And That's Why They Play the Games!
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 4:17 PM PDT
90 comments
61-101, and we didn't even secure the #1 overall pick next June. Good bloody riddance, 2008.
0 recs |
90 comments
Email
Print
Comments
At least we went out with a win AFTER the Nats lost.
Now let the offseason rumblings and rumors begin!
by seattlesundevil on Sep 28, 2008 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, at least we secured the #2 overall pick
Made possible only by completely tanking the last road trip of the season. The competition for losing was tough this year considering Tampa Bay only had to drop 96 games to secure the #1 spot.
My take on the 2008 season? It was massively disastrous but I’m glad it happened for the sake of the future.
by ThundaPC on Sep 28, 2008 4:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Our final record makes me think of the old saying
“You win 60 games and you lose 60 games. What you do with the rest of them is what counts.”
We chose to win one of them. One of them. =/
by katal on Sep 28, 2008 4:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If we had chosen to lose that one and another one I'd have my dreams of Strasburg intact.
This stupid team can’t even lose right.
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's 54 games
60 + 60 + 60 = 180.
So we won 7 games wooo :)
by phil333 on Sep 28, 2008 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey...
the Nationals fucked up signing one first-round pick this year, so they get two picks next year.
You think they’re going to draft the consensus best player in the draft AND another first-rounder AND sign them both?
by craig3410 on Sep 28, 2008 4:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't actually see any reason why not.
They might go for signability, of course, but assuming that they’ll pass on the top talent just because of that would be crazy. But there is hope.
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it's better for us that they have #1 instead of SD
but not that much better
by seattlebruin on Sep 28, 2008 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know.
The Padres have always tried to save a few bucks in the draft. After the Crow Fiasco, the Nats might be willing to make a big splash — like Pittsburgh did this year. I still see San Diego going the cheap route until something makes me change my mind.
No one knows what’s going to happen, but I’d trust San Diego over Washington to screw up that top pic.
by Teej on Sep 28, 2008 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure there either
yeah, Matt Bush immediately springs to mind, but I think the overriding factor here would be that Strasburg is from SD and is a lifelong Padres fan (at least according to his bio)
by seattlebruin on Sep 29, 2008 6:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey mariners
thanks for the shitstorm season from hell.
Cuba Si! Yanqi No!
by Patrick517 on Sep 28, 2008 4:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Whoever we draft will be pretty good after all we do have the #2.
Don’t screw this one up M’s.
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 5:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So...
Is there a consensus number 2 pick? Who are some guys we could draft at number 2?
by Combs on Sep 28, 2008 5:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is, of course, assuming the Nationals take Strasburg first
by Combs on Sep 28, 2008 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holy shit isn't it a little early for this?
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They arent trying to nail the draft pick for pick
But its good to get an idea of who’s stock is high.
by Combs on Sep 28, 2008 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is like a tie for #2 but it could be Ackley, Green, or Crow.
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Green builds off his Cape performance, he'd be the guy
in my opinion . His positional value compared to Ackley puts him as the clear #1 position prospect at this point in time.
Of course we have a good number of months for that to change
by DarkLou on Sep 28, 2008 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree too he can field his posistion and hit very well.
Also this allows us to move Truinfel to 3rd where he might be better off.
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather see Triunfel at 2B, and I think that is where most project him to at this point
by DarkLou on Sep 28, 2008 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hm good point.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Triunfel's arm is too good to waste at second
by seattlebruin on Sep 28, 2008 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be stupid to waste his bat in right or center if he could play a decent second.
9=8
by JI on Sep 28, 2008 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Fogel does have a point aren't we doing this way to early?
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is dramatically different than a 2009 mock draft.
Carlos Triunfel is already in our system.
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From the (albeit limited) number of times I've seen him, I think he has an outside shot to stick at short
but third looks a lot more likely. If he can’t stick at short I wouldn’t want him at second either, since he’ll move off due to outgrowing SS physically (he’s still very skinny at this point).
