skinsmarydu Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 He isn't, no. But for the most part he's done a pretty good job. Didn't like his move in the 14th though. And his explanation after the game didn't change my opinion at all. Off topic: but do you remember the time he (Cox) yanked Andruw Jones out of the game in the middle of an inning (for loafing on a fly ball)? I'll never forget that. Yes, I do...my bar was full from end to end & the place went bananas..."show him, Bobby", "get 'em in line, Bobby" was all you could hear...it's a shame we only have 1 WS win, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Alright, so enought stupid Braves/Nats banter because frankly, no one cares. Albert Pujols is about to get to 500 HRs. Seems like it could be the quitest 500th homer ever. Doesn't seem to be much talk about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Alright, so enought stupid Braves/Nats banter because frankly, no one cares. Albert Pujols is about to get to 500 HRs. Seems like it could be the quitest 500th homer ever. Doesn't seem to be much talk about it. I think baseball fans are "homered out" at this point. Frankly, I'm more impressed that Billy Hamilton hit a routine grounder to first and got a hit out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think baseball fans are "homered out" at this point. Frankly, I'm more impressed that Billy Hamilton hit a routine grounder to first and got a hit out of it. I just thought there'd be a little more around Pujols since he's played pretty much his whole career under the new testing standards and has had zero issues. Seems like a beath of fresh air compated to ARod. Pujols isn't a look at me guy and seems to generally stay out of the limelight. Seems like an all around good guy. Hamilton's speed is unreal. If he could get on base more consistently, he could steal 100 bases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The Giants are so perplexing...this team has won World Championships, maintained the same roster, and then struggles the next season...with that same roster. That's not a bad team at all. They got solid pitching and Buster Posey is healthy. Yet they just hover at the .500 mark. Pagan missed a considerable chunk of time. When he was there at the beginning, they were in first place. While he isn't an all-star, he's a fantastic lead off guy for that lineup and really sets the table for them. Plus, they got absolutely nothing last year out of LF. Morse has been a fantastic signing so far. The big signing though has been Hudson - who the Braves should be reminded off frequently on how they dropped the ball on resigning him. He's 2-1, with a 2.40 ERA, a 0.767 WHIP, and probably more importantly, 30 innings pitched in 4 starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Alright, so enought stupid Braves/Nats banter because frankly, no one cares. Albert Pujols is about to get to 500 HRs. Seems like it could be the quitest 500th homer ever. Doesn't seem to be much talk about it. The thing is that Pujols became irrelevant once the LAA experiment flopped. STL moved on without him and didn't miss a beat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 The thing is that Pujols became irrelevant once the LAA experiment flopped. STL moved on without him and didn't miss a beat Yeah but he does have 2 WS rings and 3 MVPs. Yes since he's gone to the Angels he hasn't quite been the same guy, but he's off to a good start this season and his 2 homers shy of 500 for his career. Just doesn't seem to get the respect he deserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The thing is that Pujols became irrelevant once the LAA experiment flopped. STL moved on without him and didn't miss a beat That and his stats went into the toilet. Here's a guy who hits .320-.330 a year with 35-40+ HRs a year in STL and now he's hitting .250-.260 with less than 25 HRs a year? Maybe last year was an anomaly, but I think he's done in LAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Exactly. He's probably the best hitter of the post steroid but he looks about finished as a real game changer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 That and his stats went into the toilet. Here's a guy who hits .320-.330 a year with 35-40+ HRs a year in STL and now he's hitting .250-.260 with less than 25 HRs a year? Maybe last year was an anomaly, but I think he's done in LAA. His 1st year in LA he hit 30HRs and drove in 105, also hit .285 that season. Not bad numbers, yes for him they were down, but there are plenty of MLBers that would take those numbers for a season. Last year, he was obviously hurt and only played 99 games. That was the first season in his 13 year career that he didn't hit at least 30HRs. Only twice has he not drove in 100, last year when he was hurt and in 2011 when he drove in 99. Right now he leads the AL in HRs and is batting .280/.587/.936. Pretty good numbers for a 34y/o. The problem I believe with Pujols is that his first few years were the height of the Bonds era when he was just getting handed the MVP every season. Pujols could