Impact Rookies

dogknot17@yahoo.co · Post by **dogknot17@yahoo.co** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:12 pm

685A56564270535A57525D5A3B0 wrote: But some thought Glasnow would be a top of the rotation pitcher at age 22. I didn't think he belonged on the team.

So are you saying that needed to get another starting pitcher?

No.

Williams, Brault, Hutchison were better options in my opinion. After Glasnow's performance, I still stand by that too. (I wouldn't have traded Duncan either)

johnfluharty · Post by **johnfluharty** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:28 pm

I don't remember which of the three you mention I thought deserved the #5 slot, but I do remember being surprised that Glasnow won it. I thought, with his altered changeup grip and the other adjustments he had made (to his stride I think?) he might be better served practicing them in AAA under less pressure. To me, his ERA in AAA is irrelevant. The criteria for his recall should be BB/IP ratio, balls and strikes ratio, and being aggressive in the zone with all his pitches.

SammyKhalifa · Post by **SammyKhalifa** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:32 pm

I thought williams should get the nod and that that Rule 5 guy could have been kept for the pen. But that was only my backup "make do with what we got" plan after we didn't go get a starter.

dogknot17@yahoo.co · Post by **dogknot17@yahoo.co** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:41 pm

4C7E72726654777E7376797E1F0 wrote: I thought williams should get the nod and that that Rule 5 guy could have been kept for the pen. But that was only my backup "make do with what we got" plan after we didn't go get a starter.

Three top starters and Kuhl. I was fine with that, actually. Kuhl has underperformed so far. I thought he would be better.

SammyKhalifa · Post by **SammyKhalifa** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 4:45 pm

5F545C5055544F0A0C7B425A5354541558543B0 wrote: I thought williams should get the nod and that that Rule 5 guy could have been kept for the pen. But that was only my backup "make do with what we got" plan after we didn't go get a starter.

Three top starters and Kuhl. I was fine with that, actually. Kuhl has underperformed so far. I thought he would be better.

In my world Kuhl would have been the #5 (yeah I didn't expect his struggles either) with Mystery Starter as maybe a #3-4 and the other guys waiting in AAA for when something went wrong.

PirateGold · Post by **PirateGold** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 5:16 pm

414A424E4B4A511412655C444D4A4A0B464A250 wrote: Don't forget that only three teams who made the MLB Playoffs ended up going further the next year since 2008.

So, after 41 teams made the NL Playoffs one year, only two did better the following year: Phillies and Cubs. Two in the NL since 2008 (82 teams total for three: Royals).

Makes you wonder why the other 38 NL teams didn't build on their playoff runs? Or the other 79 teams in all of baseball?

You are wrong. It's more than three. It's 8. Details:

2008 to 2009

LAA moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2008, knocked out in LCS in 2009

2011 to 2012

NYY moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2011, knocked out in LCS in 2012

DET moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2011, WS losers in 2012

2012 to 2013

STL moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2012, WS losers in 2013

ATL moved up - knocked out in WCG in 2012, division winner/LDS loser in 2013

2014 to 2015

KCR moved up - WS losers in 2014, WS winners in 2015

2015 to 2016

CHC moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2015, WS winners in 2016

LAD moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2015, knocked out in LCS in 2016

Several more teams reached the same level in consecutive years, like Texas losing the series in back-to-back seasons. This count also doesn't take into measure teams who missed the playoffs one year and made it the next - they also moved up a level.

dogknot17@yahoo.co · Post by **dogknot17@yahoo.co** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 5:54 pm

162F3427322301292A22460 wrote: Don't forget that only three teams who made the MLB Playoffs ended up going further the next year since 2008.

So, after 41 teams made the NL Playoffs one year, only two did better the following year: Phillies and Cubs. Two in the NL since 2008 (82 teams total for three: Royals).

Makes you wonder why the other 38 NL teams didn't build on their playoff runs? Or the other 79 teams in all of baseball?

You are wrong. It's more than three. It's 8. Details:

2008 to 2009

LAA moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2008, knocked out in LCS in 2009

2011 to 2012

NYY moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2011, knocked out in LCS in 2012

DET moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2011, WS losers in 2012

2012 to 2013

STL moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2012, WS losers in 2013

ATL moved up - knocked out in WCG in 2012, division winner/LDS loser in 2013

2014 to 2015

KCR moved up - WS losers in 2014, WS winners in 2015

2015 to 2016

CHC moved up - knocked out in LCS in 2015, WS winners in 2016

LAD moved up - knocked out in LDS in 2015, knocked out in LCS in 2016

Several more teams reached the same level in consecutive years, like Texas losing the series in back-to-back seasons. This count also doesn't take into measure teams who missed the playoffs one year and made it the next - they also moved up a level.

Ok. Good research. I was wrong. But eight (even ten) teams is still not a lot in nine years and out of 82 teams.

Sorry, for being wrong. My point is still valid.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 6:19 pm

414A424E4B4A511412655C444D4A4A0B464A250 wrote:

Sorry, for being wrong. My point is still valid.

This team is bad.

Neal Huntington is worse.

SammyKhalifa · Post by **SammyKhalifa** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 6:24 pm

Team is average and had a bad start.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Mon Jun 26, 2017 6:46 pm

05373B3B2F1D3E373A3F3037560 wrote: Team is average and had a bad start.

Ooooh. This one is going on the list of possible team slogans that I've read here recently.

1. Our front office stinks, but they're trying their best!

2. Our team is average and just had a bad start!

I remember, "We Will," but these are much better.