Heads22 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5690022 5. Jose Contreras, SP, White Sox 2006 numbers: 85.0 IP, 2.96 ERA, 60 K, 22 BB Pre-2006 numbers: 446.0 IP, 4.28 ERA, 376 K, 189 BB With the low K rate, it will be hard for Contreras to keep up this level of dominance. Moreover, he's trending toward the middle since returning from the DL. Contreras will continue to be a vital and productive member of the White Sox's rotation, but it's not likely he'll end the year with a sub-3.00 ERA. Yup, nothing lately that shows us he can strike guys out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoRowand33 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beautox Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Dayn Perry is a Hack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 It's very rare that I ever become speechless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 According to him, nobody can ever improve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 QUOTE(G&T @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 03:57 PM) According to him, nobody can ever improve. Nobody for the Sox, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamrock4Life Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 what an assclown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 The fact that he has Rios on there is proof beyond just the Sox. There's nothing about that guy that tells me he's not a hell of a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Obviously he's wrong about the k-rate, but he's probably right in the fact that Contreras won't finish with an ERA below 3, and he's also right that he's let up a fair amount of runs since coming back from the DL (by my math, he's got a 4.71 ERA since then). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) Obviously he's wrong about the k-rate, but he's probably right in the fact that Contreras won't finish with an ERA below 3, and he's also right that he's let up a fair amount of runs since coming back from the DL (by my math, he's got a 4.71 ERA since then). He makes it sound like Contreras will be a failure if he can't keep his era under 3. As if there's some long list of guys in the AL who sport earned run averages below 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:18 PM) He makes it sound like Contreras will be a failure if he can't keep his era under 3. As if there's some long list of guys in the AL who sport earned run averages below 3. What quote are you reading? "Contreras will continue to be a vital and productive member of the White Sox's rotation" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted June 18, 2006 Author Share Posted June 18, 2006 But, nope, none of the Career-First Half Tigers is a candidate to regress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I really hate this guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 This guy's a boob, but Contreras isn't likely to end the season with a sub-3.00 ERA. Which screams, who cares? He'll start the all-star game, win 18+ games, win a Cy Young award, win a game in each playoff series, and collect another ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 If Mariotti is a hineybird, what nick-name should this guy be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:27 PM) If Mariotti is a hineybird, what nick-name should this guy be? Hineypole? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSOX45 Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Is there a link that lets us send an email back to him? I'd love to spam the bastard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beautox Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:27 PM) If Mariotti is a hineybird, what nick-name should this guy be? a Hack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 (edited) I don't really understand what he said wrong. He said that Count would not be as good as he has been, but he would still be "a vital and productive member of the White Sox's rotation". What did he say wrong? (other than the K-rate, which is true if you look only at his yearly stats, rather than his last 2 games) Edited June 19, 2006 by Felix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted June 19, 2006 Author Share Posted June 19, 2006 It's his body of work that factors into this. The fact he's always willing to say something negative about the Sox. Contreras has been remarkably consistent since the end of last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 it's not likely he'll end the year with a sub-3.00 ERA. That's the best line. Count has a 2.96 ERA right now, but Perry makes it seem like raising an ERA by 0.04 is some sort of catastrophe. :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) Obviously he's wrong about the k-rate, but he's probably right in the fact that Contreras won't finish with an ERA below 3, and he's also right that he's let up a fair amount of runs since coming back from the DL (by my math, he's got a 4.71 ERA since then). There've been quite a few situations (Cubs game, for one) where Count was charged with Earned Runs that he probably shouldn't have been, for what it's worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 08:23 PM) Contreras has been remarkably consistent since the end of last year. And this might be true, but considering how he's done throughout his career and since the DL stint (small sample size and all), I don't think saying he'll finish the year with an ERA above 3 is unrealistic, or an insult. Hell, he even says that he will still be productive and a vital part of the Sox rotation, so I don't understand how he's bad mouthing Count at all. He's merely saying that Count isn't going to be below 3.00 the whole year, which is true. QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 08:30 PM) That's the best line. Count has a 2.96 ERA right now, but Perry makes it seem like raising an ERA by 0.04 is some sort of catastrophe. :headshake I'm pretty sure you are reading into it more than you should be. Perry merely said that Count wouldn't end the year with an ERA below 3, but stated that he would still be a productive part of the rotation. Edited June 19, 2006 by Felix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHizzle85 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 05:27 PM) If Mariotti is a hineybird, what nick-name should this guy be? douchelick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 12:35 AM) I'm pretty sure you are reading into it more than you should be. Perry merely said that Count wouldn't end the year with an ERA below 3, but stated that he would still be a productive part of the rotation. In such a short blurb, why mention it at all? Raising an ERA by as little as .04 is certainly insignificant, yet Perry decided to point it out anyway, as if he wouldn't be as good as he is now if he did so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.