PDA

View Full Version : To: Marte Apologists


shoota
06-06-2005, 03:20 PM
Do you admit that Damaso Marte is a worse pitcher this year than he was in 2003?

Ol' No. 2
06-06-2005, 03:25 PM
Do you admit that Damaso Marte is a worse pitcher this year than he was in 2003?Congratulations. You've correctly recognized that 2.42 is higher than 1.58.

Madvora
06-06-2005, 03:30 PM
Look at Marte's stats this year.
He has a 2.42 ERA with 25 Ks and 13 BBs in 22.1 innings.

He had a 1.58 ERA in 2003. He was unstopable. That's not showing much by comparing to that year, of course he's not doing as well. It's almost impossible to.

I'm not saying that Marte is as good as that anymore, but he's anything but horrible. His stats this year prove that. His performances are magnified because of the one run leads we always have this year. He doesn't come in and give up 4 or 5 runs everytime he's out there. He's still a very reliable pitcher. If he wasn't then his ERA wouldn't be 2.42.
It's going to be close all year. We don't have the kind of offense that will give our pitchers 6 run cushions. If we did, then Marte could have a ERA of about 3.30 - 4.30 without ever costing us the lead and people would be saying that he's brilliant.

I'm aware of what he's going through, but I don't consider myself an apologist. We've seen what bad pitching is on this team, plenty of times over the last few years. I can't believe that anyone would confuse Marte with any of that.

balke
06-06-2005, 03:31 PM
Give up Shoota.

seanpmurphy
06-06-2005, 03:36 PM
Oh my God, Madvora, WHIP is so much more important than his inflated 2.42 ERA. Man, Marte sucks! When are people going to agree with Shoota?:rolleyes:

Ol' No. 2
06-06-2005, 03:49 PM
ERA comparisons

D. Marte 2.42
E. Gagne 3.86
B. Wagner 2.67
B. Lidge 2.88
J. Mesa 4.22
T. Hoffman 3.20

Marte DEFINATELY is the Sox biggest problem this year.:rolleyes:

samram
06-06-2005, 03:50 PM
Marte doesn't need to be better than he was in 2003. He only needs to be good in 2005, since that's the season they're playing.

santo=dorf
06-06-2005, 03:55 PM
Oh my God, Madvora, WHIP is so much more important than his inflated 2.42 ERA. Man, Marte sucks! When are people going to agree with Shoota?:rolleyes:

What good is his ERA when he inherits runners? :?:

Unfortunately, Marte has been doing a great Mike Jackson impersonation lately.

Madvora
06-06-2005, 04:07 PM
This is a team game, especially the way the 2005 White Sox are playing. If Marte is only thrown in a game in the bottom of the 9th with the bases loaded and a 1-0 lead and he gives up a hit, you can't just blame him.
What about the offense that didn't give him a bigger lead? What about the pitcher who put those runners on base before him? What about the double play Konerko probably hit into?
Team game, too many factors. He's nowhere near bad enough to have sole responsibility for a loss.

balke
06-06-2005, 04:08 PM
What good is his ERA when he inherits runners? :?:

Unfortunately, Marte has been doing a great Mike Jackson impersonation lately.

7 unearned runs, we should really pee our pants over that, and throw out Mike Jackson references. Maybe if Marte didn't come in with runners on 2nd all the time, or if he weren't left in when he's obviously wild, that 7 would be about a 4-5.

Marte has 25 K's, Jackson had 26 all of last season and had a 5.00 ERA. Are you drinking hateraid now too Santo? I thought you were one of the few who are normally rational.

Marte is a good pitcher. You haters are spoiled by Politte, Hermanson, and a surprising Cotts. Then you have the nerve to complain about the pen being a liability. Read a book, get a hobby, run a few miles. Find better ways to vent your negativity and whining.

nitetrain8601
06-06-2005, 04:14 PM
How come someone is labeled an apologist if they defend a player???

