View Full Version : Glavine to the Mets
scuba
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:04 pm
Looks like the Mets were able to retain Tom Glavine for $10.5 million next year. He had a decent year last year, but I'm glad the Cubs didn't try to go after him.
Webgem
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:07 pm
I'm not to big on 40 + pitchers.
Glavine did do a fine job with the Mets last year.
Sheffield_&_Waveland
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:09 pm
That was a good signing for them cause as Scube said it keeps him out of Chicago. He is getting up there in years and is losing value I don't look for him to be as productive on the mound this year as he has been in years past.
DLee25
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:19 pm
I didn't look for him to be productive last year for the mets and he did. I am sure he will be productive, but not 10.5 mil productive.
It's kinda like what I think of clemens every year.
Webgem
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:21 pm
It's kinda like what I think of clemens every year.
I think of Clemens as a terminator machine...;)
It's amazing what this guy does at his age.
HOLYCOW!25
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:36 pm
Yea Clemens was really impressive last year. But if I wanted a veteran pitcher, I'd go with Kenny Roggers. Did anyone see that guy in the playoffs? He was a beast!
Sheffield_&_Waveland
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:42 pm
yep pine tar and all, and if the Cubs were to sign him they would have to make sure they keep him away from the media he tends to be a beast with them people also or maybe just the camera men!! LOL
HOLYCOW!25
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:43 pm
Haha, I saw him pitch in Texas like right after that happened. People down there were making a pretty big deal about it.
DLee25
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:43 pm
yep pine tar and all, and if the Cubs were to sign him they would have to make sure they keep him away from the media he tends to be a beast with them people also or maybe just the camera men!! LOL
You can't say it was pine tar, it wasn't proven. I understand, if it wasn't illegal, why did he wash it off? But Yeah it still wasn't proven. they lost anyways
HOLYCOW!25
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:46 pm
You can't say it was pine tar, it wasn't proven. I understand, if it wasn't illegal, why did he wash it off? But Yeah it still wasn't proven. they lost anyways
And he actually pitched better after he got it off. The 1st inning when it was on he was doing so-so, then he washed it off and pitched a great game. So I don't think any of those bloody Card's can say that it had to do with anything. Also, it was by the base of his thumb if i remember right, almost at his wrist. So I don't think it would of even done anything to help.
Sheffield_&_Waveland
Dec 2nd 2006, 12:51 pm
And he actually pitched better after he got it off. The 1st inning when it was on he was doing so-so, then he washed it off and pitched a great game. So I don't think any of those bloody Card's can say that it had to do with anything. Also, it was by the base of his thumb if i remember right, almost at his wrist. So I don't think it would of even done anything to help.
I agree that he pitched very well that game he was untouchable, do I believe that he had something illeagal on the palm of his hands? Well it definatly doesn't go in his favor he looks guilty as can be. And where he had it positioned on the left side of his palm which would allow him to still reach it with his fingers but however I can't take anything away from the guy he was very impressive in the playoffs just if the Tigers offense could have produced the Cards would have not stood a chance in the series.
scuba
Dec 2nd 2006, 1:00 pm
It didn't exactly help that the Tiger's pitchers were making errors like every other inning either. ;) The Cards really should have gotten destroyed by the Tigers.
Webgem
Dec 2nd 2006, 1:19 pm
You can't say it was pine tar, it wasn't proven. I understand, if it wasn't illegal, why did he wash it off? But Yeah it still wasn't proven. they lost anyways
The umps made him wash it off.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.