Where did this happen?

Baltimore's team ERA in 2005, before Mazzone came there, was 4.56. In 2006 and 2007, the two years he was there, the team ERA was 5.35 and 5.17 ... this year it's 4.80.

 

I'm not saying he's not a good pitching coach, only that pitching coaches' work is overrated. But as good as he is purported to be, the Orioles' pitching was worse on his watch.

 

Let's face it ... it's easy to look like a genius when you have good young pitchers like John Smoltz and Tom Glavine, then sign Greg Maddux at his peak as a free agent.

 

I heard it on XM radio the other day. They were interviewing Mazzone, he had a lot of good things to say and hinted that he wanted to get back in the game.

I am not a seller but rather have placed them on the waiver wire.

I heard it on XM radio the other day. They were interviewing Mazzone, he had a lot of good things to say and hinted that he wanted to get back in the game.

You heard it on the radio ... but where did this actually occur?

 

I'm sure Mazzone wants to get back in the game ... but the Baltimore stuff probably won't be on his resume.

You heard it on the radio ... but where did this actually occur?

 

I'm sure Mazzone wants to get back in the game ... but the Baltimore stuff probably won't be on his resume.

 

I'm not going to take the time to look it up. The Reds current rotation has the same potential as the former Braves Rotation. There's not telling what Mazzone could do with this staff. If you think he couldn't do wonders with this staff based on a couple years in Baltimore then I don't know what to tell you

Cueto, Volquez, and Harang = Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux? Wow.

Cueto, Volquez, and Harang = Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux? Wow.

 

Who would have thought Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux would be where they are at today 15 years ago. Volquez is 24 years old...Cueto is 22. The sky is the limit for those two.

 

BTW, I never compared them. Simply said they had equal potential, which is pretty obvious.

Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux could win more games from the DL than this Reds team can.

First full Season for each of the three 'great' pitchers:

 

Maddux: 6-14 5.61 ERA

Glavine: 7-17 4.56 ERA

Smoltz: 12-11 2.94 ERA

 

Not very impressive other than Smoltz if you ask me

Who would have thought Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux would be where they are at today 15 years ago. Volquez is 24 years old...Cueto is 22. The sky is the limit for those two.

 

BTW, I never compared them. Simply said they had equal potential, which is pretty obvious.

 

 

You did in fact compare them by saying that the Reds duo has that kind of potential. There is NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT, NULL, VOID, NADA chance that Volquez, Cueto and Harang will amass 868 wins and 7 Cy Young awards like the trio that you said that they have the same potential as. I'll even let you take any one of the 3 Braves pitchers numbers out of the equation, and bet my house that Cueto and Volquez will never reach their numbers. Why don't you just say that Volquez and Cueto can be very successful pitchers with the right coaching? That would be much more believable.

I'm not going to take the time to look it up.

You cited the stat ... how about backing it up?

The Reds current rotation has the same potential as the former Braves Rotation. There's not telling what Mazzone could do with this staff.

It could go downhill just like it did in Baltimore ...

You did in fact compare them by saying that the Reds duo has that kind of potential. There is NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT, NULL, VOID, NADA chance that Volquez, Cueto and Harang will amass 868 wins and 7 Cy Young awards like the trio that you said that they have the same potential as. I'll even let you take any one of the 3 Braves pitchers numbers out of the equation, and bet my house that Cueto and Volquez will never reach their numbers. Why don't you just say that Volquez and Cueto can be very successful pitchers with the right coaching? That would be much more believable.

 

You have no idea what kind of players Volquez and Cueto will be down the road. You would have said the same thing about Glavine, Maddux and Smoltz back then that you are saying now about these guys. Just saying that there is NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT, NULL, VOID, NAD chance that they will have similar careers to Glavine, Smoltz and Maddux is laughable at this point. They may very well not get that amount of wins becaus today's game is more specialized. Starters come of of games earlier, etc. But to say that Volquez and Cueto have zero chance to turn out as great pitchers at this point in their careers is pointless because you have no idea how they will turn out.

You cited the stat ... how about backing it up?

It could go downhill just like it did in Baltimore ...

 

I told you where I heard it, you can look it up for yourself if you don't believe it.

You have no idea what kind of players Volquez and Cueto will be down the road. You would have said the same thing about Glavine, Maddux and Smoltz back then that you are saying now about these guys. Just saying that there is NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT, NULL, VOID, NAD chance that they will have similar careers to Glavine, Smoltz and Maddux is laughable at this point. They may very well not get that amount of wins becaus today's game is more specialized. Starters come of of games earlier, etc. But to say that Volquez and Cueto have zero chance to turn out as great pitchers at this point in their careers is pointless because you have no idea how they will turn out.

 

That's my point, they may turn out to be great pitchers. However, there is absolutely no chance that they accomplish what the trio that you named did. Those pitchers all pitched in 5 man rotations, just like today's guys do. Volquez and Cueto can be great pitchers but they are nothing like Smoltz, Glavine or Maddux--sorry it ain't happening. What is more laughable, saying that they have the same potential as 3 Hall of Famers or saying that they don't. I think we all know the answer to that? :sssh::sssh::lol::lol:

 

You could have said that a pitching coach like Mazzone could have maximized their potential and maybe we would have believed you but you shot all credibilty by comparing them to that trio.

That's my point, they may turn out to be great pitchers. However, there is absolutely no chance that they accomplish what the trio that you named did. Those pitchers all pitched in 5 man rotations, just like today's guys do. Volquez and Cueto can be great pitchers but they are nothing like Smoltz, Glavine or Maddux--sorry it ain't happening. What is more laughable, saying that they have the same potential as 3 Hall of Famers or saying that they don't. I think we all know the answer to that. :sssh::sssh::lol::lol:

 

And middle relief wasn't as big a part of the game as it is today. All I said was they have the potential as Smoltz, Glavine and Maddux right now. Volquez and Cueto do at this point, personally I think its hard to argue that. This is Volquez's first full season, and he's what...15-5 2.73 ERA? Not to mention he's only 24. Cueto's season is very comparable to Maddux's and Glavine's first season. He's 22. They can be great pitchers, or they could end up being a bust. Who knows. Get back to me in 10 years.

And middle relief wasn't as big a part of the game as it is today. All I said was they have the potential as Smoltz, Glavine and Maddux right now. Volquez and Cueto do at this point, personally I think its hard to argue that. This is Volquez's first full season, and he's what...15-5 1.73 ERA? Not to mention he's only 24. Cueto's season is very comparable to Maddux's and Glavine's first season. He's 22. They can be great pitchers, or they could end up being a bust. Who knows. Get back to me in 10 years.

 

 

I think Volquez's ERA is a little bit north of 1.73. By the time Maddux was 24 he had already won 61 games in the Big Leagues. When Smoltz was 22 he had a season where he won 12 games with a 2.94 ERA. Volquez and Cueto are not near that at all.