JB98
06-06-2005, 04:18 PM
What good is his ERA when he inherits runners? :?:

Unfortunately, Marte has been doing a great Mike Jackson impersonation lately.

Marte came in with the go-ahead run on third in the ninth inning yesterday, and he struck Sizemore out. Mike Jackson would have done the same thing.

Oh, and Hermanson was scored upon in three of his four outings this week. Cut his ass too.

santo=dorf
06-06-2005, 04:19 PM
7 unearned runs, we should really pee our pants over that, and throw out Mike Jackson references. Maybe if Marte didn't come in with runners on 2nd all the time, or if he weren't left in when he's obviously wild, that 7 would be about a 4-5.
Heaven forbid he actually does what a top-notch reliever is supposed to do. :rolleyes:

Marte has inherited 14 runners this year and has allowed 6 to score.

In the past week he has inherited 4 runners and allowed 3 to score. Those outings were sandwhiched with two other crappy outings.

I'm a fan of Marte, but he certainly isn't anywhere near the pitcher he was back in 2003 or even 2004. :(:

PicktoCLick72
06-06-2005, 04:19 PM
Originally Posted bynitetrain8601
How come someone is labeled an apologist if they defend a player???

Because anyone who rips a player is obviously totally correct and there is no middle ground to that players horribbleness other then they should be traded, released, sent down, or tortured.

santo=dorf
06-06-2005, 04:20 PM
Marte came in with the go-ahead run on third in the ninth inning yesterday, and he struck Sizemore out. Mike Jackson would have done the same thing.

Oh, and Hermanson was scored upon in three of his four outings this week. Cut his ass too.

Where did I say to cut Hermanson?

Would Hermanson be in that position yesterday if Marte did his job?

santo=dorf
06-06-2005, 04:22 PM
How come someone is labeled an apologist if they defend a player???

Or gets labeled as a whiner? :kukoo:

Let's just judge ever pitcher by ERA!!! It's not like situational pitching counts for anything!!!

samram
06-06-2005, 04:22 PM
I'm a fan of Marte, but he certainly isn't anywhere near the pitcher he was back in 2003 or even 2004. :(:

And yet, the Sox have the best record in baseball and are better than they were last year or the year before. Like I wrote before, 2003 and 2004 are now irrelevant, only 2005 matters. Marte is contributing to a good team. Every team in baseball would love to have him.

balke
06-06-2005, 04:22 PM
How come someone is labeled an apologist if they defend a player???

Because people are trying to copy the witty "APaulogists" term that FarWestChicago uses, which really doesn't apply to Marte at all since he's not overpaid, and doesn't fail to produce nearly as often. The title should say Marte defenders, since there's really nothing to apologize about. Maybe Tadahito wants to apologize for botching the big double play ball in the Angels series. Other than that, I'm sure Marte is happy with an ERA under 3, and a 3-3 record seeing how he's not our closer, and there's great relief on the team to back him up. I guess Shingo could apologize too for turning a 180 this season, as well as Vizz.

LVSoxFan
06-06-2005, 04:24 PM
I do see the point here about Marte inheriting ducks all over the pond and then people complaining when he gives up--gasp!--a hit.

While my jury's still out on Marte this season I conceded that point.

I also concede that we're leaning way too heavily on the closers and bullpen this year by leaving them scarce one and two-run leads to protect. If we want to keep skating that close to the ledge, we're going to get blown over sometimes.

tstrike2000
06-06-2005, 04:30 PM
Marte is up to 2.42 from 1.58 in '03? That bum, let's drop em now! Once he controls his walk totals, he'll be fine.

balke
06-06-2005, 04:30 PM
Heaven forbid he actually does what a top-notch reliever is supposed to do. :rolleyes:

Marte has inherited 14 runners this year and has allowed 6 to score.

In the past week he has inherited 4 runners and allowed 3 to score. Those outings were sandwhiched with two other crappy outings.

