Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: Mets: Peterson sees 'A' talent in young staff

  1. #1

    Mets: Peterson sees 'A' talent in young staff

    And Peterson, the A's pitching coach from 1998-2003 before joining the Mets, sees distinct similarities between that group and the three youngsters who currently comprise 60 percent of the Mets starting rotation.

    Zito, Mulder and Hudson each went on to become 20-game winners. And, while he's not about to predict such greatness for his largely untested trio, Peterson is enthused by the progress shown by Maine, left-hander Oliver Perez and rookie Mike Pelfrey.

    Perez, the 25-year-old reclamation project, is scheduled to start here tonight as the unbeaten Mets open a three-game series with the Braves. Pelfrey, 23, will make his first start of the season a week from today at Shea Stadium.

    "I'm probably as excited as I've been in a long time," Peterson said. "I liken it to my first couple of years in Oakland because there is just so much untapped potential. ... (Zito, Mulder and Hudson) were just young, talented guys who were ready to evolve."

    Peterson said he likes the "gap of untapped potential" he sees with the Mets three youngsters.

    "If they bridge that gap -- and they're very capable -- we'll have a special staff here," he said. "If they even come close, it'll be real exciting. And they're all edging toward it."

    http://www.nj.com/sports/ledger/inde...180.xml&coll=1

  2. #2
    all i know is that the mets pitching has been just dominant the first 4 games of the season here......


    i'm not unrealistic and i know there will be games where a pitcher will look bad....especially young pitchers....

    but if this is a sign of things to come....with this lineup....the mets are going to be SCARY good for a while

    and if pedro can be close to what he was the last 2 years....we're going to be tought to beat come august and spetember....and don't forget we get mota back.......
    i am genuinely excited to be a mets fan this year

  3. #3
    Zito, Mulder, Hudson, Harden >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pelfrey, Humber, Maine, Perez

    The Mets 4 are talented, but nowhere near the level of the A's four. I don't see any reason to compare Peterson's old staff to his new one.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    Zito, Mulder, Hudson, Harden >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pelfrey, Humber, Maine, Perez

    The Mets 4 are talented, but nowhere near the level of the A's four. I don't see any reason to compare Peterson's old staff to his new one.

    dude......rick peterson is the one who compared the two staffs.........

    take issue with him if you don't like the comparison....

    you are just a HUGE hater......you must be from kansas city

  5. #5
    We've already seen some flashes of what Maine and Perez are capable of, and Pelfrey and Humber are 2 Excellent Prospects. Maine and Perez have looked terrific as of recently, and Pelfrey and Humber have all the potential in the world. If the Mets play their cards right with these 4, they could have a very, very good rotation for a very long time. I do think you can draw some parallels with the early stages of building up his staff in Oakland, as there is a ton of pure, untapped potential that is just beginning to come through with the help of Rick Peterson.

    I'm becoming convinced more and more each day that Rick Peterson is the best pitching coach in Baseball, and there's nobody else I'd rather have working with these guys.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by neckdemon
    dude......rick peterson is the one who compared the two staffs.........

    take issue with him if you don't like the comparison....

    you are just a HUGE hater......you must be from kansas city
    Lol pwnage.

    Not.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    Lol pwnage.

    Not.
    Who would know more - you or Rick P?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynBound
    Who would know more - you or Rick P?
    I don't know, but only experts know anything about baseball.

    Honestly, could you not see this completely out of control situation where some crazy reports brings up the A's foursome? And if Peterson made the comparison unprovoked (doubtful), don't you think it might have been made

    The only one of those Mets guy I really like is Humber. Unlike Pelfrey he has a plus plus breaking ball, and he has very good fastball command. Pelfrey has nothing resembling a consistent breaking ball, and as good as his fastball is his control is incosistent. Perez has lost some of his velocity, and gained alot of weight. I think he becomes a good #3-4, same for Maine.

  9. #9
    John maine is going to be a real great pitcher and so is perez, infact the whole mets staff is right were it should be

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by jetsfanforlife78
    John maine is going to be a real great pitcher and so is perez, infact the whole mets staff is right were it should be
    4 games into the season....

    Saaaaample siiize....

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato

    Perez has lost some of his velocity, and gained alot of weight. I think he becomes a good #3-4, same for Maine.

    dude, perez was throwing his fastball 94 mph last night......

    now i'm not sure if he used to throw even harder than that....but if you can throw a 94 mph heater you have more than enough velocity

    btw, you never answered my question.....what team do you root for?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    I don't know
    Incorrect. The answer is Ricky P. Good day, sir.

  13. #13
    The Cubs neckdemon.

    Incorrect. The answer is Ricky P. Good day, sir.
    Ah, so I can't analyze talent is what you're saying? Cause I disagree with Peterson or anyones comparison of the two rotations?

    The A's 4 were together when the AL West was one of the best divisions in baseball, arguably the best. They played in the bigger offensive league in a park that was between pitcher and nuetral. They were all very good.

    The Mets play in a bigger park, and in an inferior league. Most of these guys have serious flaws in their track record or just not enough of stuff/command/control to be aces like the 3/4 were at their best. The only one as highly touted as any of the A's 3 is Pelfrey, and he doesn't have a consistent breaking ball yet.

