Do you believe that this rotation will lead the Mets to 100 wins with just the addition of Derek Lowe?
Obviously when your rotation consists of Johan Santana, a still very young Mike Pelfrey, and a pitcher we hope is fully recovered from off season surgery in John Maine, expectations can’t be that high for the 2009 season.
It would be one thing if were to add C.C. Sabathia, PLUS a Derek Lowe or a Jon Garland..
BUT, to make the prize of the offseason Derek Lowe alone and then try to convince me that we have a World Series caliber rotation, well… your just barking up the wrong tree.
Where exactly are those 100 wins coming from?
Let’s assume the bullpen is only half as shitty as last year, we can safely put 20 wins in Johan Santana’s column. Right?
And even though Derek Lowe has only won 15 or more games once in the last five years, let’s just assume at age 35 he can do it again, (even though he hasn’t done it in three years with the Dodgers who have had one of the best bullpens in baseball during that time).
It would be foolish to start throwing around 15 wins all over the place right?
I mean I could say 15 for Maine, and 15 for Pelfrey and another 15 for Jon Niese, but let’s be real here people…
The thing that’s most scary to me is if we do in fact get Derek Lowe, we have a heck of a terrible track record with pitchers over 35.
Glavine, Pedro, El Duque, Trachsel, and Wagner all went down with injuries or ineffectiveness at age 35.
After picking up $25 million dollars in salary savings with the losses of Pedro, El Duque and Perez, I thought for sure we’d be in the game for Sabathia. Or at the very least, something a little bit more palatable than Derek Lowe.
1. Santana, 2. Lowe, 3. Maine(insert Lima Time if not recovered), 4. Pelfrey, 5. Niese
Championship caliber in 2009?? Opinions, please…
