Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

Jimenez v. Santana


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 beasley1915

beasley1915

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 475 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 10:29 PM

Thus far looks like DD made the wrong decision. Ubaldo has been getting shelled while Santana has been doing work for Atl

#2 johnpolitics

johnpolitics

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,250 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 10:59 PM

I am very happy about it.

A month ago in a different thread larsanderson wrote the following:

 

Baltimore is overflowing with pitching talent. Santana wouldn't have made the 25 man roster.



#3 Far from home

Far from home

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,898 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 11:17 PM

laranderson is a troll. He was being sarcastic. Santana wouldn't have pitched this way in Baltimore. The NL and the Atlanta ballpark is a better fit.
Ideological gravy trains lead to poor decisions.
Learn from the last President, and make this next era one of rebuilding what has been torn down.
Instead of being loyal to your party, be loyal to your country and your people.

#4 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 07:10 AM

I am very happy about it.

A month ago in a different thread larsanderson wrote the following:

 

Baltimore is overflowing with pitching talent. Santana wouldn't have made the 25 man roster.

lars is a yankees fan who trolls this board. don't take his comments too seriously.


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#5 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 07:12 AM

Thus far looks like DD made the wrong decision. Ubaldo has been getting shelled while Santana has been doing work for Atl

I preferred Jimenez over Santana, but I fear you are right.  I watched Santana for a couple innings last night against the Phillies and he was nasty.  He pitched 6 innings and struck out 11 and gave up one run.  He stuff was really good.  He mixed a 95 mph fastball with pitches that had all kinds of movement.  He walked 2.  He looked like a front-end starter while Jimenez has looked like a meatball that couldn't pitch at Norfolk.  Early yes, but the difference in stuff is startling to me. 



#6 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 07:18 AM

Santana wouldn't have pitched this way in Baltimore. The NL and the Atlanta ballpark is a better fit.

that's for sure. 

 

I wanted the O's to sign Santana over Jimenez for this very reason. Santana will give the Braves some very consistent starting pitching. it won't be exceptional, but it will be reliable. Jimenez will give the O's a few starts like we've seen so far, then he'll throw a gem, then a couple of good games. his season will have peaks, but it will have more valleys (if his career to this point is a worthy gauge).

 

if there is a bright spot on the horizon, it's that UJ always has bad Aprils & ~Mays. if that holds true in Baltimore, the O's will tighten up as the season progresses. and if you have to choose one or the other, a strong finish beats a strong start every time. 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#7 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 07:19 AM

I preferred Jimenez over Santana, but I fear you are right.  I watched Santana for a couple innings last night against the Phillies and he was nasty.  He pitched 6 innings and struck out 11 and gave up one run.  He stuff was really good.  He mixed a 95 mph fastball with pitches that had all kinds of movement.  He walked 2.  He looked like a front-end starter while Jimenez has looked like a meatball that couldn't pitch at Norfolk.  Early yes, but the difference in stuff is startling to me. 

yeah, but it was the Phillies. so... :P


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#8 ivanbalt

ivanbalt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,393 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 08:12 AM

I'm loving the Santana strike outs so far.



#9 soulflower

soulflower

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48,575 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 08:19 AM

that's for sure.

I wanted the O's to sign Santana over Jimenez for this very reason. Santana will give the Braves some very consistent starting pitching. it won't be exceptional, but it will be reliable. Jimenez will give the O's a few starts like we've seen so far, then he'll throw a gem, then a couple of good games. his season will have peaks, but it will have more valleys (if his career to this point is a worthy gauge).

if there is a bright spot on the horizon, it's that UJ always has bad Aprils & ~Mays. if that holds true in Baltimore, the O's will tighten up as the season progresses. and if you have to choose one or the other, a strong finish beats a strong start every time.


Fangraphs posted an article yesterday about Ubaldo's velocity problems.

Basically, he's been a much better pitcher when his velo averages 93-94 mph. In his three starts for Baltimore, he's averaged 89-91 mph.

It may take him til May to build up his arm strength and velocity since he came to camp a little later than normal. But if the lower velocity issues persist, then he may very well be a dud.
"...reality has a well-known liberal bias"

#10 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 08:35 AM

Fangraphs posted an article yesterday about Ubaldo's velocity problems.

Basically, he's been a much better pitcher when his velo averages 93-94 mph. In his three starts for Baltimore, he's averaged 89-91 mph.

It may take him til May to build up his arm strength and velocity since he came to camp a little later than normal. But if the lower velocity issues persist, then he may very well be a dud.

one thing is for sure, he has a strange and unique delivery. I don't know how he can consistently repeat those mechanics. 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#11 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:31 AM

Fangraphs posted an article yesterday about Ubaldo's velocity problems.

Basically, he's been a much better pitcher when his velo averages 93-94 mph. In his three starts for Baltimore, he's averaged 89-91 mph.

It may take him til May to build up his arm strength and velocity since he came to camp a little later than normal. But if the lower velocity issues persist, then he may very well be a dud.

