WE HAVE NO RELIEF PITCHERS VALVERDE IS OVERATED PEOPLE.

**apabruce** · 02-12-2012, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by PuNk42AE

What about Yooper?

I never jump on Yoop. I'm very afraid.

**Sports_Freak** · 02-12-2012, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by tigerjoe

You could do a lot worse than Valverde, Benoit, Dotel, Coke, and Al Al as your top 5 bullpen guys. Duane Below did a pretty decent job and could also be a plus reliever and spot starter. And it isn't a huge stretch to think Schlereth could turn into a decent pitcher, not great but decent. Villarreal has potential.

Al Al is the key, I think. If he can come back healthy and everyone else pitches up to reasonable expectations this could be a top notch bullpen.

Well said. While I don't expect Valverde to go 49 for 49 in save situations (that's asking alot), I think the Tigers BP should be a strength. I'm more concerned with a 5th SP, as well as a 6th SP for spot starts.

**Shelton** · 02-12-2012, 02:15 PM

I'm not sure what is more shocking: the original post or the people that responded with serious criticisms of the logic contained therein.

**tigerbomb13** · 02-12-2012, 02:20 PM

Killer thread.

**apabruce** · 02-12-2012, 02:20 PM

Originally Posted by Sports_Freak

Well said. While I don't expect Valverde to go 49 for 49 in save situations (that's asking alot), I think the Tigers BP should be a strength. I'm more concerned with a 5th SP, as well as a 6th SP for spot starts.

Since rosters will be expanded to 26 for certain doubleheaders, I don't know why a 6th SP for spot starts would ever be needed.

**IdahoBert** · 02-12-2012, 02:28 PM

I don't normally comment on why people are banned, but it could never be a coincidence that so many classic trolling signs could be contained in one or two posts without it being intentional. This person is obviously someone who knows this board--or the internet--well and knows what buttons to push. They just weren't given enough time to toy with the membership as they usually are.

**tigerjoe** · 02-12-2012, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Shelton

I'm not sure what is more shocking: the original post or the people that responded with serious criticisms of the logic contained therein.

I figured since the topic was about the bullpen, I'd ignore all the stupid stuff and talk about the bullpen. :)

**TigersFan81371** · 02-12-2012, 02:59 PM

So is that a record for the quickest banning ever?

**Sports_Freak** · 02-12-2012, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by tigerjoe

I figured since the topic was about the bullpen, I'd ignore all the stupid stuff and talk about the bullpen. :)

It's not talked about enough. And I think it's a major strength. Not many openings in the BP.

**DaYooperASBDT** · 02-12-2012, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by PuNk42AE

What about Yooper?

i r a genius and all u Inge htrs can sukit

**potthole** · 02-12-2012, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by TigersFan81371

So is that a record for the quickest banning ever?

Has to be up there, at the very least. His join date was 2/4, so he technically was around for eight days. I'm sure there have been quicker bans, but they were probably situations where an IP address or something like that was immediately recognized.

**Titus Tiger** · 02-12-2012, 05:13 PM

This totally stinks.. I get called a people for the first time in maybe ever and DTR is released.. didn't even get a chance to make up a creepy gif.

Dang... I sooooo need spring training to start

Word.

I hope I don't get banned for saying 'dang'

**tiger337** · 02-12-2012, 05:13 PM

I remember one guy complained how hard it was to register for the site in his first post. I don't think he lasted more than a few hours. I suspect there was something else going on that we didn't see publicly.

**TigerFan1984** · 02-12-2012, 05:21 PM

Wow while the thread was rather trollish, in my opinion he was banned to soon. He should have got a second chance. Also he has a point with Valverde, he just went about it wrong. I'm worried about Valverde too.

**ajspence** · 02-12-2012, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by TigerFan1984

Wow while the thread was rather trollish, in my opinion he was banned to soon.

Me too. Saw his comments in another thread and thought some 7 year old Tiger fanatic got online while mom was napping.

Originally Posted by IdahoBert

I don't normally comment on why people are banned, but it could never be a coincidence that so many classic trolling signs could be contained in one or two posts without it being intentional. This person is obviously someone who knows this board--or the internet--well and knows what buttons to push. They just weren't given enough time to toy with the membership as they usually are.

You're probably right, Bert. I am just so not used to seeing you with the iron fist (political smackdown yesterday, now this). You might earn a new, tougher reputation. I'm kinda scared . . .

**DaYooperASBDT** · 02-12-2012, 05:45 PM

I know a couple of guys who took a trip to Idaho and never came back ... just sayin'

**John_Brian_K** · 02-12-2012, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitTigersRule

I just wanna say that we have no relief pitchers except Al Alberque and Joquian Benoit. Jose Valverde is not good sure you can say he had 43 consecutive saves but did you watch those 43 consecutive games he pitched we would have say a 10-0 lead and he comes in and he brings up the score to 10-9 and he still gets the save. I think we should go out and get a solid relief pitcher.

Lol

**tiger337** · 02-12-2012, 07:53 PM

No more Mr. Nice Guy. Bert is mad as hell and isn't going to take it anymore.

