it's hard to find spots starters with marginal skills that are "innings eaters" with a 5+ ERA on contending teams. i think we all know that if we are depending on wandy as a #4 then we are in big trouble.
Yes, there are question marks about Woody, I've said as much myself. That's all well and good, robbie. But that has zero bearing on the relevance of spring training stats, which is what was being discussed.
i just don't see how you can say spring training doesn't matter at all for marginal players. woody is 40 years old and he displayed decreasing durability with age. a poor spring for a 40 year old guy is not a good sign.
i'm trying to say that wandy sucks and he won't be able to increase his IP because he simply is not good.
As Buck pointed out earlier, Williams ERA has been terrible the past 4 spring trainings: Woody Willams, Spring Training, last 4 seasons: ERA - 14.54, 14.4, 7.2, 6
I thought "spring numbers don't matter" so who cares if he was bad last year in Spring and turned it around
I was addressing robbie380's post which said that Williams is not having a good spring and that is not a good sign for the regular season. The numbers simply show that spring stats are not THE indicator for regular season success.
I was a bit surprised when I looked at WR's IP from last season. I guess I maybe remember his melt downs in the second half more so than his first half. I do vaguely recall that WR pitched well in April and May of last year, maybe with an ERA in the 3s.
Yep, me too. He was horribly inconsistent last year. Sometimes, within the same inning. I hold no real faith in him, but I understand why they're giving him a shot *to start the season* over, say, Albers or Moehler.
i'm not saying they are an indicator for regular season success but they are something to look at. granted i have not seen woody throw a game this spring and i know vet pitchers generally don't care about the spring but seeing a 10 ERA and 1.9 WHIP over 26 IP doesn't make me feel good. also, when we signed woody did anyone care about his home/road splits?
Dude, I think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill before the season even starts ... name one team in our division who has pitching with absolutely NO question marks ????? Anyone, anyone ... buehler? That's right it just means without Rocket we aren't the front runner pitching wise in the division but, the Cardinals have no question marks, heck the Cubs? Prior and Wood may never be what they were supposed to be because of injuries. The rest of the division DEFINITE problems. Think Arroyo will be doing half as good for the Reds as he did the first half last year? Yes, the Stros have question marks for their pitching, the good news is they are in a division that once again will probably be a "free for all" at the end plus, they have money to spend at the trade deadline potentially to get over the hump potentially. Just relax, baseball season is a marathon ... not a sprint!
I feel that the Stros' 1-2-3 is on par with any of the other 1-2-3 in the NL, both in terms of potential as well as question marks. Oswalt is the best pitcher in the NL... period. Carpenter comes close, but he's older, has more injury problems, and has nowhere near the "stones" that Roy can carry around. Most cardinals fans would take Roy in a second... and that's pretty much all the comparison you need. Jennings is the difference maker. If he merely matches the year he had at still hitter-friendly (even with the humidor) coors... I'll be ecstatic. The fact that he's looking to most likely improve (with his sinker sinking more) still has me confident that he'll be an ideal #2 guy. I love his durability... its calming to know you'll have a guy who'll most likely take the ball every 4th day without fail. And there's no reason why he can't be as effective as Jeff Suppan was for the Cardinals down the stretch last year. Woody is woody... 40 years old, but still competitive in the NL. I wasn't thrilled about the signing when it happened (mainly because I still was counting on Pettite being here), but now he's going to have to bring it. I expect him to do very well the first couple of months of the season, but then potentially start getting knocked around a little, or possibly have some arm trouble. Then again, he knows what he's doing out there... and that's also calming out of your #3 guy (no Tim Reddings, please). After that, I'm more excited about the possibilities of Nieve, Sampson, Albers, and that certain #22... then I am about who's actually going to be pitching in the #4 and #5 spots to start the season. If its Wandy, so be it... we have a good enough bullpen, and the earlier he gets knocked out, the better the team will be for it for the rest of the season. In the end, pitching is no longer a given... that's for sure. But it normally isn't a given for any team in MLB, including the Yankees. We were BLESSED to have three pitchers pitching at Cy Young levels in 2005. Its the #1 reason we made the World Series (given our lineup). Now, its back to reality... the Stros are better than they were in 02 and 03 (pre-Roger/Andy), and the rest of the NL is much worse. its wide open... there for the taking.
Yes...the Cubs have questions. How this team is getting nearly even odds to win the NL Central is completely beyond me. http://mlb.aolsportsblog.com/2007/03/27/wade-miller-beats-out-mark-prior-for-cubs-fifth-spot/ Wade Miller Beats Out Mark Prior For Cubs' Fifth Spot Posted Mar 27th 2007 5:22PM by PostmanE Filed under: Cubs, NL Central, MLB Injuries If you've been following what Bleed Cubbie Blue today calls the "Woodprior monster" for much of spring training, then you're aware Prior and Wood are both having pretty awful preseasons. Prior has been unable to pitch effectively at all, and Wood appears to be injured yet again. Yee-ha. Into that wake steps Wade Miller, who beat Prior for the Cubs' fifth rotation spot, Lou Piniella confirmed today. Considering how shaky Prior has been this offseason, this was an obvious move for the Cubs. That said, Miller isn't a huge improvement over the injury-prone Prior; since a 2001-2003 stretch when he averaged around 180 innings a year, Miller pitched a combined 200. He's not exactly a Carlos Zambrano-level workhorse. On the other hand, the Cubs don't need him to be. If he can keep his ERA under 4, his lifetime average, in that fifth spot ... I think the Cubs will be mighty happy with that. The tailspin of this story is that Prior -- onetime dominator -- will likely be a starter in the Cubs' minor league system. Wow. "Unhinged" was the word I believe we used a few weeks ago, and it's looking all the more accurate.
i think its because their lineup is revamped and no one really has dominant pitching in our division their lineup ...with Soriano, Ramirez, Lee, Derosa, Floyd, etc is pretty solid...they even have a decent hitting catcher
like the Texas Rangers? i just don't know how that gets you even odds. vegas is smarter than me, but i think they're nuts on this one.
I was actually about to type "at best, they're the Texas Rangers of the NL". But, I'm actually not sold on Soriano being the ultimate panacea for that offense... especially if he's batting leadoff.
