JDsDirtySox Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 For those bashing Aardsma... I wonder how many have actually watched the kid pitch. I have liked David Aardsma ever since I first saw him as the closer for the Rice Owls. Aardsma is a good pitcher who really started to come around at the end of last year. From Whitesox.com: Aardsma showed steady improvement with each time up at the Major League level, and he posted a 2-0 mark with a 3.12 ERA after the All-Star break. He was even more impressive in the final month of the season when he recorded a 1.65 ERA in 16 1/3 innings, including a stretch of 12 scoreless innings from Sept. 2-19. When will people learn to trust in the objectives of KW and his staff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:29 PM) Look at the fact that he has a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. Sounds more like Cotts to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 09:26 PM) You're welcome. So, you'd rather evaluate a pitcher based on amateur scouting, rather than what he's actually done on the field? Actual performance tells you more than mercurial BS like what someone once said about his stuff and "makeup". "Makeup" is one of the most meaningless words used on this board. I think the point is that it's his first year. It really wasn't a bad rookie season. And anyway, if you believe all this, why are you so pissed, when Neal hasn't been any better in "actual performance" over the course of his career, and was certainly worse than Aardsma in 2006? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:29 PM) Did you actually watch Sox games this season? Until September, Guillen routinely used Cotts as the #1 lefty in high leverage situations. That is just a fact, and it is a fact that was complained about on this forum on a daily basis. Thanks! Aardsma is worse than Riske, with a track record to prove it. Look at Aardsma's stats. Look at the fact that he has a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. And show me even one source that says the throw in Vazquez is even a decent prospect. Please stop with the pointless stance. To compare a 24 year old Aardsma to 30 year old David Riske (who the Sox and every other team in the Majors) made a whipping boy is absurd. Aardsma has good stuff and got better as the year went on last year. (In the final month of the season when he recorded a 1.65 ERA in 16 1/3 innings, including a stretch of 12 scoreless innings from Sept. 2-19.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:26 PM) You're welcome. So, you'd rather evaluate a pitcher based on amateur scouting, rather than what he's actually done on the field? Actual performance tells you more than mercurial BS like what someone once said about his stuff and "makeup". "Makeup" is one of the most meaningless words used on this board. Actual performace tells me Aardsma is better, FWIW. I was merely looking at the fact that Aardsma also has other talent that will allow him to remain successful as a reliever in the MLB - a 95-98 MPH fastball - with just tweaks to mechanics necessary to maintain that success, whereas Cotts is hit or miss with absolutely no middle ground to whether he'll be successful or not. Usually, pitchers with straight 91 MPH fastballs get hit pretty hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 09:31 PM) For those bashing Aardsma... I wonder how many have actually watched the kid pitch. I have liked David Aardsma ever since I first saw him as the closer for the Rice Owls. Aardsma is a good pitcher who really started to come around at the end of last year. From Whitesox.com: Aardsma showed steady improvement with each time up at the Major League level, and he posted a 2-0 mark with a 3.12 ERA after the All-Star break. He was even more impressive in the final month of the season when he recorded a 1.65 ERA in 16 1/3 innings, including a stretch of 12 scoreless innings from Sept. 2-19. When will people learn to trust in the objectives of KW and his staff. This is what I don't get. When I saw him this year, which admittedly was only a few times, he looked good. And his numbers are pretty good. Why is everyone s***ting all over this guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 For those bashing Aardsma... I wonder how many have actually watched the kid pitch. I have liked David Aardsma ever since I first saw him as the closer for the Rice Owls. Aardsma is a good pitcher who really started to come around at the end of last year. We should be optimistic about this guy because he had a good September after an August where he had a 4.67 ERA? And I don't put much weight in the amateur scouting reports of fans who are "impressed with his stuff", etc. Do you know how many AAA pitchers have impressive stuff but can't pitch particularly well in the majors? By the way, his impressive stuff is one pitch. When will people learn to trust in the objectives of KW and his staff. It's not like every trade KW makes is a great one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 02:29 AM) Did you actually watch Sox games this season? Until September, Guillen routinely used Cotts as the #1 lefty in high leverage situations. That