I'm a fan of Marte, but he certainly isn't anywhere near the pitcher he was back in 2003 or even 2004. :(:

Let's base Marte's entire season on the past two weeks then. He's obviously done nothing before these past two weeks of merit :rolleyes:

Marte got out of a jam with a runner on third yesterday, and won a big game in Anaheim a few weeks back with 2 innings of perfect relief. You just called Marte top notch, then bashed him and compared him to Mike Jackson. Make up your mind. I fail to see how he's not better than he was last season, please dig up those "intangible" stats of what a good reliever is. Show me a +3.00 ERA pitcher who is better because his WHIP is lower. Maybe all of our pitchers should concentrate on WHIP, and not worry about ERA at all. I'd love a higher ERA'd staff, wouldn't you? You people couldn't possibly be overreacting to a week of below average outings could you? NOOOOO COULDN'T BE! :redneck

JB98
06-06-2005, 04:32 PM
Where did I say to cut Hermanson?

Would Hermanson be in that position yesterday if Marte did his job?

You missed my point. If you're going to do a hatchet job on Marte, you might as well do one on Hermanson too. Both pitchers had tough weeks. And that's all it was, a tough week. We survived. We went 4-2.

Hermanson will settle down and return to form soon. So will Marte. I don't understand the venom toward Marte. He had a career year in 2003. He isn't at that level now, but I feel he's thrown the ball better this year than he did last year. He has a track record of success, and I have faith in him. Apparently, you don't. I don't understand that, but to each his own.

wdelaney72
06-06-2005, 04:36 PM
Big difference between Marte and Hermanson. Marte has been spotty THROUGHOUT THE SEASON. Plus, he had problems walking guys last year. Hermanson had a rough week. He's been miles better than Marte this year.

I'm sorry, but inheriting ducks on the pond is part of being a bullpen pitcher, especially late inning setup pitchers. He's not getting the big outs. I don't care what his ERA says, he's not doing his job very well this year. For every big out he gets, he seems to follow it up with 2 outings of giving up a big hit or walk.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm ready to move Neal Cotts up on the depth chart of our LH specialists.

LauraJ14
06-06-2005, 04:37 PM
You missed my point. If you're going to do a hatchet job on Marte, you might as well do one on Hermanson too. Both pitchers had tough weeks. And that's all it was, a tough week. We survived. We went 4-2.

Hermanson will settle down and return to form soon. So will Marte. I don't understand the venom toward Marte. He had a career year in 2003. He isn't at that level now, but I feel he's thrown the ball better this year than he did last year. He has a track record of success, and I have faith in him. Apparently, you don't. I don't understand that, but to each his own.


For me the frustrating thing about Marte is how often he goes 0-2 on a batter and then gives up a hit. He needs to get better about putting the hitters away without out having to throw so many pitches or walk the batter.
Also, he has cost me 2 Buehrle victories on my fantasy team in the last 2 weeks. Not making me happy!

balke
06-06-2005, 04:39 PM
Big difference between Marte and Hermanson.

Marte has been spotty THROUGHOUT THEY SEASON. Plus, he had problems walking guys last year.

I'm sorry, but inheriting ducks on the pond is part of being a bullpen pitcher. He's not getting the big outs.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm ready to move Neal Cotts up on the depth chart of our LH specialists.


Noone's taking anything away from Cotts, he's been great as of late, closer to who he's supposed to have been all along. I personally have doubts as to how long Cotts will pitch at this high level, but yeah for now he's been great. Better than Marte? I don't think so. They are very close, but I'd rather take Marte at least for now.

santo=dorf
06-06-2005, 04:44 PM
Let's base Marte's entire season on the past two weeks then. He's obviously done nothing before these past two weeks of merit :rolleyes:

Marte got out of a jam with a runner on third yesterday, and won a big game in Anaheim a few weeks back with 2 innings of perfect relief. You just called Marte top notch, then bashed him and compared him to Mike Jackson. Make up your mind. I fail to see how he's not better than he was last season, please dig up those "intangible" stats of what a good reliever is. Show me a +3.00 ERA pitcher who is better because his WHIP is lower. Maybe all of our pitchers should concentrate on WHIP, and not worry about ERA at all. I'd love a higher ERA'd staff, wouldn't you? You people couldn't possibly be overreacting to a week of below average outings could you? NOOOOO COULDN'T BE! :redneck
You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Based on 2002 and 2003, Marte is a top notched reliever correct? With the exception of his ERA (hell even Mike Jackson had an ERA of 1.93 in April of 2004) he has pitched as badly as Mike Jackson.

