Around Baseball 2015 Edition

thethe said:
I don't think the Braves cared as much about the wins this year as the innings.
Click to expand...

Sure. I can buy that which is why this debate was silly in the first place. Stults and Wandy were both glorified place holders for Wisler/Folty. Wandy obviously offered more upside which is the entire point Brule and Gilesfan were making. Stults is going to give you 200 innings of replacement level innings. Either way it's a pretty ****ty situation.
 
yeezus said:
Which is why we got him off the scrap heap to eat innings to delay the young guys, if need be. Same reason Wandy was also on the scrap heap.
Click to expand...

Listen, there isn't a guy on this board that agrees more with you. If you are going to rebuild then there are going to be certain positions that you punt for the year. Stults is the baseball equivalent to an Andy Lee 50 yard punt within the 5 yard line.
 
Stults vs. Wandy was not about winning a bunch of games to help us compete. We have a lot of young pitching, and you want to make sure they're ready. If one of them proves it, Stults will be relegated to a lesser role, and quickly. He's depth. If someone gets hurt, he can go out there every 5 days so you don't have to bring up a guy who clearly isn't ready. Wandy does not provide you the comfort of health. His chances to be depth in case of injuries are low, as he's oft-injured himself. Since they're similar (according to every team, considering they both weren't signed), the logic of going with the more healthy, reliable guy is not confusing. the fact that some refuse to see it, again, says a lot.
 
chop2chip said:
Sure. I can buy that which is why this debate was silly in the first place. Stults and Wandy were both glorified place holders for Wisler/Folty. Wandy obviously offered more upside which is the entire point Brule and Gilesfan were making. Stults is going to give you 200 innings of replacement level innings. Either way it's a pretty ****ty situation.
Click to expand...

No, there argument is Wandy > Stults therefore Braves front office stupid.

My argument is that Stults is more reliable to give innings and that was the #1 thing they were looking for out of the back end starter. So for the Braves Stults > Wandy.
 
chop2chip said:
Sure. I can buy that which is why this debate was silly in the first place. Stults and Wandy were both glorified place holders for Wisler/Folty. Wandy obviously offered more upside which is the entire point Brule and Gilesfan were making. Stults is going to give you 200 innings of replacement level innings. Either way it's a pretty ****ty situation.
Click to expand...

And no one really debated this; if both were guaranteed to be able to give you 150+ innings, then yes, choosing Wandy is a no-brainer. That is far from the case, which is why saying Wandy was the clear choice over Stults is silly. both cases can be made. I understand the Stults rationale.
 
thethe said:
No, there argument is Wandy > Stults therefore Braves front office stupid.

My argument is that Stults is more reliable to give innings and that was the #1 thing they were looking for out of the back end starter. So for the Braves Stults > Wandy.
Click to expand...

the whole point is saying one was a clear choice over the other is just stupid. neither was a clear choice. so go with the guy more likely to be reliable and available should you need him.
 
I simply think Stults was a better bet for 100-150 IP, and that in itself accomplishes all of what the FO was looking to get done. That's it.

I don't think anyone would debate Wandy hasn't been the better pitcher through his career.
 
thethe said:
No, there argument is Wandy > Stults therefore Braves front office stupid.

My argument is that Stults is more reliable to give innings and that was the #1 thing they were looking for out of the back end starter. So for the Braves Stults > Wandy.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. It just seemed there was counter argument made by you guys that Stults was better. The innings argument is rational.
 
thethe said:
No, there argument is Wandy > Stults therefore Braves front office stupid.

My argument is that Stults is more reliable to give innings and that was the #1 thing they were looking for out of the back end starter. So for the Braves Stults > Wandy.
Click to expand...

Your argument is fine. If the Braves (and you) prefer Stults because he wasn't injured the past 2 years, that's fine. You guys (and moreso yeses) claimed Stults was a better pitcher. He's not, he's terrible. And the reason his numbers are just bad and not worse is because he pitched a large amount of innings in Petco Park, which has like a .9 park factor.

Now that yall were proven wrong, you have to backtrack and say better pitcher.......for the Braves.
 
Though, I will say the comical thing is if the Braves kept Wandy over Stults; yeezus and thethe would be saying "SEE THEY KEPT THE GUY WITH MORE UPSIDE"

And if you don't believe that, simply go back and see how they hyped the acquisition of Cahill.
 
gilesfan said:
Your argument is fine. If the Braves (and you) prefer Stults because he wasn't injured the past 2 years, that's fine. You guys (and moreso yeses) claimed Stults was a better pitcher. He's not, he's terrible. And the reason his numbers are just bad and not worse is because he pitched a large amount of innings in Petco Park, which has like a .9 park factor.

Now that yall were proven wrong, you have to backtrack and say better pitcher.......for the Braves.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I ever tried to construct an argument saying that Stultz was better than Wandy. If so, please direct me to it so I can see the error of my ways.

Also, I'm not sure that its a definite that Wandy is better only because of his recent injury history. What type of pitcher is Wandy right now?
 
gilesfan said:
Though, I will say the comical thing is if the Braves kept Wandy over Stults; yeezus and thethe would be saying "SEE THEY KEPT THE GUY WITH MORE UPSIDE"

And if you don't believe that, simply go back and see how they hyped the acquisition of Cahill.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because a young pitcher like Cahil with no recent injury history is comparable to Wandy.

Not even sure why you get off on these tangents.
 
gilesfan said:
Though, I will say the comical thing is if the Braves kept Wandy over Stults; yeezus and thethe would be saying "SEE THEY KEPT THE GUY WITH MORE UPSIDE"

And if you don't believe that, simply go back and see how they hyped the acquisition of Cahill.
Click to expand...

He's getting flipped for Corey Segar or some other top 50 prospect at the deadline.
 
BRule said:
He was good in April last year, so I was off 1 month......ohhhhhhhhhh nooooooooo!!!!

The point is, everyone is freaking out and anointing Miller as a stud or whatever is dumb. It's been 1 month, If he pitches to a 4.4 ERA in June through August then what?
Click to expand...

He was awful in April last year... and May... still wondering what you're talking about.... I guess the past 6th best prospect in baseball who has been pitching lights out since LAST August (after an added pitch and delivery change) as a 24 year old isn't trending the right way... Miller is such an underrated talent.
 
zbhargrove said:
He was awful in April last year... and May... still wondering what you're talking about.... I guess the past 6th best prospect in baseball who has been pitching lights out since LAST August as a 24 year old isn't trending the right way...
Click to expand...

Its not because it doesn't fit the world he chooses to live in.
 
thethe said:
Also, I'm not sure that its a definite that Wandy is better only because of his recent injury history. What type of pitcher is Wandy right now?
Click to expand...

Yup, saying Wandy is definitely better is false. Stults was solid the last two years, Wandy barely pitched.
 
gilesfan said:
Now that yall were proven wrong, you have to backtrack and say better pitcher.......for the Braves.
Click to expand...

This was, literally, the beginning of the argument. Some said we clearly should have kept Wandy over Stults. Which means they're essentially saying Wandy was clearly a better option for the Braves. Which is exactly what was being argued the whole time: no, he's not clearly a better option.

You never even proved Wandy was better. He hasn't been since 2012 (and one start, last night). Stults was more valuable in 2013. Which is more recent than 2012, if I'm not mistaken. Brule proved Wandy has had a better career, which no one ever once argued, so..god job Brule!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top