- Joined:
- Nov 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 25,053
- Liked Posts:
- 11,503
My favorite teams
I guess I'm confused....when Theo Baseball says the Cubs goal every year is to win a World Series, and every season is sacred, we're supposed to take that literally?
I guess I'm confused....when Theo Baseball says the Cubs goal every year is to win a World Series, and every season is sacred, we're supposed to take that literally?
And this has what to do with what?
LMAO. no.
These are the guys that soak up innings for you, usually with average to slightly above-average performance, but who don't meet the standards to be a One/Two. For weaker teams, a Number Three may take the first slot in the rotation and be the de-facto ace. There is usually a fairly clear dividing line between a Number Three and Number One/Two. It's like pornography; you know it when you see it.
If we accept those definitions he has the tools to be a 2. Whether he becomes that or not is frankly open to debate, but he certainly has two plus pitches right now.That pretty much describes Shark to a T.
A guy to soak up innings, but who isn't as good or consistent or durable as a solid Three. The styles here can vary wildly. Some of these guys are control artists who lack plus stuff, others have plenty of stuff but don't command it well.
That pretty much describes Shark to a T.
Did you actually read what I wrote?Taking statements GMs make literally, or not.
Just saying, you seem to firmly believe in Cashman's statements in regards to Tanaka.
I'm more outraged/appalled that the Cubs have considered the past two seasons sacred.
If we accept those definitions he has the tools to be a 2. Whether he becomes that or not is frankly open to debate, but he certainly has two plus pitches right now.
I see a lot of shark in 3-4-5 category, not the 1-2.
So, you agree that he is a 3 present time but you dont think his ceiling is any higher.
But you see Tanaka who hasnt thrown a pitch in the majors much more?
Pretty much, I see him as a 3 on a playoff caliber team. The lower Shark is in a rotation, the better the team will be.
He can be a 2 on the Cubs...but I don't think Shark is a 2 on a playoff contending team. JMO.
Nope. I'll defer to the scouts who see him as a 2.
He has a ceiling of a 2. They think he is a 3 right now. He is not Yu Darvish or thought of as Yu Darvish.
This is what I don't think you understand. These terms are not team dependent. It isn't about where they slot on a particular team's rotation. If you put Felix Hernadez on the Dodgers it doesn't make him a 2. Look I can accept that Samardzija's results will never match his stuff. That he will be a guy who consistently underperforms his peripherals. But there are the tools to be a front of the rotation starter there, and that is why quite a few teams have called the Cubs in regards to Shark.