[討論] "一球未投"的風險有多高?
好像每次遇到有日韓選手挑戰MLB時
總是會有所謂的"一球未投 風險很高"之類的說法
言下之意似乎是沒在大聯盟證明過就不值得拿高薪
但問題是 就算在大聯盟已經投過很多球了 這樣就算是證明有拿肥約的價值嗎?
以今年為例
田中將大: 一球未投 但是stuff蠻好的 日職成績很殺
Ervin Santana: 丟了蠻多球的 不過也被打蠻多全壘打的
Ubaldo Jimenez: 也丟了很多球 球速年年下滑
Matt Garza: 這兩年丟了...沒有很多球 因為花了不少時間在DL裡
哪一位投手才是最沒有風險的投資呢?
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 123.194.205.48
推
12/28 15:48, , 1F
12/28 15:48, 1F
※ 編輯: abc12812 來自: 123.194.205.48 (12/28 15:50)
推
12/28 15:51, , 2F
12/28 15:51, 2F
推
12/28 15:51, , 3F
12/28 15:51, 3F
→
12/28 15:55, , 4F
12/28 15:55, 4F
→
12/28 16:00, , 5F
12/28 16:00, 5F
推
12/28 16:06, , 6F
12/28 16:06, 6F
→
12/28 16:15, , 7F
12/28 16:15, 7F
→
12/28 16:21, , 8F
12/28 16:21, 8F
→
12/28 16:34, , 9F
12/28 16:34, 9F
推
12/28 17:12, , 10F
12/28 17:12, 10F
→
12/28 17:36, , 11F
12/28 17:36, 11F
推
12/28 17:43, , 12F
12/28 17:43, 12F
→
12/28 17:44, , 13F
12/28 17:44, 13F
→
12/28 17:45, , 14F
12/28 17:45, 14F
→
12/28 17:46, , 15F
12/28 17:46, 15F
→
12/28 17:46, , 16F
12/28 17:46, 16F
推
12/28 17:47, , 17F
12/28 17:47, 17F
→
12/28 17:47, , 18F
12/28 17:47, 18F
→
12/28 17:47, , 19F
12/28 17:47, 19F
→
12/28 17:47, , 20F
12/28 17:47, 20F
→
12/28 17:55, , 21F
12/28 17:55, 21F
→
12/28 17:56, , 22F
12/28 17:56, 22F
推
12/28 18:02, , 23F
12/28 18:02, 23F
→
12/28 18:03, , 24F
12/28 18:03, 24F
推
12/28 18:05, , 25F
12/28 18:05, 25F
→
12/28 18:05, , 26F
12/28 18:05, 26F
推
12/28 18:07, , 27F
12/28 18:07, 27F
→
12/28 18:07, , 28F
12/28 18:07, 28F
→
12/28 18:07, , 29F
12/28 18:07, 29F
→
12/28 18:07, , 30F
12/28 18:07, 30F
→
12/28 18:08, , 31F
12/28 18:08, 31F
→
12/28 18:09, , 32F
12/28 18:09, 32F
→
12/28 18:10, , 33F
12/28 18:10, 33F
推
12/28 18:11, , 34F
12/28 18:11, 34F
→
12/28 18:11, , 35F
12/28 18:11, 35F
→
12/28 18:14, , 36F
12/28 18:14, 36F
→
12/28 18:14, , 37F
12/28 18:14, 37F
→
12/28 18:17, , 38F
12/28 18:17, 38F
還有 122 則推文
→
12/29 16:12, , 161F
12/29 16:12, 161F
→
12/29 16:13, , 162F
12/29 16:13, 162F
→
12/29 16:13, , 163F
12/29 16:13, 163F
→
12/29 16:14, , 164F
12/29 16:14, 164F
→
12/29 16:15, , 165F
12/29 16:15, 165F
推
12/29 16:15, , 166F
12/29 16:15, 166F
→
12/29 16:15, , 167F
12/29 16:15, 167F
→
12/29 16:15, , 168F
12/29 16:15, 168F
→
12/29 16:16, , 169F
12/29 16:16, 169F
→
12/29 16:16, , 170F
12/29 16:16, 170F
→
12/29 16:24, , 171F
12/29 16:24, 171F
推
12/29 16:28, , 172F
12/29 16:28, 172F
→
12/29 16:33, , 173F
12/29 16:33, 173F
推
12/29 19:25, , 174F
12/29 19:25, 174F
→
12/29 19:27, , 175F
12/29 19:27, 175F
→
12/29 19:27, , 176F
12/29 19:27, 176F
→
12/29 19:28, , 177F
12/29 19:28, 177F
→
12/29 19:29, , 178F
12/29 19:29, 178F
→
12/29 19:29, , 179F
12/29 19:29, 179F
→
12/29 19:30, , 180F
12/29 19:30, 180F
→
12/29 19:31, , 181F
12/29 19:31, 181F
→
12/29 19:31, , 182F
12/29 19:31, 182F
→
12/29 19:31, , 183F
12/29 19:31, 183F
→
12/29 19:32, , 184F
12/29 19:32, 184F
→
12/29 19:32, , 185F
12/29 19:32, 185F
→
12/29 19:33, , 186F
12/29 19:33, 186F
→
12/29 19:36, , 187F
12/29 19:36, 187F
→
12/29 19:36, , 188F
12/29 19:36, 188F
→
12/29 19:37, , 189F
12/29 19:37, 189F
→
12/29 19:38, , 190F
12/29 19:38, 190F
→
12/29 19:38, , 191F
12/29 19:38, 191F
→
12/29 19:39, , 192F
12/29 19:39, 192F
→
12/29 19:41, , 193F
12/29 19:41, 193F
推
12/29 20:31, , 194F
12/29 20:31, 194F
→
12/29 20:32, , 195F
12/29 20:32, 195F
噓
12/29 20:39, , 196F
12/29 20:39, 196F
推
12/31 07:54, , 197F
12/31 07:54, 197F
→
12/31 07:55, , 198F
12/31 07:55, 198F
→
01/01 11:46, , 199F
01/01 11:46, 199F
→
01/01 11:52, , 200F
01/01 11:52, 200F
討論串 (同標題文章)