Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

Number One Reliever


Guest Edgy DC

Number One Reliever  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Number One Reliever

    • 1) Manny Acosta
      0
    • 2) Pedro Beato
      5
    • 3) Tim Byrdak
      0
    • 4) D.J. Carrasco
      0
    • 5) Ryota Igarashi
      0
    • 6) Jason Isringhausen
      6
    • 7) Michael O'Connor
      0
    • 8) Bobby Parnell
      11
    • 9) Johan Santana
      1
    • 10) Dale Thayer
      0


Recommended Posts

Grand Central Contributor
Posted


Edgy DC wrote:
Showcasing Izzy in front of his potential buyers? Maybe?


someone did suggest that he wanted to get to 300 saves and they'll give him the opportunity.


Old-Timey Member
Posted


And while Izzy is closing, Parnell has slid quite comfortably into the "scare the crap out of the fans in the eighth inning" bullpen spot.
Later


Posted


TransMonk wrote:
Maybe. I think he's the right choice anyhow given his experience.


the "right choice" to do what, exactly? To help the Mets develop their next closer? No? Oh, you mean to win more games THIS year. Well, even that's a coin flip, given his peripherals (as compared to Parnell and Beato), but that can't be what Sandy has in mind for the balance of the 2011 season.

He's rebuilding Izzie's value for a deadline deal. Otherwise, this is just a stupid waste of valuable time in the development of closers for this organization's future.


Grand Central Contributor
Posted


Vic Sage wrote:
TransMonk wrote:
Maybe. I think he's the right choice anyhow given his experience.


the "right choice" to do what, exactly? To help the Mets develop their next closer? No? Oh, you mean to win more games THIS year. Well, even that's a coin flip, given his peripherals (as compared to Parnell and Beato), but that can't be what Sandy has in mind for the balance of the 2011 season.

He's rebuilding Izzie's value for a deadline deal. Otherwise, this is just a stupid waste of valuable time in the development of closers for this organization's future.


Yes, Parnell having to face Pujols with two on in a 2-run game hurt his development because it was in the 8th inning.


Guest Edgy DC
Guests
Posted


Two on? Bases were totally jizzed, Cee.


Posted


Yes, Parnell having to face Pujols with two on in a 2-run game hurt his development because it was in the 8th inning.


well at least we agree on something.


Grand Central Contributor
Posted


Edgy DC wrote:
Two on? Bases were totally jizzed, Cee.



doh, how could I forget the awesome defensive play by The 7 to keep the ball in the infield?


Posted


Pitching with a 2 run lead in the eighth vs. pitching with a 2 run lead in the ninth...what's the difference in terms of the "development of a closer"?


Grand Central Contributor
Posted


TransMonk wrote:
Pitching with a 2 run lead in the eighth vs. pitching with a 2 run lead in the ninth...what's the difference in terms of the "development of a closer"?


well obviously since it was the 8th inning Parnell just couldn't get the adrenaline going, which is why he loaded the bases.


Guest Edgy DC
Guests
Posted


The sarcasm awash in this thread is enough to drown a man.


Posted


Ceetar wrote:
Yes, Parnell having to face Pujols with two on in a 2-run game hurt his development because it was in the 8th inning.


I especially like this one.


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Mets community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...