is just a fact, and it is a fact that was complained about on this forum on a daily basis. Umm -- as I said, after June, Neal was below Thorton. Neal was still used a lot, but when it got to the later innings, Guillen went to Thorton as his first lefty. Cotts was certainly used too much, that I agree with, but Thorton was definitely "higher up" than Cotts. Thanks! Aardsma is worse than Riske, with a track record to prove it. Yeah, I'm glad you can evaluate talent on 63 innings. You're one helluva scout. Look at Aardsma's stats. What, his meaningful ones, like his minor league stats? Or the 63 IP that you can apparently take a lot out of. Look at the fact that he has a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. Here's what the guys at Bleed Cubbie Blue says (from SouthSideSox): Aardsma can throw 97+ on a consistent basis. His trouble is, he's a thrower, not a pitcher. He just throws hard, has had trouble with control, which is why the Giants gave up on him. He did seem to have more success with his control in the last couple of months of 2006. In September he had a 1.72 ERA in 15.2 IP, with 21 strikeouts and nine walks and a 0.96 WHIP. I was a bit disappointed at this deal, as I like Aardsma a lot and IF he can get his control harnessed, he's closer material. But you know what, I'll just take your word for it. You're obviously a professional scout or a GM disguised as a Soxtalk poster. And show me even one source that says the throw in Vazquez is even a decent prospect. Vasquez is pretty irrelevant. A throw-in. He had a nice year last season, good K/IP numbers. If he becomes a major league LOOGY, that'll be pretty good. Edited November 17, 2006 by CWSGuy406 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I think the point is that it's his first year. It really wasn't a bad rookie season. And anyway, if you believe all this, why are you so pissed, when Neal hasn't been any better in "actual performance" over the course of his career, and was certainly worse than Aardsma in 2006? Granted, the statistical evidence on Aardsma isn't voluminous, but what there has been isn't very impressive. Nor is his one good, but not great pitch. And I don't think Cotts is a world beater, but he's a lefty who has managed one great season in his brief major league career. That is one more than Aardsma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:36 PM) We should be optimistic about this guy because he had a good September after an August where he had a 4.67 ERA? And I don't put much weight in the amateur scouting reports of fans who are "impressed with his stuff", etc. Do you know how many AAA pitchers have impressive stuff but can't pitch particularly well in the majors? By the way, his impressive stuff is one pitch. It's not like every trade KW makes is a great one. You my friend should change your name to Scrooge. From your FIRE OZZIE tag... to the love connection with Neal Cotts, I conclude you are unrepairable. Take Care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Please stop with the pointless stance. To compare a 24 year old Aardsma to 30 year old David Riske (who the Sox and every other team in the Majors) made a whipping boy is absurd. Riske is better than Aardsma and Riske had a batter 2006 season than Aardsma. Aardsma has good stuff and got better as the year went on last year. (In the final month of the season when he recorded a 1.65 ERA in 16 1/3 innings, including a stretch of 12 scoreless innings from Sept. 2-19.) Aardsma's "good stuff" is a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. He was up and down last year, including a very good September and a horrible August. That one good month doesn't fill me with optimism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:38 PM) Granted, the statistical evidence on Aardsma isn't voluminous, but what there has been isn't very impressive. Nor is his one good, but not great pitch. And I don't think Cotts is a world beater, but he's a lefty who has managed one great season in his brief major league career. That is one more than Aardsma. He's also had like, oh, 3 more years to have great years at the majors compared to Aardsma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 This is what I don't get. When I saw him this year, which admittedly was only a few times, he looked good. And his numbers are pretty good. Why is everyone s***ting all over this guy? Because he just isn't that good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:38 PM) Granted, the statistical evidence on Aardsma isn't voluminous, but what there has been isn't very impressive. Nor is his one good, but not great pitch. And I don't think Cotts is a world beater, but he's a lefty who has managed one great season in his brief major league career. That is one more than Aardsma. Oh... and if you are gonna live on stats (4.67 era in August), dig deeper before you base your arguement. That 4.67 ERA was due to one bad night of 5 ER in a game against the Cardinals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 09:38 PM) Granted, the statistical evidence on Aardsma isn't voluminous, but what there has been isn't very impressive. Nor is his one good, but not great pitch. And I don't think Cotts is a world beater, but he's a lefty who has managed one great season in his brief major league career. That is one more than Aardsma. He had one great season where he helped the team a lot, and two poor seasons where he hurt the team some. Aardsma had one good season where he was a solid contributor. That's a huge discrepancy? So if someone has one great year, his "actual performance" is only that one year, and you should just throw out everything else? Lol. Basically, you're saying that you wouldn't trade Cotts for anyone who hasn't had as good a season. Anything short of Jake Peavy, and SH1980 ain't biting. Okay... