Author Topic: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)  (Read 35964 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online spidernat

  • Posts: 67963
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #375: April 30, 2012, 09:07:19 AM »
Willingham 3-5 with 2B and 3B. Leads the AL in OPS+ but apparently he is not good cheap enough for the Nats


Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35050
  • Champs!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #376: April 30, 2012, 09:39:49 AM »
But we got a relief pitcher for him!!! That's much more valuable than a everyday player.

Online spidernat

  • Posts: 67963
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #377: April 30, 2012, 12:51:51 PM »
But we got a relief pitcher for him!!! That's much more valuable than a everyday player.

Wasn't there someone here who objected to trading a relief pitcher for an every day player and who also happens to complain about the offense all the time?  :stir:

Offline welch

  • Posts: 12104
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #378: April 30, 2012, 01:05:58 PM »
Wasn't there someone here who objected to trading a relief pitcher for an every day player and who also happens to complain about the offense all the time?  :stir:

Grumbles. You probably aren't thinking of me, but I think a position player is more valuable than a pitcher...and I disliked the Willingham trade. I volunteer to be the "somebody".

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35050
  • Champs!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #379: April 30, 2012, 01:35:25 PM »
Wasn't there someone here who objected to trading a relief pitcher for an every day player and who also happens to complain about the offense all the time?  :stir:

Me? I can't recall saying don't trade a RP.

Online spidernat

  • Posts: 67963
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #380: April 30, 2012, 03:20:23 PM »
It was neither of you. I believe the conversation revolved around the possibility of trading Clippard for a CF.

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 24847
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #381: April 30, 2012, 05:44:06 PM »
We had two variations - Clippard or Storen for Span and maybe the same for Bourn (now seems to be det).

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6951
  • Show me Otani
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #382: April 30, 2012, 06:07:12 PM »
AJ cole is at AAA for the A's.  that means they jumped a 19 year old over high A and double A.  he's 0-3 with an era in the 6's so it looks like they are freaking up his development.

Offline EdStroud

  • Posts: 10139
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #383: April 30, 2012, 07:28:43 PM »
We had two variations - Clippard or Storen for Span and maybe the same for Bourn (now seems to be det).

Wasn't someone talking about one of the Uptons from the Rays/Dbacks

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19204
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #384: April 30, 2012, 07:29:41 PM »
Milone is 3-1 with a 2.00 era and a .852 whip

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93629
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #385: April 30, 2012, 07:29:49 PM »
AJ cole is at AAA for the A's.  that means they jumped a 19 year old over high A and double A.  he's 0-3 with an era in the 6's so it looks like they are freaking up his development.
Where do you see that he's at AAA? That can't be right.


Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37377
  • LAC 8)
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #387: April 30, 2012, 08:23:00 PM »
PA likes Corey Brown & Henry Rodriguez over Josh Willingham.

I still find that laughable.

Offline hammondsnats

  • Posts: 37377
  • LAC 8)
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #388: April 30, 2012, 08:25:33 PM »
milone is getting shelled tonight. 

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35050
  • Champs!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #389: April 30, 2012, 08:32:52 PM »
Yeah at Fanduel I played a lot of Red Sox. Knew it was a bad matchup for Tom.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93629
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #390: April 30, 2012, 08:57:14 PM »
Milone got rocked by the Red Sox tonight: 4.2 IP 8 H 7 ER 1 BB 5 K (98 pitches). ERA up to 3.69. Regression to mean

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35050
  • Champs!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #391: April 30, 2012, 08:58:37 PM »
I'm sure those first four starts meant nothing. :roll:

Offline zimm_da_kid

  • Posts: 6951
  • Show me Otani
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #392: April 30, 2012, 08:58:57 PM »
Where do you see that he's at AAA? That can't be right.

sorry.  i guess masn was wrong.  :)

Offline EdStroud

  • Posts: 10139
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #393: April 30, 2012, 09:16:16 PM »
Dodgers- Activated RHP Todd Coffey from the 15-day DL

Click this and then...
(Embedding disabled, limit reached)

....this right after



It was the best I could do


Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 42656
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #394: May 01, 2012, 07:56:20 AM »
It was neither of you. I believe the conversation revolved around the possibility of trading Clippard for a CF.

I posted a link that suggested it.  At the time, I was in favor of trading Clippard for Span straight up. Still am somewhat.

Milone is 3-1 with a 2.00 era and a .852 whip

Not anymore ...

Willingham has a BABIP of .396. He's not going to sustain that. It's almost a 100 points higher than his career average. He'll cool off to his career norms.

Willingham on this team would mean no Bryce Harper. I'll take Bryce.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35050
  • Champs!
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #395: May 01, 2012, 09:52:17 AM »
Strawman meet Slateman.

Offline GMUNat

  • Posts: 5251
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #396: May 01, 2012, 10:18:52 AM »
Willingham on this team would mean no Bryce Harper. I'll take Bryce.
Why exactly would it mean no Harper and I don't really care because Willingham is a much better player than Harper now.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19204
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #397: May 01, 2012, 10:26:54 AM »

Not anymore ...


He got shelled by boston (number 1 in runs scored) Gio put up his numbers against the reds, astros, and padres- I'll stick to my prediction that milone ends the season with better numbers

Offline The Chief

  • Posts: 30644
  • it's a thumb
    • http://www.wnff.net
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #398: May 01, 2012, 10:35:27 AM »
He got shelled by boston (number 1 in runs scored) Gio put up his numbers against the reds, astros, and padres- I'll stick to my prediction that milone ends the season with better numbers

Which numbers?  And be sure to bring this up again after the season whether you were right or not ;)

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19204
Re: The "Former Nat Watch" Thread (2012)
« Reply #399: May 01, 2012, 10:38:48 AM »
Which numbers?  And be sure to bring this up again after the season whether you were right or not ;)

the 0 runs allowed numbers: his other two games, against the cubs 3.2 ip with 4 earned and against the dodgers, 6 ip with 2 earned