And boom goes the dynamite. This reminds me so much of the "Brainless Garner rant rant rant NEVER sac bunts late in games rant rant rant this is so stupid rant rant rant". Followed by "Uh, Houston has the 2nd most sac bunts in close & late games in MLB the past 2 seasons". Followed by silence.
never having a thought of your own and just piggybacking on the popular opinion of the board and chiming in with the occasional "in your face!" post never really gets old, does it?
ad hominem is such bullcrap. And, so is whining. You do both of those a lot. *That* is what gets old. You made up some bullcrap and your empty, factless take got exposed. Deal with it.
Not to add fuel to the fire, but I do remember someone in the organization saying that Woody was an "innings eater" sometime back in Spring training. I thought it was in one of the chronicle spring training reports..... I just can't remember where I read it....... DD
I put that guy near the top of the baseball minds in this forum. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he brought a 12-pack over for the Astros game last Friday (and is welcome to do the same tonight).
do you realize that your first citing is basically a posting from a fan? not to mention that even he was using only one season as an example, and comparing him to one other pitcher in the major leagues. and i am guessing your reading comprehension is pretty low, but your 2nd one is not a quote from garner, it's one blurb from one beat writer. typing in "woodywilliamsinningseater" on Google is neat, aint it!? keep lobbin em up for me fellas!
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! "Piggybacking the popular opinion" is a very, very fanciful, some would say "completelymadethe****up", description. And it never gets old when it's *your* face, sweetums.
Posts like that are like a bad car wreck--you should move on, but you just keep reading. The over-confidence in an unfounded, stupid opinion and the strutting around about it, as if exulting proudly over a .187 OBP. Nothing of any significance or value, but you just keep reading, thinking, "no freaking way."
The main point is, no knowldegable baseball source (that doesn't include the hacks that work for the chronicle) would qualify Woody Williams as an inning eater. I don't consider Lopez, JDJOrtiz, or even Justice any more knowldegable than any of us here... the only thing they have access to above a diehard fan is the clubhouse, and interviewing the managers/players. If they were quoting an Astros source, who was it? How were they coming up with the conclusion that he's going to pitch a ton of innings this year? The bottom line is he's not... he doesn't pitch 200 innings a year, has durability issues, and is 41 freaking years old. If anybody expected him to go out there and give you 7 inning quality starts every time out, I'm sorry your expectations were so misguided. Woody was signed due to the ineptitude of all the kids that pitched for us last year, as well as to bridge the gap for the possible returns of Roger and Backe. He also had a pretty decent year last year when he did actually pitch, as he was a starter for a team that made the playoffs. If Nieve or Albers seems to finally come into their own at AAA, then by all means Woody should start fading away (especially if Wandy and Sampson continue to put up quality starts)... but we're still a ways away to see if that can happen, and Woody has only pitched 4 freaking starts thus far (1 good, 1 so-so, 2 bad).
Ive never heard or read anything remotely calling Woody an inning eater since he joined the Astros. Secondly, he has averaged less than 6 IP per start for the last two years. Less than 6!! Lets say approximately 5 2/3. That barely even qualifies for the win!!! How could anyone with a brain mistake that for someone who is an inning eater? This conversation is ridiculous. No way in hell did the Astros expect a 41 year old, who has averaged less than 6 IP per start for the last 2 years, to eat up innings.
He's doing better than you are so far. You haven't even found a fan who has said Woody will be an innings eater. You don't sign a 40 year old with the expectation of eating innings. Clemens was an absolute horse throughout his career, but I wouldn't say he's an innings eater anymore (or last year). To add one more, from an Astros sports handicapper... Link And more from Footer... Three straight days before Roy O includes Woody. Clear implication that Williams is not expected to pitch deep into games. Link Look, I don't think anyone's happy with his performance to date, but there's no need to upwardly revise what he was supposed to be. I was hoping for a calming veteran rotation influence (which for all we know, he has been) and a solid/consistent 5-6 innings each night with an ERA around 4.50. If his average outing was 6 innings, 3 runs (4.50 ERA), I'd be happy.
LOL, I had to check out Wikipedia, just in case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Williams Rocketfat, just take this like a man and admit being wrong...no need to continue digging yourself in a hole here.
LOLOL. wait a minute....you're telling me woody williams LOSES his effectiveness as his pitch count increases?????? crazy!!! thank god for wikipedia. no, i wont admit to being wrong, because....well, because i'm right! but i'll do you one better, i'll end my argument. keep on posting the informative links though, i'll happily still read them.
Well, bottomline is that there is plenty of stuff on the internet talking about Woody not being an inning eater...and we've shown that to you. Give us one source...anything...that says otherwise. Just one. Isnt it as easy as typing into google, "Woody Williams Inning eater"? You lose.
It isn't about winning the argument--he's entitled to his opinion. It's about watching him strut around his argument, in the face of a myriad now of facts that point otherwise, and still somehow remaining so cocky about it. Everyone is entitled to opinions, even stupid opinions.
He was stating that Woody was an inning eater based on what he heard from radio or whatever other source. And then he wont change his stance because he says he is "right". In fact, he is wrong.