probably have another 2 MVPs (he's finished 2nd 4 times). He had his dominant years from 2005-2010 when he won 3 MVPs and finished 2nd two other times. Then he went to LA had a good 1st year, but not great by his standards and Cabrera really started to take off. Now that the Angels are bad and Cabrera is on fire, he's kind of an after thought. But if you look at his career numbers, they're as good as anyone's to play the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Just . . . not worth what they're paying him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The big signing though has been Hudson - who the Braves should be reminded off frequently on how they dropped the ball on resigning him. He's 2-1, with a 2.40 ERA, a 0.767 WHIP, and probably more importantly, 30 innings pitched in 4 starts. How many times does the Hudson thing have to be explained? At the time, the Braves rotation still had Medlen, Beachy, and Minor. They couldn't lock up all their younger players like Freeman and Kimbrel in the offseason if they brought back Hudson. Plus, they had plenty of younger, cheaper, starting pitchers at the time.The Braves didn't 'want' to let Hudson go. It was a business decision. And why exactly should the Braves be reminded of losing Hudson, when they have the lowest team era in baseball? Entering Sunday, their starting rotation had a 1.41 era, which was a full POINT lower than anyone else! What were the Braves THINKING when they let Hudson walk?!!!?!!: Harang 3-1 0.70 Santana 2-0 0.86 Wood 2-2 1.67 Teheran 2-1 1.93 Hale 0-0 2.93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted April 21, 2014 Author Share Posted April 21, 2014 Just . . . not worth what they're paying him. But that doesn't mean he's not good. He hasn't been the StL Pujols since singing with the Angles, but he's sitll a damn good baseball player and I'd take him on the O's in heartbeat. He was playing through injuries last season before finally shutting it down. I don't see any reason that if he stays healthy this season, why he couldn't hit another 30HRs or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 How many times does the Hudson thing have to be explained? At the time, the Braves rotation still had Medlen, Beachy, and Minor. They couldn't lock up all their younger players like Freeman and Kimbrel in the offseason if they brought back Hudson. Plus, they had plenty of younger, cheaper, starting pitchers at the time. The Braves didn't 'want' to let Hudson go. It was a business decision. And why exactly should the Braves be reminded of losing Hudson, when they have the lowest team era in baseball? Entering Sunday, their starting rotation had a 1.41 era, which was a full POINT lower than anyone else! What were the Braves THINKING when they let Hudson walk?!!!?!!: Harang 3-1 0.70 Santana 2-0 0.86 Wood 2-2 1.67 Teheran 2-1 1.93 Hale 0-0 2.93 You're telling me a team that is paying BJ Upton $14 million and Dan Uggla $13 million this year couldn't find a way to resign Hudson for $9 million (probably a little less if they would have tried). And I'll check back in a few weeks or more to see if the Braves starting 5 can maintain that awesome start. I suspect they wont since Harang & Teheran are career 4+ERA guys over the past decade of their MLB careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You're telling me a team that is paying BJ Upton $14 million and Dan Uggla $13 million this year couldn't find a way to resign Hudson for $9 million (probably a little less if they would have tried). And I'll check back in a few weeks or more to see if the Braves starting 5 can maintain that awesome start. I suspect they wont since Harang & Teheran are career 4+ERA guys over the past decade of their MLB careers. Uggla and Upton were already due that money, so not sure what that has to do with anything. Again, the Braves had to decide if they wanted to lock up all their young stars, or give an aging pitcher coming off an injury a lot of money. The Braves, at the time, had an abundance of starting pitching. So they could afford to not bring Huddy back. The results speak for themselves. You are acting as if Harang and Santana won't continue to pitch well (and they may not). Yet you assume Hudson will keep up his pace. Bottom line, you keep saying the Braves were stupid to not bring him back, when obviously that isn't the case at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 The results speak for themselves. You are acting as if Harang and Santana won't continue to pitch well (and they may not). Yet you assume Hudson will keep up his pace. First off, I agree with you that it wasn't a bad move to let Hudson walk. However, Harang sucks. He's had some luck. Santana will be good, but not great by the end of this. Finally, Uggla and BJ were terrible decisions. Don't try to claim they weren't. Those contracts sucked when they were offered and they suck today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Uggla and Upton were already due that money, so not sure what that has to do with anything. Again, the Braves had to decide if they wanted to lock up