Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
one of my early picks for fantasy baseball:

 

Javier Vazquez

I'm hesitant to trust someone without a real track record, pitching in the American League, and the Yankees for the first time.

Three solid years isn't a track record? He's got great peripherals, good ERAs, and consider that he's pitched in a difficult environment for pitchers. I'd draft Vazquez in a heartbeat. Consider that he'll get killer run support this season.

Guest FrigidSoul
Posted
one of my early picks for fantasy baseball:

 

Javier Vazquez

I'm hesitant to trust someone without a real track record, pitching in the American League, and the Yankees for the first time.

Three solid years isn't a track record? He's got great peripherals, good ERAs, and consider that he's pitched in a difficult environment for pitchers. I'd draft Vazquez in a heartbeat. Consider that he'll get killer run support this season.

Also consider he'll have one of the shittiest defenses playing behind him as well. He'll be good for K's and keeping your ERA down but wins and WHIP may suffer.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
one of my early picks for fantasy baseball:

 

Javier Vazquez

I'm hesitant to trust someone without a real track record, pitching in the American League, and the Yankees for the first time.

May God have mercy on his soul if he doesn't deliver.

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Luckily for him, he has three ways to be considered a success here.

 

a) Be better than Clemens was

 

b) Be better than Wells was.

 

c) Be better than Pettitte was.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
Three solid years? He was 10-13, with a 3.91 in 2002. The numbers aren't horrible, but they should be better with Vazquez's talent.

And he only went 13-12 last year, but he does have a better team behind him this year, so the win record will be better.

 

He damn well better hope so.

Posted
Three solid years? He was 10-13, with a 3.91 in 2002. The numbers aren't horrible, but they should be better with Vazquez's talent.

 

He lost five or six games 1-0 or 2-1 because the Expos couldn't score. It was sad and I was begging that the Expos trade him cause I liked the guy when he was a Delmarva Shorebird.

 

The Yankees got a steal with him.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
The Yankees got a steal with him.

Uhm...no.

 

We gave up some valuable guys as well.

Guest Anglesault
Posted

The only real reason I'm a little nervous is that we just got done with a "well, some of his numbers aren't that good, but he was on a bad team!" experiment.

 

We all know who I'm talking about, no need to mention it's name.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
You're favorite player AS?

If that's what you want to call that...thing.

Posted
Three solid years? He was 10-13, with a 3.91 in 2002. The numbers aren't horrible, but they should be better with Vazquez's talent.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/...wlreport03.html

 

Bow down Vern!

 

Top 30 ML Starters (ranked by SNWs over a .425 pitcher):

Vazquez #7

 

Unluckiest 10 ML Starters (ranked by (W - E(W)) + (E(L) - L)):

Vazquez #8

 

Javier, with LEAGUE AVERAGE run support, wins 16 games and loses 9 in 2003.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
Three solid years? He was 10-13, with a 3.91 in 2002. The numbers aren't horrible, but they should be better with Vazquez's talent.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/...wlreport03.html

 

Bow down Vern!

 

Top 30 ML Starters (ranked by SNWs over a .425 pitcher):

Vazquez #7

 

Unluckiest 10 ML Starters (ranked by (W - E(W)) + (E(L) - L)):

Vazquez #8

 

Javier, with LEAGUE AVERAGE run support, wins 16 games and loses 9 in 2003.

Well, like I said, he has his run support now. He better win like 16 or 17.

Posted
one of my early picks for fantasy baseball:

 

Javier Vazquez

I'm hesitant to trust someone without a real track record, pitching in the American League, and the Yankees for the first time.

May God have mercy on his soul if he doesn't deliver.

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Luckily for him, he has three ways to be considered a success here.

 

a) Be better than Clemens was

 

b) Be better than Wells was.

 

c) Be better than Pettitte was.

2003 Win Shares

 

Vazquez 21

Clemens 15

Pettitte 15

Wells 14

Mussina 19

Rivera 18

Contreras 7

Weaver 2

Hammond 7

Osuna 4

 

I think Vazquez will work out just fine. Olympic Stadium has been killer on pitchers the last few years. A move to Yankees Stadium should improve Vazquez. The only thing that would derail him is injury, but he hasn't missed a start in 2-3 years.

Guest Anglesault
Posted

He should do well.

 

But then again, Weaver should have done well. Aaron Boone should have hit a god damned ball occasionally.

 

There can be a big differences between what logic says someone should do and what they end up doing.

 

And unlike some people, I don't give second chances. (ie. There were some people willing to keep The Dream Wrecker and hope that he stopped sucking) You get one chance here.

Posted

Aaron Boone did hit the ball once, in game 7 of the ALCS. It's funny, because for all the bellyaching about the Yankees offense in the World Series, the Marlins actually hit much worse (232/281/300). It only goes to show that you can't guarantee a victory. All you can do is stack the cards and hope for the best.

 

As for Vazquez, he's no worse a risk to suck than Andy Pettitte.

Guest Anglesault
Posted
Aaron Boone did hit the ball once, in game 7 of the ALCS.

Lotta good that did.

 

the Marlins actually hit much worse (232/281/300).

 

Thet hit when it mattered.

 

As for Vazquez, he's no worse a risk to suck than Andy Pettitte.

 

Andy Pettitte gave me reason to trust him.

Guest FrigidSoul
Posted

Looper won't have to worry about struggling in the post season since he signed with the Mets if ya catch my drift

Guest Anglesault
Posted

Braden Looper was the Marlin with the perma-grin?

Guest Anglesault
Posted
Its likely the Mets will miss out, but stranger things have happened. Who would've thought the Marlins would make the postseason last season (besides Mik)?

That's the exception rather than the rule.

 

The seven other teams were either the ovrwhelming favorite going into the year or one of the team that was at least in the running.

Posted
Its likely the Mets will miss out, but stranger things have happened.  Who would've thought the Marlins would make the postseason last season (besides Mik)?

That's the exception rather than the rule.

 

The seven other teams were either the ovrwhelming favorite going into the year or one of the team that was at least in the running.

I'd say 6, the Twins seemed to be there just because someone had to be there from the AL Central.

Posted
Its likely the Mets will miss out, but stranger things have happened.  Who would've thought the Marlins would make the postseason last season (besides Mik)?

That's the exception rather than the rule.

 

The seven other teams were either the ovrwhelming favorite going into the year or one of the team that was at least in the running.

I'd say 6, the Twins seemed to be there just because someone had to be there from the AL Central.

Yeah, but a lot of people were giving the Twins a good shot at at least making it to the ALCS, given that that was going to be the last year they could keep that team together. I know I expected them to win going away...I was very surprised at the start they had.

Posted
Its likely the Mets will miss out, but stranger things have happened.  Who would've thought the Marlins would make the postseason last season (besides Mik)?

That's the exception rather than the rule.

 

The seven other teams were either the ovrwhelming favorite going into the year or one of the team that was at least in the running.

Well, other teams like the Royals, Expos, and Blue Jays performed better than expected. The point is that there are so many variables that anything can happen in a season.

Posted

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/base...opkins.obit.ap/

 

Paul Hopkins, believed to be the oldest major league player, dies at the age of 99. Hopkins made his debut in 1927, in the same game which Babe Ruth hit his record tying 59th home run. The new oldest living major leaguer is believed to be Ray Cunningham.

 

Negro league star Ted "Double Duty" Radcliff is probably the oldest living ballplayer of any kind. Radcliff is 101 years old, and still kicking.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...