Oh god, I was wondering about this.  I haven't seen any of Jimenez's starts, so I was curious about his velocity.  I've seen quite a few times where velocity can be a strong indicator of success or failure.  On the success side look at Chris Tillman.  He first came up he sat around 89-90 and got his rear handed to him.  Now he sits at 94-95 and is a dominant starter.  Two other lesser cases are Matusz and Britton.  Granted they are relievers now, but there velocity is way up compared to when they were stinking it up.  Britton is up to around 95 now from 91-92 and is killing it.  On the failure side look at Jim Johnson and Jason Hammel.  In 2012 when they were lights out they both sat at 95 consistently hitting 96 at times..  In 2013 when they weren't so good they were down at 92-93.  I'm afraid we have a lemon in Jimenez with that velocity.  Santana came in much later and he is winging it at 95.  We got the meatball version of Ubaldo.  If he doesn't pick it up this will wreck the year.



#12 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:38 AM

yeah, but it was the Phillies. so... :P

Yeah Phillies not great, but there is no doubt Santana would of given us a better chance to win in the three start Jimenez has made.  The stuff Santana had last night would play anywhere including the AL East.  Flat out filthy.  On the other hand, you have Jimenez serving up meatballs at 89mph.  We are in trouble on this one.



#13 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 10:33 AM

Yeah Phillies not great, but there is no doubt Santana would of given us a better chance to win in the three start Jimenez has made.  The stuff Santana had last night would play anywhere including the AL East.  Flat out filthy.  On the other hand, you have Jimenez serving up meatballs at 89mph.  We are in trouble on this one.

this is all true, but keep in mind that Jimenez was given #3 money. and he is most certainly going to deliver on that. I mentioned this to Soulflower when the deal was announced. I preferred Santana, but I'm still happy the O's signed Jimenez. don't worry about his season so far. his career history says that he will come 'round.  


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#14 Struds

Struds

    Moderate

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,015 posts
  • LocationHarford County

Posted 15 April 2014 - 10:57 AM

this is all true, but keep in mind that Jimenez was given #3 money. and he is most certainly going to deliver on that. I mentioned this to Soulflower when the deal was announced. I preferred Santana, but I'm still happy the O's signed Jimenez. don't worry about his season so far. his career history says that he will come 'round.  

A little anxious after three starts, but not worried yet because of his history as a slow starter. If it continues into May, the rumblings for Gaussman and maybe even our Santana to come up will begin and grow louder.   



#15 weird-O

weird-O

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,865 posts
  • LocationI'm here from downtown, I'm here from Mitch and Murray.

Posted 15 April 2014 - 11:59 AM

A little anxious after three starts, but not worried yet because of his history as a slow starter. If it continues into May, the rumblings for Gaussman and maybe even our Santana to come up will begin and grow louder.   

I'm sure of that. 


"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Benjamin Disraeli

#16 Jimmy Jazz

Jimmy Jazz

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,408 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 05:36 PM

Oh god, I was wondering about this.  I haven't seen any of Jimenez's starts, so I was curious about his velocity.  I've seen quite a few times where velocity can be a strong indicator of success or failure.  On the success side look at Chris Tillman.  He first came up he sat around 89-90 and got his rear handed to him.  Now he sits at 94-95 and is a dominant starter.  Two other lesser cases are Matusz and Britton.  Granted they are relievers now, but there velocity is way up compared to when they were stinking it up.  Britton is up to around 95 now from 91-92 and is killing it.  On the failure side look at Jim Johnson and Jason Hammel.  In 2012 when they were lights out they both sat at 95 consistently hitting 96 at times..  In 2013 when they weren't so good they were down at 92-93.  I'm afraid we have a lemon in Jimenez with that velocity.  Santana came in much later and he is winging it at 95.  We got the meatball version of Ubaldo.  If he doesn't pick it up this will wreck the year.


Speaking of Hammel, he's won his first 2 starts for the Cubs, both against the Pirates.

#17 RIKMAN

RIKMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,927 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 07:44 PM

His history is he will be up and down. I am going to give him time before I call him a dud. I think he will be ok.
Baltimore Sports fan since 1965!:cool:

Confusing the delusional with fact since 2005!

#18 where's earl

where's earl

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 7,120 posts

Posted 17 April 2014 - 07:24 AM

Right on, the season is less than 10% old and it's a marathon not a sprint. Britton looks like he may be starting before the seasons over if UJ doesn't get it straightened out. We are 7-7 with the league's toughest schedule and haven't really started to hit.


Show me a good loser in professional sports, and I'll show you an idiot." Leo Durocher
"I would rather beat the Yankees regularly than pitch a no hit game."
Bob Feller
"You win pennants in the off season when you build your teams with trades and free agents."
Earl Weaver

#19 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 56,983 posts

Posted 17 April 2014 - 07:29 AM

It's still April


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:

#20 CROUSEMAN

CROUSEMAN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 08:59 AM

Last time I checked, a win in April counted the same as a win in September.  So I'm not buying into the notion that it's early and don't worry about Jimenez.  Every win or loss in the AL East is critical and he has given us no chance in his three starts.  If he pitches to a 2-1 record we sit at 10-5 not 8-7.  The drop in velocity is really disturbing and makes for the distinct possibility that we will be stuck with the Meatball version all year.  When you see guys like Santana and Feldman pitching to sub 1 ERA's it makes you sick.  Even Jason Hammel has three quality starts.  The upcoming start in Boston will tell a lot.  I'm not expecting much.  Hope I'm wrong.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users