Lackey or Burnett? (1 Viewer)

[Wrigley]

I'm holding both, and must pick one to keep

Which one, and why?

 

[guru_007]

pretty much a coin flip here. I can make solid arguments for each.

Age is almost identical. WHIPS and League adjusted ERA's are similar. Burnett has a pretty solid K advantage. But Lackey pitches in a weaker division and probably a much better and younger defense around him. I'd go Lackey.

 

[ceo3west]

Lackey, and it's not close IMO. Burnett has done little outside of contract years, and is injury prone. Not only that but he pitches in the best division in baseball. High priced free agents have not worked out well for the Yanks in recent years, and they overpaid for him big time. I am avoiding.

Lackey on the other hand is someone I'm targeting. A clear cut fantasy ace when he is healthy, which he has been most of his career. Plays in a very weak division and is in a contract year, should be very motivated this year.

 

[MAC_32]

It's not a contract year for Burnett, keep Lackey.

 

[Eephus]

I'd probably go with Lackey. Although they were pretty comparable last year, Lackey has a better sustained record of success and reliability than Burnett.

 

[Balco]

I'd probably go with Lackey. Although they were pretty comparable last year, Lackey has a better sustained record of success and reliability than Burnett.

:X Agreed. Lackey is going to have a very nice year, and he has been very undervalued in drafts.

 

[E-Z Glider]

Id keep Lackey. Burnett's had two good seasons and both were contract years. That being said, he still has value. Cant you trade him to a Yankee lover?

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

I would take Lackey because I worry about Burnett's arm. Then again, the last time I took Lackey relatively early he burned me (2 or 3 years ago, I don't remember).

 

[Wrigley]

Id keep Lackey. Burnett's had two good seasons and both were contract years. That being said, he still has value. Cant you trade him to a Yankee lover?

No, we don't have off-season movesThe only reason I'm looking at keeping Lackey or Burnett is the injury to Hamels.I can keep a combo of either Lackey/Burnett and Broxton or I can keep HamelsNews of Hamels elbow is making me a little nervous.

 

[awesomeness]

Keep Lackey for sure. If you're worried about Hamels and how he is prone to injuries, you definitely don't want Burnett backing him up.

 

[E-Z Glider]

Id keep Lackey. Burnett's had two good seasons and both were contract years. That being said, he still has value. Cant you trade him to a Yankee lover?

No, we don't have off-season movesThe only reason I'm looking at keeping Lackey or Burnett is the injury to Hamels.I can keep a combo of either Lackey/Burnett and Broxton or I can keep HamelsNews of Hamels elbow is making me a little nervous.

Id take Lackey+Broxton over Hamels at this point. Yeah, there was no structural damage to Hamels, but Im avoiding him like the plague. Phils rode him hard last season en route to the WFC.

 

[thehornet]

Burnett is slightly better than Lackey, but you should probably keep Lackey if you dont keep Hamels. Burnett is just too much of an injury risk.

that being said, if both were guaranteed 32 starts, i would definitely take Burnett.