I still hold out hope that Tejada can fetch us at least one good prospect. Seriously it's pointless to keep him here now.
Haven't you been reading Cat's posts? Bucholz sucks. Any fan who thinks otherwise is a misinformed idiot who uses overrated stats.
http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=2803522&highlight=Buchholz#post2803522 http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=2803748&highlight=Buchholz#post2803748 http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=2837875&highlight=Buchholz#post2837875 http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=2838594&highlight=Buchholz#post2838594 http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=2884173&highlight=Buchholz#post2884173 http://bbs.clutchfans.com/showthread.php?p=3018113&highlight=Buchholz#post3018113
I'm confused. Buchholz wasn't a very good pitcher, at the time I made those posts. That was 1-1.5 years ago. How does that correlate with my opinion of his performance this season? He's had an exceptional year out of the pen.
You're delusional -- no other way around it. You won't find a person on this board that values statistics more than me, when it comes to evaluating a player's performance. The problem, as many others besides me have tried to tell you as well, is that you can't tell WHY a player is playing well from statistics. There are many reasons a player may or may not play well, and for that, you have to watch the tape. It's complex, apparently a little too much so for you to grasp. But in this thread, no one's talking about why. It's simply about performance. In the context of Buchholz, I was acknowledging that he was having a hell of a season. Good for him.
Well, obviously my point isn't that you think he sucks now. If you did, you would be completely insane. Instead, you are merely wrong on how Buchholz would turn out. Really wrong.
Again, what? Can you show me a post (none of those six you linked come close to qualifying) where I predicted that Buchholz would be a bad reliever? All of those posts were either addressing whether Buchholz was indeed considered a top prospect (at the time of the trade) or me commenting on his level of play at the time. None of those had anything to do with me projecting his future level of play, so I'm having a hard time seeing where I'm "wrong," much less "really wrong." The only player I can recall having significant discussion on how they would turn out is Willy Taveras. IIRC, you and several others were on the other side of that debate. Tell me, how's he doing this season?
LOL, you have to be kidding. All you did was continually bash Buchholz and defend that trade. Now Buchholz is good and that trade you loved looks worse than ever. Oh, I dont recall ever saying that Taveras would be good in 2009! That's my defense of my support of Taveras. About as good as yours.
You're a riot. Worse than ever? The principle player in the trade is the equivalent of Michael Bourn! Failed starters become good middle relievers (not a closer) on a regular basis. It's one of the easiest quantities in the game to find. Buchholz and Hirsh each failed at their intended roles -- starting pitcher -- and Taveras is a walking disaster. Buchholz looks very good right now, but we also have to remember it's been about 100 games -- hardly an enormous enough sample to dictate the future of his career. I bashed Buchholz for his poor performances at the time. They were poor, and those points stand. Your failed attempt at a clever analogy masks the fact that you still haven't found a post from me projecting Buchholz' 2008 performance. I defended the trade because it seemed a very minimal risk to acquire someone with a track record of durability and a prior season like Jennings had in 2006, in the context of the modern pitching market. It still makes sense, and to act as if the trade looks "worse than ever" when the principle players are Michael Bourn II and a 26-year-old AAA player, aka Chad Reineke II, is ludicrous.
You know who else is a walking disaster? Jason Jennings. You know who isn't? Taylor Buchholz. Yeah, you say NOW that it's easy for Buchholz to be a relieve, somehow you didn't realize it back then! If you thought he would be good in 2008, would you have bashed him so much and supported dumping him for garbage in a trade? The trade still makes sense? Really, you have to be kidding here. You would have to be insane to do that over again.
Huh? Of course I realized the possibility. When did I say otherwise? You're taking literal statements I made about his performance at the time and somehow equating that to me projecting the duration of his career. Of course it's possible that a failed starter can be converted to a good reliever. Happens all the time. It's common sense. That's also why he's still not all that valuable in a trade (well, until he does it either over a longer sample size or does it in the closer's role) -- it's too damn easy over the history of baseball to find examples of that. Absolutely. Even if I knew 100 percent (which no one could have, there's always a risk with prospects) that Buchholz would be a good reliever, I'd still support doing the deal given Jennings' track record of durability, his performance in the prior season and his move to a more pitcher-friendly park. The Astros had a need, and made a deal that addressed it by giving up assets of very limited upside. Unfortunately, it didn't work out because Jennings' arm effectively died -- but it was a risk worth taking.
And there were many people at the time who said the trade was NOT worth it partly because Buchholz had potential. Your response was the he sucked ballz. And since we were talking trade, we were talking about what they would do in the future. If you analyze a trade, you dont base it on past performance, but on what you think they will do in the future. Just because you can justify the logic of the trade isn't helping you now, the trade was a failure. You said repeatedly that Buchholz wasn't worth much and that he was trash. You technically didnt say he would suck in 2009, but that seems to me like weasiling out of being wrong.
www.mlbtraderumors.com MLB trade rumors reports that there have been no moves even coming close. Check www.astros.com and Ed Wade told Miguel he is not going anywhere.
There were roughly 35,000 tickets sold for last night's mid-week battle to stay out of the cellar in the NL Central. The ballpark and its proximity will draw fans even when this team isn't competitive...like right now.
i agree. but i'm not sure they'd draw as many fans if they stripped the team to its core and started over. i think oswalt, berkman, lee and even pence do indeed draw fans - not tens of thousands, but i bet its significantly more than [insert young, unknown prospect]. in that regard, i, again, understand drayton's perspective. we, being a little more die hard, would understand and likely embrace a rebuild; but joe casual fan...? not so sure. i continue to preach it's easier to build around current oswalt, berkman and lee than it is to find, develop and promote the next oswalt, berkman and lee... that you then have to biuld around all over again. rebuilding, aka a fresh start, like spring training, is a romantic notion. but its application is anything but easy and the guarantees are minimal. i think drayton has the right idea; i think he's more in touch with the casual fan than people realize.