    Sorry, but if you can't take other fan's opinions or analyization then you shouldn't really be on a message board. It's not just a place for everyone to agree on how great the Mets are.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    The Cubs neckdemon.



    Ah, so I can't analyze talent is what you're saying? Cause I disagree with Peterson or anyones comparison of the two rotations?

    The A's 4 were together when the AL West was one of the best divisions in baseball, arguably the best. They played in the bigger offensive league in a park that was between pitcher and nuetral. They were all very good.

    The Mets play in a bigger park, and in an inferior league. Most of these guys have serious flaws in their track record or just not enough of stuff/command/control to be aces like the 3/4 were at their best. The only one as highly touted as any of the A's 3 is Pelfrey, and he doesn't have a consistent breaking ball yet.

    Sorry, but if you can't take other fan's opinions or analyization then you shouldn't really be on a message board. It's not just a place for everyone to agree on how great the Mets are.
    You can hold your own opinions. But if you think your opinion is more informed and accurate than Peterson's, you have another thing coming.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynBound
    You can hold your own opinions. But if you think your opinion is more informed and accurate than Peterson's, you have another thing coming.
    So again, I should bend over and take it like its gospel?

    What'd you want him to say? Why would he say anything that may show that he thinks nothing but the best of them?

    I guess we should just bring in an expert or coach on any disagreements on this board, since they know all and everything we read that they sayis true. Fans, especially non-Mets fans, know nothing about baseball.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    So again, I should bend over and take it like its gospel?

    What'd you want him to say? Why would he say anything that may show that he thinks nothing but the best of them?

    I guess we should just bring in an expert or coach on any disagreements on this board, since they know all and everything we read that they sayis true. Fans, especially non-Mets fans, know nothing about baseball.
    If I just said it out of the blue, you could legitimately take issue with it. The difference is, Rick has forgot more about baseball today than we have learned in our entire lives. And, he works with them everyday while we post about it on Jets message boards.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynBound
    If I just said it out of the blue, you could legitimately take issue with it. The difference is, Rick has forgot more about baseball today than we have learned in our entire lives. And, he works with them everyday while we post about it on Jets message boards.
    I'm not gonna deny nor admit thats true, but there are many fans who can talk intelligently about baseball. It's complete bull**** for an obviously biased fan to argue another fan's opinion with another more highly regarded opinions. You win arguments with facts, not opinions you value more highly than others. This isn't brain surgery, it's baseball.

    That was Rick Peterson's completely evidence-free opinion. It doesn't make it fact. It leaves it open to debate and discussion.
    Last edited by SenorGato; 04-07-2007 at 11:23 PM.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    I'm not gonna deny nor admit thats true, but there are many fans who can talk intelligently about baseball. It's complete bull**** for an obviously biased fan to argue another fan's opinion with another more highly regarded opinions. You win arguments with facts, not opinions you value more highly than others. This isn't brain surgery, it's baseball.

    That was Rick Peterson's completely evidence-free opinion. It doesn't make it fact. It leaves it open to debate and discussion.
    I'm just reminding you of the source. Any pro pitching coach knows more about pitching than any of us combined - and this man is in the upper echelon of this group. You can have any opinion you want - but the man I quoted knows a little bit more about the game than we do. And don't underestimate the fact he sees them every day - we don't.

    Also, Peterson's opinion is evidence-free? So he doesn't know what he's talking about? His opinion isn't formed on evidence he sees every single day?

    And I'm not biased - sorry buddy. If you've known my posts, people have accused me of being a dark sider. I hate homers.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynBound
    I'm just reminding you of the source. Any pro pitching coach knows more about pitching than any of us combined - and this man is in the upper echelon of this group. You can have any opinion you want - but the man I quoted knows a little bit more about the game than we do. And don't underestimate the fact he sees them every day - we don't.

    Also, Peterson's opinion is evidence-free? So he doesn't know what he's talking about? His opinion isn't formed on evidence he sees every single day?

    And I'm not biased - sorry buddy. If you've known my posts, people have accused me of being a dark sider. I hate homers.
    No dude, evidence means he said something that statistically or definitely support his opinion. What he gave was an opinion. What evidence was there to support it?

    You're regarding his opinion as fact because he's an expert. I'm saying "experts" who have "forgotten more about the game than we have" have said ridiculous, unsupported things before and been completely wrong. I value Rick Peterson's on pitching very highly, especially mechanics. Coaches usually suck at analyzing players to the media, thats what I think he did right there.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by SenorGato
    No dude, evidence means he said something that statistically or definitely support his opinion. What he gave was an opinion. What evidence was there to support it?

    You're regarding his opinion as fact because he's an expert. I'm saying "experts" who have "forgotten more about the game than we have" have said ridiculous, unsupported things before and been completely wrong. I value Rick Peterson's on pitching very highly, especially mechanics. Coaches usually suck at analyzing players to the media, thats what I think he did right there.
    Just because the article did not feature enough evidence to support his opinion does not mean that Peterson's opinion isn't completely valid. Like I've said, his resume and day to day involvement with said players more than qualifies that he knows what he's talking about.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us