all their young stars, or give an aging pitcher coming off an injury a lot of money. The Braves, at the time, had an abundance of starting pitching. So they could afford to not bring Huddy back. The results speak for themselves. You are acting as if Harang and Santana won't continue to pitch well (and they may not). Yet you assume Hudson will keep up his pace. Bottom line, you keep saying the Braves were stupid to not bring him back, when obviously that isn't the case at all. It's (the salaries of Uption and Uggla) proof that the Braves could have afforded Hudson if they wanted to. They have a track record of paying for players they want. But, they let a guy, with a career 3.43 ERA, walk because he had an ankle injury in his last year. Prior to that injury, he had won 105 games for them over 8 years. And they doubted he would be effective again? Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 It's (the salaries of Uption and Uggla) proof that the Braves could have afforded Hudson if they wanted to. They have a track record of paying for players they want. But, they let a guy, with a career 3.43 ERA, walk because he had an ankle injury in his last year. Prior to that injury, he had won 105 games for them over 8 years. And they doubted he would be effective again? Wow. What part of "the Braves have the best starting pitching in MLB (by a RUN)" did you not understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thekyle1591 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 What part of "the Braves have the best starting pitching in MLB (by a RUN)" did you not understand? You do realize that Harnag and Santana are gonna come back to earth sooner than later, and then you'll wish you didn't spend your money on 2 scrubs that struggle to hit .200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 But that doesn't mean he's not good. He hasn't been the StL Pujols since singing with the Angles, but he's sitll a damn good baseball player and I'd take him on the O's in heartbeat. He was playing through injuries last season before finally shutting it down. I don't see any reason that if he stays healthy this season, why he couldn't hit another 30HRs or so. I could see that. Frankly, I think he should be hitting 4th and Trout should be hitting third, but with Hamilton out, I see why the Angels hit them in that order. What I don't understand is Scioscia insistence on hitting Shuck leadoff when he sucks. Move him down, put Kenderick up there, and swap them later, when Shuck can get out of his funk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You do realize that Harnag and Santana are gonna come back to earth sooner than later, and then you'll wish you didn't spend your money on 2 scrubs that struggle to hit .200. At least we're not paying our starting pitchers ludicrous amounts of money to lose 22 of 29 to their division rivals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 And I'll check back in a few weeks or more to see if the Braves starting 5 can maintain that awesome start. I suspect they wont since Harang & Teheran are career 4+ERA guys over the past decade of their MLB careers. Of course they can't. It would be historic. But, that doesn't mean that a 38 yo Tim Hudson can stay healthy and keep up his start either. As with most personnel decisions, we'll have to wait and see. But early returns have been undeniably great for the Braves. Are we talking about the same Teheran? Because the Braves' Teheran hasn't had a decade-long career. Last year was his first real stint in the majors (in the 2 years prior he had a combined total of 7 games, 4 starts, 25 innings). Last year he went 14-8 with a 3.20 ERA. He's been a top prospect in the organization for a while, a young guy on the come who hasn't come anywhere close to his peak yet. His career ERA is a perfectly respectable 3.27, but is irrelevant anyway given his age and experience. The organization has been anticipating his breakout for years. The Harangutang, like Hudson, is an older pitcher. And his career numbers aren't stellar. But the Braves don't need him to be stellar. What they need him to be is a serviceable #3 in the rotation. Anything beyond that, like his start to this year, is gravy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 At least we're not paying our starting pitchers ludicrous amounts of money to lose 22 of 29 to their division rivals. you know... putting a smiley face at the end of a sentence doesn't absolve all dickish comments that come before it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thekyle1591 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 At least we're not paying our starting pitchers ludicrous amounts of money to lose 22 of 29 to their division rivals. No, you're just paying them to lose in the first round of the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubble Screen Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 No, you're just paying them to lose in the first round of the playoffs. What have the gNats EVER done in the playoffs besides choke? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.