**Titus Tiger** · 02-12-2012, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

I know a couple of guys who took a trip to Idaho and never came back ... just sayin'

In Idaho... Bert is know as God Poppa Grande

**Yoda** · 02-12-2012, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by apabruce

When we encounter a poster who is so off base, with no communication skills who jumps in with both feet, I worry she/he has a learning disability. Then I feel guilty for jumping on a handicapped person.

The person was smart enough to know that Valverde is overrated, rather than just believing everything Rod and Mario say... I feel he knew the game and pretending to be really dumb to get a rise out of people. Especially with things like "we should go after Buehrle"...

**potthole** · 02-12-2012, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by ajspence

Me too. Saw his comments in another thread and thought some 7 year old Tiger fanatic got online while mom was napping.

I dunno, I think the poster in question used some phrasing that most kids aged seven wouldn't use in normal online speak.

**apabruce** · 02-12-2012, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by Yoda

The person was smart enough to know that Valverde is overrated, rather than just believing everything Rod and Mario say... I feel he knew the game and pretending to be really dumb to get a rise out of people. Especially with things like "we should go after Buehrle"...

I worked with a guy for 20+ years, and he was always thinking the worst of people and questioning their motives, where I tended to be trusting and wanted to give people the benefit of the doubt. It pissed me off that he was right far more often than I was.

**sabretooth** · 02-12-2012, 10:00 PM

Now every punk with an itchy keyboard finger and something to prove will be gunning for Bert.

**Titus Tiger** · 02-12-2012, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by sabretooth

Now every punk with an itchy keyboard finger and something to prove will be gunning for Bert.

He will be sitting with his back to the potatoes so he can see the ALL CAPS coming at him

**Gehringer_2** · 02-12-2012, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by Titus Tiger

He will be sitting with his back to the potatoes s......

when you sit in the silo, your back is toward no door........

**Titus Tiger** · 02-12-2012, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by Gehringer_2

when you sit in the silo, your back is toward no door........

different story when you are at the Vodka factory

**DaYooperASBDT** · 02-12-2012, 10:28 PM

Never mind the silo, you gotta get him out of the privy first.

**Titus Tiger** · 02-12-2012, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by DaYooperASBDT

Never mind the silo, you gotta get him out of the privy first.

Elmer Fudd = Bonderman

and now this

You Yoop = comedy genius

**cruzer1** · 02-13-2012, 06:41 AM

WE HAVETA HAVE THREDS LIKE THESE ONCE INA WILE TOO REMIND US HOW SMART WEE AR.

**jj04** · 02-15-2012, 11:55 AM

I just want to point out a case where leading by 27 runs can still result in a save, and I have HATED the save statistic since this day.

August 22, 2007 Texas Rangers at Baltimore Orioles Box Score and Play by Play - Baseball-Reference.com

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 02-15-2012, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by jj04

I just want to point out a case where leading by 27 runs can still result in a save, and I have HATED the save statistic since this day.

August 22, 2007 Texas Rangers at Baltimore Orioles Box Score and Play by Play - Baseball-Reference.com

I have more respect for granting a save based on pitching 3 effective innings than allowing 4 baserunners and 2 runs in the 9th of a 3 run game. FWIW.

**DaYooperASBDT** · 02-15-2012, 02:14 PM

Shaddup, Todd.

**ajspence** · 02-15-2012, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by jj04

I just want to point out a case where leading by 27 runs can still result in a save, and I have HATED the save statistic since this day.

August 22, 2007 Texas Rangers at Baltimore Orioles Box Score and Play by Play - Baseball-Reference.com

They were leading by only 11 runs when he came into the game.

**jj04** · 02-15-2012, 04:39 PM

I agree (to a certain degree, that being that the lead is not greater than 4 runs), and I think that would be a more effective measure for a save than the current measurement. What bothers me is situations like the one I indicated where the Rangers were already leading by 11 when he came in. Was their lead ever in question after they went up in the sixth? I guess you could make a point for the Orioles 8th inning, but they only put three runners on and none crossed the plate. To me, what Littleton did was a hold, not a save.

I realize now that the Rangers were only up by 11 (instead of 27 as I had initially stated). Sorry about that, but I still wanted to point out it's not impossible for a save to be recorded in a game decided by more than 4 runs.

**Mr. Bigglesworth** · 02-15-2012, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by jj04

I agree (to a certain degree, that being that the lead is not greater than 4 runs), and I think that would be a more effective measure for a save than the current measurement. What bothers me is situations like the one I indicated where the Rangers were already leading by 11 when he came in. Was their lead ever in question after they went up in the sixth? I guess you could make a point for the Orioles 8th inning, but they only put three runners on and none crossed the plate. To me, what Littleton did was a hold, not a save.

I realize now that the Rangers were only up by 11 (instead of 27 as I had initially stated). Sorry about that, but I still wanted to point out it's not impossible for a save to be recorded in a game decided by more than 4 runs.

I think save should be 1 run lead for 1 inning or more of work, 2 run (or less) lead for 2 innings or more of work, and 3 run lead (or less for 3 or more innings of work, otherwise it is a hold.

But I hate how saves are currently granted as a measure of reliever effectiveness.