Anthopoulos served as an advanced scout for the Greek National Baseball Team for the 2004 Summer Olympics. The Greek team finished in 7th place.

 

Didn't Mike Piazza play on that team?

Didn't Mike Piazza play on that team?

 

I think he was on Italy. Nick Markakis was on the Greek team.

Just lock this, so I'm not tempted to come back and point out how bad that trade was.

 

14-9, 3.61

 

28 starts, 187 innings.

 

Oh, and he can rake too.

 

He'll be starting Game 2 in Philadelphia.

He'll be starting and losing Game 2 in Philadelphia.

 

KW just better pray that Stewart can be a #4 or 5 starter, as Hudson continues to look like he's going to be a #1 or 2 for a long time.

Maybe, but at least he'll be there.

 

And the D-backs will have him cheap for the next 5 years.

Will it be four years or five (with Hudson)?

 

Did he pitch enough in 2010 to push his service time forward?

Will it be four years or five (with Hudson)?

 

Did he pitch enough in 2010 to push his service time forward?

He didn't come up until well after the Super 2 deadline, so it ought to be 5 more years after this.

KW just better pray that Stewart can be a #4 or 5 starter, as Hudson continues to look like he's going to be a #1 or 2 for a long time.

He's not proven he's a #1 - maybe a #2, but I think he needs to show more. He's not even the best pitcher on his own team right now.

 

I don't dispute he has performed quite well since virtually the day we traded him, but let's not make him into an ace quite yet.

 

He's pitching to a 3.6 ERA in the year of the pitcher in the National League in a division in which there are zero competent offenses.

Edited August 30, 201114 yr by iamshack

He's not proven he's a #1 - maybe a #2, but I think he needs to show more. He's not even the best pitcher on his own team right now.

 

I don't dispute he has performed quite well since virtually the day we traded him, but let's not make him into an ace quite yet.

 

He's pitching to a 3.6 ERA in the year of the pitcher in the National League in a division in which there are zero competent offenses.

 

The Dodgers, Giants and Padres are not good offenses?

The Dodgers, Giants and Padres are not good offenses?

 

Some of the worst actually

Humber would beat Hudson.

AA has done some amazing things, many of his moves are more for the longer term (I know, you're an all in guy). That said, if after another 3 years and he hasn't progressed in the standings then of course he didn't keep up his track record.

 

That's the key to all of this. He was lucky to find a taker for Wells, but his return for Halladay isn't looking so hot right now, and he was (and still probably is) the best and most valuable pitcher in baseball. Kyle Drabek, though still young, has been absolutely demolished at both the MLB and AAA level this year and one has to wonder if he's not injured. Michael Taylor - who's been OK - was actually traded immediately for Brett Wallace. Wallace was then traded for Michael Gose, who has, again, been OK at the AA level. Travis d'Arnaud has played well this year, but that's one player.

 

He was lucky to find a taker for Wells too.

 

I like Anthropolous and what he's done with that organization as much as the next guy, but they are still quite a ways away from getting out of 4th place. People were in love with Jack Zduriencik too and then the M's fell flat on their face and his plan failed, and suddenly he is thought of as a middle of the pack GM again.

 

There are many ways to go about building a team - the Astros brought in as many players as they could for Pence and Bourn to try and replenish the depth they'd lost over the years as well as getting as many serviceable MLB players as they could. The Jays have set themselves up with high ceiling players, but if 2-3 of those players completely flop, especially some of the bigger names (this year alone, Snider and Lind could have done wonders for them, but their presence has been non-existent), it's all for not. What I see is high variability with that team. There will be a year, probably within the next 4, that they win anywhere between 92-102 games. And then there will be a couple years that they only win 75-83. That's the nature of young players and how they pan out. Some players blossom and continue to be stars. Some come out like a bang, struggle for a year or two, and then find their groove again. Others succeed at all times they are not injured - which is often. Some succeed, fail, and then can't get it back. There is a lot which is yet to be accounted for.

 

 

Before anyone declares AA as one of the best in the game, I would suggest that they take a step back and wait for everything to pan out. In the meantime, I'm going to suggest that, if using wins/resources, Andrew Friedman is the best GM in the game. I don't think there's much of an argument.

Edited August 31, 201114 yr by witesoxfan

KW just better pray that Stewart can be a #4 or 5 starter, as Hudson continues to look like he's going to be a #1 or 2 for a long time.

 

He's probably more like a quality #3. A ? trade at the time that just looks bad. You could have retained a young arm where it looks like this organization might new one since there may be no Danks.

 

I think it was you that pointed out getting Jackson because Kenny didn't want to trust an unproven pitcher in a race and now they have to trust Stewart.

 

I think you could make an equally compelling argument for Terry Ryan of the Twins being the best overall GM in the game, if you took his payroll limitations, the Pohlads and a smaller-revenue producing stadium into account.

