Master Index of Archived Threads
No Runs and Bad Defence
metirish May 12 2009 07:39 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 12 2009 08:57 AM |
|
Ben Shpigel lays into the Mets here .
|
Edgy DC May 12 2009 07:47 AM |
For not a single moment last night, did I wish the Mets had signed Derek Lowe.
|
smg58 May 12 2009 07:50 AM |
Well hey, just because the Mets have won seven of their last eight doesn't mean they can't get ripped into.
|
metirish May 12 2009 07:50 AM |
And certainly not at that money . I had forgotten how much the braves gave him. Not scoring runs for Santana gets mentioned a lot but what about the defence , does that also suffer when Johan toes the rubber. I would have thought it would not have with the way Santana pitches , it's not like he's slow out there.
|
smg58 May 12 2009 07:56 AM |
I wouldn't have overpaid for Lowe either, but I also wouldn't have offered Ollie more than two years and $15M. The only way Minaya gets off the hook for Lowe is if Ollie pitches comparably.
|
MFS62 May 12 2009 07:56 AM |
In the year Bob Gibson posted a 1.12 ERA he lost 9 games.
|
Frayed Knot May 12 2009 08:49 AM |
1) Those claiming to [u:qxslajic]know[/u:qxslajic] that Lowe would have been a good sign need to be sure to tell us all about how they are calling this one in their favor approx 1/20th of the way through a deal that takes the pitcher until just before birthday #40 while, at the same time, I'm sure were all over the Glavine deal being a mistake despite coming at a similar age & money only with 1 fewer year guaranteed and a better career up to that point.
|
Edgy DC May 12 2009 08:55 AM |
If defense is what cost us the win last night, I can live with that. Those errors won't define us every night.
|
metsmarathon May 12 2009 09:09 AM |
well, as others have said, i don't think it would've been smart to overpay as much for lowe as the braves did, nor do i think it was smart to pay ollie as much as we did.
|
Nymr83 May 12 2009 09:14 AM |
|
they were pretty damn similiar. the lowe deal pretty much IS the glavine deal, or at least as close as you can get in making these types of comparisons, so anyone who says "the mets should have signed lowe" also has to agree with the statement "i am happy with how the glavine deal turned out and would like to have that again" i could go either way on that. i liked lowe better than the crappy alternative ("ball 4" Perez), but didnt really LIKE him.
|
Edgy DC May 12 2009 09:21 AM |
Well, I don't know if you have to agree with the Glavine deal as it turned out. You just have to agree that it was the right deal to have made.
|
Willets Point May 12 2009 09:24 AM |
Of course the best deal not made was when the Mets didn't trade Glavine for Lowe back in 2005.
|
SteveJRogers May 12 2009 09:29 AM |
||||||||||||||||||
|