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 You my friend should change your name to Scrooge. From your FIRE OZZIE tag... to the love connection with Neal Cotts, I conclude you are unrepairable. Take Care. Ok, I'll play that game. You my friend should cahnge your name to SoxHomer#1. Because if the Sox make a trade you are going to spin it like crazy to convince yourself and everyone else that this has somehow made the Sox better. See ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 09:42 PM) Because he just isn't that good. Well, now I believe you. All I needed was to read it 15 times without any support. Thanks for the insight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Oh... and if you are gonna live on stats (4.67 era in August), dig deeper before you base your arguement. That 4.67 ERA was due to one bad night of 5 ER in a game against the Cardinals. Spin, spin, spin. Alibi, alibi, alibi. Take out all of his bad games and his stats suddenly look great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:45 PM) Spin, spin, spin. Alibi, alibi, alibi. Take out all of his bad games and his stats suddenly look great! You should just take all his good games and show us how bad he REALLY was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:41 PM) Riske is better than Aardsma and Riske had a batter 2006 season than Aardsma. Aardsma's "good stuff" is a good, but not great fastball and no decent second pitch. He was up and down last year, including a very good September and a horrible August. That one good month doesn't fill me with optimism. How is a 96-98 MPH Fastball not great? Aardsma also has a sinker, slider, curve and change. Just come clean and confess this isn't about Aardsma... it is about a man crush on Cotts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 He had one great season where he helped the team a lot, and two poor seasons where he hurt the team some. Aardsma had one good season where he was a solid contributor. Quick point here. A reliever in the NL with a 4.08 ERA and a 1.30 WHIP is not a good season. That's a huge discrepancy? So if someone has one great year, his "actual performance" is only that one year, and you should just throw out everything else? Lol. Of course not. Let's not be intentionally obtuse. His one great year shows that he can, at least under some circumstances pitch very well in the majors. I don't know if he'll ever do that again. But there is more evidence that he will, than this Aardsma character who hasn't shown a thing. Oh yeah, except for that one good month! Basically, you're saying that you wouldn't trade Cotts for anyone who hasn't had as good a season. Anything short of Jake Peavy, and SH1980 ain't biting. Okay... Huh? Put the crack pipe down. Well, now I believe you. All I needed was to read it 15 times without any support. Thanks for the insight. And what's your support? A radar gun reading and the fact that you watched him pitch a few times and you like his makeup? My opinion is based on what he's actually done and not done on the field. How is a 96-98 MPH Fastball not great? From what I've read, he tops out at 96 and most of his fastballs are 92-95. Aardsma also has a sinker, slider, curve and change. LMAO. Yeah, just like I can throw a sinker, slider, curve and change. I can do it, but they are all crap. None of Aardsma's other pitches are even mediocre. He's a one pitch pitcher. Just come clean and confess this isn't about Aardsma... it is about a man crush on Cotts. Feel free to search my entire posting history. You won't find me coming to Cotts defense. He had a crap season and I have never been a big fan. But his value was higher than the crap KW got for him. A bad trade is a bad trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:54 PM) He's a one pitch pitcher. Is Cotts not a 1 pitch pitcher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Is Cotts not a 1 pitch pitcher? ...who has actually had some major league success. And Cotts is a lefty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 QUOTE(SoxHawk1980 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 08:56 PM) ...who has actually had some major league success. And Cotts is a lefty. And you give Aardsma 4 years in the league, and I bet he has one good season too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxHawk1980 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 And you give Aardsma 4 years in the league, and I bet he has one good season too. It's a bet. 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.