 

Heck, the Twins were almost vanquished from baseball and they went on to win 6 out of 9 division titles and they were a coin flip away from 7/9. Almost every single player that contributed to the 2010 Twins' team was put in place by Ryan, with the exception of Delmon Young's monster year. In the end, the DY trade turned out to be something of a bust for them. Luckily, Bill Smith has turned out to be a bottom third GM so far in his tenure.

 

Of course, in Friedman's defense, the Rays have a much higher bar to get across with the Yankees and Red Sox, there's no doubt about that.

 

But I would definitely take Ryan and Friedman over Beane. Seems Beane needs to see what he could do with a higher-revenue team in order to really prove how good a GM he could actually be. Perhaps, like KW, he "peaked" in the Hudson/Zito/Mulder/Tejada/Chavez days and his best years are firmly behind him in the rearview mirror.

 

 

 

 

The thing to remember though...Terry Ryan had exactly 2 ridiculous benefits. He got the #1 pick in the right year to get a player who came up and hit while he was still GM (and then departed before that player's knees gave out), and then he also happened to hit absolute gold on a rule 5 draft pick.

 

He also was the beneficiary of some really stupid trading by the Giants too.

 

If we wanted to there's room to criticize him as well. Letting David Ortiz walk right before he turned into a (possibly chemically enhanced) hitting machine.

Hudson up to 15 wins and beat the division rival. DBs got the better half of that deal.

The thing to remember though...Terry Ryan had exactly 2 ridiculous benefits. He got the #1 pick in the right year to get a player who came up and hit while he was still GM (and then departed before that player's knees gave out), and then he also happened to hit absolute gold on a rule 5 draft pick.

 

He also was the beneficiary of some really stupid trading by the Giants too.

 

If we wanted to there's room to criticize him as well. Letting David Ortiz walk right before he turned into a (possibly chemically enhanced) hitting machine.

The majority of GMs would have taken Pryor over Mauer.

The majority of GMs would have taken Pryor over Mauer.

 

So would Ryan if Priors salary demands didn't scare him off as a small market GM.

So would Ryan if Priors salary demands didn't scare him off as a small market GM.

Sometimes being cheap pays off, it also helped Mauer was the local boy, but he did make the correct call.

That's the key to all of this. He was lucky to find a taker for Wells, but his return for Halladay isn't looking so hot right now, and he was (and still probably is) the best and most valuable pitcher in baseball. Kyle Drabek, though still young, has been absolutely demolished at both the MLB and AAA level this year and one has to wonder if he's not injured. Michael Taylor - who's been OK - was actually traded immediately for Brett Wallace. Wallace was then traded for Michael Gose, who has, again, been OK at the AA level. Travis d'Arnaud has played well this year, but that's one player.

 

He was lucky to find a taker for Wells too.

 

I like Anthropolous and what he's done with that organization as much as the next guy, but they are still quite a ways away from getting out of 4th place. People were in love with Jack Zduriencik too and then the M's fell flat on their face and his plan failed, and suddenly he is thought of as a middle of the pack GM again.

 

There are many ways to go about building a team - the Astros brought in as many players as they could for Pence and Bourn to try and replenish the depth they'd lost over the years as well as getting as many serviceable MLB players as they could. The Jays have set themselves up with high ceiling players, but if 2-3 of those players completely flop, especially some of the bigger names (this year alone, Snider and Lind could have done wonders for them, but their presence has been non-existent), it's all for not. What I see is high variability with that team. There will be a year, probably within the next 4, that they win anywhere between 92-102 games. And then there will be a couple years that they only win 75-83. That's the nature of young players and how they pan out. Some players blossom and continue to be stars. Some come out like a bang, struggle for a year or two, and then find their groove again. Others succeed at all times they are not injured - which is often. Some succeed, fail, and then can't get it back. There is a lot which is yet to be accounted for.

 

 

Before anyone declares AA as one of the best in the game, I would suggest that they take a step back and wait for everything to pan out. In the meantime, I'm going to suggest that, if using wins/resources, Andrew Friedman is the best GM in the game. I don't think there's much of an argument.

 

 

AA looking at potential $100+ million pitcher Yu Darvish.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_leagu...urn=mlb-wp18464

 

You would have to think the Dice-K and Aroldis Chapman experiments would be cooling off most GM's on these huge international signings...

Edited September 5, 201114 yr by caulfield12

If there is something I am not going to spend $100 million on as a young team, it's pitching. TINSTAAPP.

Hudson with a CG win.

 

*cue the it doesn't count because it came against the Padres comments*

it doesn't count because it came against the Padres

 

 

Hudson with a CG win.

 

*cue the it doesn't count because it came against the Padres comments*

 

As of a few weeks ago, I do know that Padres had a top 3 offense in the NL since the ASB. However, that was before they started losing 13 of their next 15.