Some of you are actual saying that Marte isn't that bad because his ERA is slighty higher than his 2003 ERA.
You simply can't judge a reliever based only on ERA.

You want stats?

WHIP
2002: 1.03
2003: 1.05
2004: 1.22
2005: 1.57

HR
2002:5
2003: 3
2004: 10
2005: 3

BB/9
2002: 2.69
2003: 3.84
2004: 4.15
2005: 5.24

Hits/9
2002: 6.56
2003: 5.65
2004: 6.84
2005: 8.87

SLG% against:
2002: .296
2003: .266
2004: .357
2005: .425

But his ERA is the only thing that matters!!!

Joe Nathan has an ERA of 2.88. Would you take him over Marte?
How about Turnbow for the Brewers?
Shigetoshi Hasegawa?
Trevor Hoffman?

Those are just some guys whose ERA's are close to 3 with WHIP much lower than Marte.

balke
06-06-2005, 05:03 PM
You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Based on 2002 and 2003, Marte is a top notched reliever correct? With the exception of his ERA (hell even Mike Jackson had an ERA of 1.93 in April of 2004) he has pitched as badly as Mike Jackson.

Some of you are actual saying that Marte isn't that bad because his ERA is slighty higher than his 2003 ERA.
You simply can't judge a reliever based only on ERA.

You want stats?

WHIP
2002: 1.03
2003: 1.05
2004: 1.22
2005: 1.57

HR
2002:5
2003: 3
2004: 10
2005: 3

BB/9
2002: 2.69
2003: 3.84
2004: 4.15
2005: 5.24

Hits/9
2002: 6.56
2003: 5.65
2004: 6.84
2005: 8.87

SLG% against:
2002: .296
2003: .266
2004: .357
2005: .425

But his ERA is the only thing that matters!!!

Joe Nathan has an ERA of 2.88. Would you take him over Marte?
How about Turnbow for the Brewers?
Shigetoshi Hasegawa?
Trevor Hoffman?

Those are just some guys whose ERA's are close to 3 with WHIP much lower than Marte.


No I wouldn't take Hasegawa or Turnbow over Marte. Turnbow's not experienced enough, and both are not a lefty, plus Hasegawa sucks, and Turnbow is in the National league, his ERA would be even higher in the AL. And let me remind you that you are basing your stats off of 1/3 a season's worth of pitching. I also repeat, He is not our closer like the players you mentioned. He's a great set-up lefty facing AL batters and striking them out regularly. Not only has he been more than fine, he will be even better.

Also, great for Jackson he had a low ERA in April. I bet we liked him in April. This is June unfortunately, and Marte still has a low ERA, and has been perfectly acceptable in his outings, as "bad" as they've been the past 2 weeks.

FarWestChicago
06-06-2005, 05:20 PM
Because people are trying to copy the witty "APaulogists" term that FarWestChicago uses, which really doesn't apply to Marte at all since he's not overpaid, and doesn't fail to produce nearly as often. The title should say Marte defenders, since there's really nothing to apologize about.Yes, BOD (Backers of Damaso) would be more appropriate since the attacks on him are reminiscent of the original FO attacks on Manos by the Friends of Buddy Lee in 2001. That led to the rise of the Backers of Manos, the BOM vs. FOB wars. Damaso isn't an 8 figure, .220 hittin', plate tectonic, backstabber. He doesn't need Apaulogists. :cool:

shoota
06-06-2005, 05:33 PM
Heaven forbid he actually does what a top-notch reliever is supposed to do. :rolleyes:

Marte has inherited 14 runners this year and has allowed 6 to score.

