FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Wakefield is the best $ 4 million inning-eater out there available.

The Red Sox would have to be clinically retarded not to pick-up this option. 180-200 innings of above average ERA for $4M -- I call that a bargain.

The best you've ever had?

This little mary tosses that crap every day. How about manning up and throwing a fastball now and then? Then lets see you eat innings.

The preceding message was paid for by "UnreasonableNYYankee Fans.Org".

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 10:30 AM ET  11.01 by TommyTheCat

The best you've ever had?

Very nice Who cat, very nice.

Gotta love Wake...like a fine wine he gets better with age.

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 01:11 PM ET  11.01 by Marsh08

Gotta love Wake...like a fine wine he gets better with age.

Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about. How did that wine taste in these playoffs?He's become more irrelevant each passing year, you mulyock.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 10:30 AM ET  11.01 by SlinkyRedfoot

The Red Sox would have to be clinically retarded not to pick-up this option. 180-200 innings of above average ERA for $4M -- I call that a bargain.

That's it. You and me. Spitballs at dawn.

QUOTE(#7):

Originally posted 01:28 PM ET  11.01 by Atro Steals Yer Base

How did that wine taste in these playoffs? He's become more irrelevant each passing year, you mulyock.

Wakefield's 16.88ERA wine in the playoffs this year tasted better than Chien-Ming Wang's 19.06ERA wine in last year's playoffs!

The Indians were the ones that scalped Wang in the playoffs last year, by the way.

;-)

QUOTE(#9):

Originally posted 01:49 PM ET  11.01 by SlinkyRedfoot

Wakefield's 16.88ERA wine in the playoffs this year tasted better than Chien-Ming Wang's 19.06ERA wine in last year's playoffs!

Are you suggesting that Wang is irrelevant as Atro's suggesting Wakefield is?

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:45 AM ET  11.01 by salvaje50

Wakefield is the best $ 4 million inning-eater out there available.

4 mil is pocket change when your budget is 150 mil
smart move- even if he is a a spot starter.....

QUOTE(#11):

Originally posted 01:54 PM ET  11.01 by The Walrus

Are you suggesting that Wang is irrelevant as Atro's suggesting Wakefield is?

Not at all. Wang is a good pitcher, but he got his own wang handed to him by the Tribe in last year's ALDS -- but it was a small sample size (the 2-games, not Wang's wang). Same with Wakefield's post-season performance this year.

Small sample size is also what explains why very often the team to win the World Series is not necessarily the best team in the majors. Even a seven game series, in the context of a 162-game season is a small sample size. Winning four games does not always identify the best team.

For example, August 11th through August 14th, the World Champion Phillies were swept -- four straight games -- by the Dodgers. Does that mean the Dodgers are a better team? No, but had those four games occured a couple of months later, perhaps people would be calling the Dodgers the best team in the majors right now. Fact is, in terms of playing baseball, neither the Dodgers or Phillies were the best team. That's not to take anything away from Philly, winning the World Series is sweet, but often it's not synonymous with being the best team in baseball. I suppose it's semantics, but what the ****.

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 02:09 PM ET  11.01 by SlinkyRedfoot

Not at all. Wang is a good pitcher, but he got his own wang handed to him by the Tribe in last year's ALDS -- but it was a small sample size (the 2-games, not Wang's wang). Same with Wakefield's post-season performance this year. Small sample size is also what explains why very often the team to win the World Series is not necessarily the best team in the majors. Even a seven game series, in the context of a 162-game season is a small sample size. Winning four games does not always identify the best team. For example, August 11th through August 14th, the World Champion Phillies were swept -- four straight games -- by the Dodgers. Does that mean the Dodgers are a better team? No, but had those four games occured a couple of months later, perhaps people would be calling the Dodgers the best team in the majors right now. Fact is, in terms of playing baseball, neither the Dodgers or Phillies were the best team. That's not to take anything away from Philly, winning the World Series is sweet, but often it's not synonymous with being the best team in baseball. I suppose it's semantics, but what the ****.

I HATE it when I have my Wang handed to me!

QUOTE(#11):

Originally posted 01:54 PM ET  11.01 by The Walrus

Are you suggesting that Wang is irrelevant as Atro's suggesting Wakefield is?

Listen, you walkin' fat sack. Number one, you are now putting Wang, a young ground-out pitcher who didn't even play this year and has nothing to do with the topic or Wakefield, TO Wakefield, whose Depends stick out the top of his uniform pants, DID pitch this year, and stunk it up like a rotting narwhale. You may dance around the topic all you wish, but the fact remains that Wakefield, exclusive of whatever Yankee pitchers you irrelevantly throw into the argument, is not the guy you want on the mound anymore when you need a playoff win. OBVIOUSLY.

We all know you're married to statistics, but you're a corn farmer comparing apples to oranges here. Plus, you're overweight and your governor is a walking poster child for northern dipstickedness.

QUOTE(#9):

Originally posted 01:49 PM ET  11.01 by SlinkyRedfoot

Wakefield's 16.88ERA wine in the playoffs this year tasted better than Chien-Ming Wang's 19.06ERA wine in last year's playoffs!

You're right, Slink. Wakefield's pile of **** smelled a lot better than Wang's pile of ****. Good call.

QUOTE(#15):

Originally posted 06:48 PM ET  11.01 by Undertoad

you're overweight

I agree. The Walrus could stand to swim a few extra laps.

QUOTE(#18):

Originally posted 07:07 PM ET  11.01 by Marmosito

I agree. The Walrus could stand to swim a few extra laps.

Shouldn't you be rallying the Angels on towards another colossal letdown or something?

QUOTE(#19):

Originally posted 07:09 PM ET  11.01 by Undertoad

Shouldn't you be rallying the Angels on towards another colossal letdown or something?

Tuck Munderfoad.