Il BuonO Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Ok, yea, I'll believe your supposed scout buddies over the fact other teams had documented interest in him and he signed a more lucrative deal than Chen. You're asking me to believe that Duquette, under big financial constraints, just randomly signed Wada to an $8M deal when they could have had him whatever they wanted since nobody else offered anything. You don't have to believe anything I say. The Dodgers were initially the first ones interested and they backed away too. More than the two teams you dug up in your little google search looked at him. That isn't the point. Yes, we were the only ones who ponied up $8 Mil to sign this guy vs Chen who's FB sits 92 not 86, big difference. I'll agree with one of your earlier posts and say that according to his numbers over his career he has some talent, and OFFNY clearly showed one of my statements was incorrect when I said he hadn't strung together more than two starts in AAA. He has, but then why is he still down there? Duquette and Showalter must both be idiots not to have him up at this point, huh? Or is it more likely that Dan and Buck don't think he can help. I think DD made a depth signing coming off a long hiatus away from the game he may not make today under similar circumstances. It might sound like I'm hypercritical of Wada but I've said in this thread I think he may be able to help out of the pen. He throws strikes which I like. I just didn't think much of the signing when it was made but it's understandable given Duquette's time away from the game when he was hired. Compared to McPhail, DD moves at light speed but even Andy had a few good moves. I won't agree with everything that Dan does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrungoHazewood Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 It might sound like I'm hypercritical of Wada but I've said in this thread I think he may be able to help out of the pen. He throws strikes which I like. I just didn't think much of the signing when it was made but it's understandable given Duquette's time away from the game when he was hired. Compared to McPhail, DD moves at light speed but even Andy had a few good moves. I won't agree with everything that Dan does. Wow. Hypercritical seems like an appropriate way to describe it. And then you go on to give DD a pass on what you're basically calling an idiotic move because he was just getting back into the game and (I guess) wasn't up to speed on how MLB works in 2011. Given that attitude, yes, I'd agree with your sarcastic suggestion that Buck and DD are idiots. If you'd sign a barely passable middle reliever to an $8M contract you probably shouldn't be allowed to run a two-bit indy league's front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il BuonO Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Wow. Hypercritical seems like an appropriate way to describe it. And then you go on to give DD a pass on what you're basically calling an idiotic move because he was just getting back into the game and (I guess) wasn't up to speed on how MLB works in 2011.Given that attitude, yes, I'd agree with your sarcastic suggestion that Buck and DD are idiots. If you'd sign a barely passable middle reliever to an $8M contract you probably shouldn't be allowed to run a two-bit indy league's front office. That's quite an angry misreading of my post, but hey I guess your entitled. I won't go into everything, but I'll bring up another point that supports the idea that when he was "up to speed" as you said. Remember Kim Seong-min and the KBA? Was that ok, or was that a mistake? I'd say it was lack of current knowledge of operations due to his absence from the game. I'm allowed to question the team I like and the people that work for that team. I'm not malicious about it. You want to fall in lock-step with everything they do that's your prerogative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malike Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 The Pirates, Nationals, Dodgers, and Orioles all had good interest in Wada. He was viewed as a reliever by the other teams, and he wanted to be given the chance to start, and the Orioles were willing to give it a shot and he signed. To say no other teams wanted him or thought he had any value is ridiculous. It didn't work out, he needed surgery, it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrungoHazewood Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 The Pirates, Nationals, Dodgers, and Orioles all had good interest in Wada. He was viewed as a reliever by the other teams, and he wanted to be given the chance to start, and the Orioles were willing to give it a shot and he signed. To say no other teams wanted him or thought he had any value is ridiculous. It didn't work out, he needed surgery, it happens. I think that's a reasonable interpretation of what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il BuonO Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 The Pirates, Nationals, Dodgers, and Orioles all had good interest in Wada. He was viewed as a reliever by the other teams, and he wanted to be given the chance to start, and the Orioles were willing to give it a shot and he signed. To say no other teams wanted him or thought he had any value is ridiculous. It didn't work out, he needed surgery, it happens. Those teams you listed had initial interest in Wada, the demand to start cooled that. I said we were the only ones there at the time interested in signing him. As you said that was because we signed him as a starter. I've never said he didn't have any value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash- bd Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 the pirates, nationals, dodgers, and orioles all had good interest in wada. He was viewed as a reliever by the other teams, and he wanted to be given the chance to start, and the orioles were willing to give it a shot and he signed. To say no other teams wanted him or thought he had any value is ridiculous. It didn't work out, he needed surgery, it happens. tnstaajpp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrungoHazewood Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 I've never said he didn't have any value. We were the only team even remotely interested in him when he was signed. Not exactly a ringing endorsement. I'm assuming your initial statement (the second one here) was referring to him as a starter, which you didn't say. Because otherwise I have a hard time reconciling your opinion that the O's were the only team remotely interested in him with you also thinking he has/had value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il BuonO Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 I'm assuming your initial statement (the second one here) was referring to him as a starter, which you didn't say. Because otherwise I have a hard time reconciling your opinion that the O's were the only team remotely interested in him with you also thinking he has/had value. Correct as I clarified in the previous post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CA-ORIOLE Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 Correct as I clarified in the previous post. I haven't been following this but I'll add that in a press conference awhile back Buck stated he did not see Wada being a viable/valuable reliever. I gathered a large part of that to be a function of his conditioning. I tend to agree with you that this is one we really messed up on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OFFNY Posted August 7, 2013 Author Share Posted August 7, 2013 . 5 shutout innings. 1 walk, 7 strikeouts. High on the pitch-count, although an excellent strikes-to-balls ratio. He was replaced by Steve Johnson at the start of the 6th inning. TSUYOSHI WADA O (vs. AAA-Gwinnett, 8/06) IP:. 5 H:o 4 R:O 0 BB: 1 SO: 7 Pitches: 88 (60 Strikes, 28 Balls) 2013 ERA: 4.70 (AAA-Norfolk) ***************** PITCHES BY INNING 15 (11 Strikes, 4 Balls) 26 (17 Strikes, 9 Balls) 12 (81 Strikes, 4 Balls) 13 (81 Strikes, 5 Balls) 22 (16 Strikes, 6 Balls) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene88 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 I would like to point out the opponent tonight has one of the worst offenses in AAA. Not trying to discount Wada's outing, just putting things in perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdbdotcom Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 I would like to point out the opponent tonight has one of the worst offenses in AAA. Not trying to discount Wada's outing, just putting things in perspective. Of course you're trying to discount his outing. That's why you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickM21 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Wasn't Wada suppose to be better than Chen? At least that's what was said before the start of last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Can_of_corn Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Wasn't Wada suppose to be better than Chen? At least that's what was said before the start of last year? Depends on whom you asked. O's certainly hyped him more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.