I still think it’d be a waste to put his bat in a corner as well. Don’t think he has the speed to play center.
by seattlebruin on Sep 28, 2008 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd personally like to see him at third somewhere in the future.
Move that Tui assface to a corner OF spot.
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Ackley was to play CF or something that would make this a little more interesting.
Also he is a lefty bat but let’s wait before we make any assumptions.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's a first baseman.
This reminds me of F’nA’s
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who says he can't play somewhere else?
I even heard he might switch to 2B. He can play the OF and can be speedy he is a solid defender at first but if he could switch to and OF position his stock would rise.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would you think that someone who plays 1B in college is capable of playing a more difficult defensive position at a higher level?
J.K.L.
by acblue on Sep 28, 2008 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He split time in the OF/1B.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But did he play those positions competently?
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or is he there because he does the least amount of damage defensively
at the low end of the defensive spectrum?
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is a solid defender at first and good at right.
He has too much speed for a 1B but spent time there his freshman year I see him more in RF/LF CF might be a stretch though.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's exceedingly rare for players to move up the defensive spectrum.
J.K.L.
by acblue on Sep 28, 2008 9:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is one of those OF/1B guys.
Where do you want to kill his speed for power or move him to first so where he can focus on power and he ended up splitting time there. From what I’ve heard/seen he is a very hard guy to double up.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 28, 2008 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OF/1B guys make terrible centre fielders
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a reason they're OF/1B.
When a manager is playing them either in left field or first base (the easiest defensive positions to play in the defensive spectrum), it’s usually to soften the impact of that player’s lack of defensive ability.
A typical OF/1B is someone like Raul Ibanez or Adam Dunn. Terrible in the field so the manager plays them in a position where they will do the least amount of damage.
(Unfortunately for us LF and RF are swapped on the spectrum at Safeco)
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well if a guy is primarily an OF who is put at first because he's a good fielder, there's the possibility
I wouldn’t want to write Ackley off without ever having seen him play.
by seattlebruin on Sep 28, 2008 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Players end up at 1B because they lack footspeed
A lack of footspeed is the last thing you want in CF. Such players often play LF/RF because teams are willing to play slower guys in the corners. Doesn’t make them a full-out OF.
by Gomez on Sep 29, 2008 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well fine then Ackley is just a really fast 1B.
He has got the 20+ steal potential and had the TREX double play training because he is hard to double up.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 29, 2008 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually Ackley has played in CF.
But if he can play it consistently I don’t know. I believe the reason he was at 1B is because he didn’t have the good RF arm.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 29, 2008 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't move CFs to 1B because they have a bad arm.
by Graham on Sep 29, 2008 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is why I'm wondering about him he is listed as 1b/OF or 1b/CF.
BOOYA! You got Slurved!
by Slurvey on Sep 29, 2008 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember those awesome Season in Review preview posts from preseason?
We didn’t even sweep the Angels.
by DCMariner on Sep 28, 2008 6:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Christ. So this year only FELT like it took forever?
My fault. Though in my search for said articles I did come across this:
Here Come the Rays
This is a pretty interesting conversation to look back on.
by DCMariner on Sep 28, 2008 7:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When I read this when it was initially posted, I thought Jeff was crazy.
I’ve learned my lesson.
by BrianL on Sep 28, 2008 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Being generous, this post is 23 words
Good thing you’re mean.
by NOLAmarinergirl on Sep 28, 2008 7:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This wouldn't even cut it as a fan post
9=8
by JI on Sep 28, 2008 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've always been one for quantity over quantity
but rules are rules
9=8
by JI on Sep 28, 2008 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This isn't a fanpost
Therefore you can suck it.
by Graham on Sep 28, 2008 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey fuck this shit
I just saw a TV commercial from the MLB advertising the playoffs, and it was about the Angels, which was fine. But they used a fucking Niehaus clip exclaiming that the Angels were AL West champs. WTF
HA HA HA, your Grandpa's an ASS!- Tourette's Guy (R.I.P)
by tootthekazoo on Sep 28, 2008 10:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