In the past week he has inherited 4 runners and allowed 3 to score. Those outings were sandwhiched with two other crappy outings.

I'm a fan of Marte, but he certainly isn't anywhere near the pitcher he was back in 2003 or even 2004. :(:

This pretty much sums up my feelings of Marte. He's still a good arm in the pen, but I do not have that confidence in him to get big outs like I did in 2003. He was so dominating then, and it seemed like his pitches just swept through the strikezone. I don't know why his pitches aren't like that today, maybe his release point or mechanics are slightly different. He seems to nibble around the strikezone much more than in 2003 when he put hitters on the defensive.

I guess my point with this thread is to understand why people defend Marte when no one has really ripped him or hasn't acknowledged that he's still a decent bullpen pitcher. Surely, Marte apologists, you must admit that he's a worse pitcher today than he was in 2003, right?

Marte's reign of dominance ended on the opening series (day?) against KC in 2004, IIRC. At that time, we could laugh it off because we knew that we wouldn't be seeing much of that from Marte. We're not laughing now.

You really have a problem with reading comprehension.
Based on 2002 and 2003, Marte is a top notched reliever correct? With the exception of his ERA (hell even Mike Jackson had an ERA of 1.93 in April of 2004) he has pitched as badly as Mike Jackson.

Some of you are actual saying that Marte isn't that bad because his ERA is slighty higher than his 2003 ERA.
You simply can't judge a reliever based only on ERA.

You want stats?

WHIP
2002: 1.03
2003: 1.05
2004: 1.22
2005: 1.57

HR
2002:5
2003: 3
2004: 10
2005: 3

BB/9
2002: 2.69
2003: 3.84
2004: 4.15
2005: 5.24

Hits/9
2002: 6.56
2003: 5.65
2004: 6.84
2005: 8.87

SLG% against:
2002: .296
2003: .266
2004: .357
2005: .425

But his ERA is the only thing that matters!!!


This is really telling.

Ol' No. 2
06-06-2005, 05:35 PM
This pretty much sums up my feelings of Marte. He's still a good arm in the pen, but I do not have that confidence in him to get big outs like I did in 2003. He was so dominating then, and it seemed like his pitches just swept through the strikezone. I don't know why his pitches aren't like that today, maybe his release point or mechanics are slightly different. He seems to nibble around the strikezone much more than in 2003 when he put hitters on the defensive.

I guess my point with this thread is to understand why people defend Marte when no one has really ripped him or hasn't acknowledged that he's still a decent bullpen pitcher. Surely, Marte apologists, you must admit that he's a worse pitcher today than he was in 2003, right?

Marte's reign of dominance ended on the opening series (day?) against KC in 2004, IIRC. At that time, we could laugh it off because we knew that we wouldn't be seeing much of that from Marte. We're not laughing now.



This is really telling.Once again, you've correctly recognized that 2.42 is higher than 1.58. Congratulations. Is there another point to this silly thread?

kevingrt
06-06-2005, 06:15 PM
I say jsut send him back to the Pirates and get Matt Guerrier back? Anyone with me?

nedlug
06-06-2005, 07:47 PM
What about the double play Konerko probably hit into?


Should this still be in teal?

Ol' No. 2
06-06-2005, 10:32 PM
If you find it distressing that Damaso Marte isn't doing as well as he did in 2003, then you'd better sit down for this one:

A.J. Pierzynski isn't hitting as well as he did in 2003.

:bundy

maurice
06-07-2005, 04:39 PM
The title should say Marte defenders, since there's really nothing to apologize about. Maybe Tadahito wants to apologize for botching the big double play ball in the Angels series. Other than that, I'm sure Marte is happy with an ERA under 3

:thumbsup:

Chisox003
06-07-2005, 04:44 PM
:threadsucks