He is throwing a 2 seamer now...a pitch he said he didn't use in Colorado. That pitch has been huge for him.
Yeah this one is a Britton-like sinker, 94-95mph, nasty late break. Sometimes that's all it takes.
Posted 25 April 2012 - 08:11 PM
He is throwing a 2 seamer now...a pitch he said he didn't use in Colorado. That pitch has been huge for him.
Posted 25 April 2012 - 09:15 PM
@AdamWolff
Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:01 PM
Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:05 PM
Throw the two-seamer with all that movement and a changeup, it's a lethal combination. It's too hard to pick up a changeup after seeing nasty 2-seams.Mentioned the sinker earlier in the thread. It seems to be a legit difference maker for Hammel.
Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:20 PM
Throw the two-seamer with all that movement and a changeup, it's a lethal combination. It's too hard to pick up a changeup after seeing nasty 2-seams.
Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:23 PM
As long as they're not to 3rd we might be okayAnd overlooked is the fact that he KNOWS he needs to keep the ball on the ground, which is why he throws so many 2S.
I worry that eventually those sinkers are going to cost him as our defense is so terrible, but if people keep missing them it won't matter.
Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:20 AM
Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:22 AM
Seems like this trade is working out well, huh?
I remember people being distraught over it.
Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:24 AM
Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:11 AM
I wasn't a huge fan of the trade but I understood it.
I don't think you always need to get prospects back in a deal. I think DD looked at the rotation last year and said, we can't have all these young guys in there at once. Looks like he was right.
I think DD was smart to look at these guys and think that their numbers would be better outside of Denver.
If Hammel keeps this up he becomes an excellent trade piece either this year or next.
Posted 26 April 2012 - 02:36 PM
I wasn't a huge fan of the trade but I understood it.
I don't think you always need to get prospects back in a deal. I think DD looked at the rotation last year and said, we can't have all these young guys in there at once. Looks like he was right.
I think DD was smart to look at these guys and think that their numbers would be better outside of Denver.
If Hammel keeps this up he becomes an excellent trade piece either this year or next.
Posted 26 April 2012 - 03:08 PM
Posted 26 April 2012 - 03:19 PM
Our David Ortiz / Carlos Pena, like you often say. He would just be on the mound instead of at DH.Could he be a late bloomer, come out of no where type guy because of a new pitch?
Posted 26 April 2012 - 03:24 PM
Our David Ortiz / Carlos Pena, like you often say. He would just be on the mound instead of at DH.Could he be a late bloomer, come out of no where type guy because of a new pitch?
If the Birds are gonna actually be good anytime soon, we'll definitely need a out-of-nowhere star like that. At least one. In addition to some other positive developments of our younger players.
Posted 26 April 2012 - 03:28 PM
This trade was like the Koji trade. I would have either preferred 2 younger, cheaper players or have the second player be a prospect(ie no davis or lindstrom).
I did say I would have preferred to wait till the deadline with JG than make this trade. Hammel showed in back to back years that he could be close to a 4 WAR player and that he could have good peripherals.
But the 2s is changing things and his stuff is lithe right now. A guy throwing the way he is has TOR potential....again, I doubt he reaches that but with him getting gbs and Ks the way he is, could he be a late bloomer, come out of no where type guy because of a new pitch?
Posted 26 April 2012 - 03:36 PM
There's a good comp! (hopefully)Kevin Brown the sequel.
Posted 27 April 2012 - 01:07 AM
Posted 27 April 2012 - 08:35 AM
Posted 30 April 2012 - 12:40 AM
FTR, Duquette said no of those so-called high ceiling prospects were available for a trade. Whether he is being honest or not is a different matter.Dude looked like Stras out there.
Clearly, he has better stuff than anyone thought.
I do agree with the idea that you can't ALWAYS get prospects back in a deal, but our judgment is also clouded a bit by the 12-7 start.
If the O's finish 72-90, then we may be sorry we didn't get any type of young prospect with potential out of the JG deal.
But as far as trying to field a competitive team in 2012, it's worked out well so far...
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |