Who would be the best starter of these 3?

[caulfield12]

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/T/Matt-Thornton.shtml

 

Matt Thornton, 80 minor league starts, 1 in the majors. Will turn 31 in September.

 

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/S/Andy-Sisco.shtml

 

Andy Sisco, 65 minor league starts, just turned 24.

 

 

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Nick-Masset.shtml

 

Nick Masset, 104 minor league starts, about to turn 25.

 

 

 

My opinion, it's a little bit late for Thornton, and I think he's been relieving too long, and relying on just a couple of pitches, to make an effective transition. Sisco, being a lefthander, and having the organizational depth with Thornton and Logan, would seem the most attractive bet (and he's the youngest), but there can be lots of arguments made for Masset as well.

 

If Danks/Floyd/Gio don't evolve into 1-3 caliber starters, the odds are KW will try to convert at least 2 of these 3 guys (if not all three) into starters for next year, as there are no quick fixes in the rotation. Sure, Haeger, Broadway, Phillips or McCullogh could come in as a five or possibly four, but that's about it.

 

I think there are too many health concerns with MacDougal for him to ever go back to starting.

 

Finally, there's Adam Russell.

 

What are the odds that any of these pitchers could ever be a legit 1-2 starter to fit into the rotation with Jose, Garland and Vazquez?

 

Floyd (15%)

Gio (30%)

Danks (50%)

Sisco (40%)

Masset (40%)

Russell (25%)

 

I guess the way I look at it, I don't expect more than two of those guys to make it, but that would be fine, because we all feel pretty confident Haeger and maybe Broadway can slot in as the #5.

 

Just guessing...feel free to debate/discuss.

Edited April 6, 2007 by caulfield12

[soxfan3530]

I think of those three Masset has the best chance to start. No way for Thornton.

 

I like Gio and Haeger and think they will be good pitchers for us in the future.

[caulfield12]

I think of those three Masset has the best chance to start. No way for Thornton.

 

I like Gio and Haeger and think they will be good pitchers for us in the future.

 

If Baseball Prospectus actually likes ANYTHING connected with the White Sox, it makes me leery. Which is probably why I'm down on Haeger, because almost nothing they say is correct. In reality, you just assume the direct opposite of whatever they say.

 

Masset has the better control (from his minor league numbers), Sisco a better WHIP by about .20, at any rate it seems like control is probably the most important thing to the White Sox at the big league level, so that definitely favors Masset, although some believe Sisco has slightly better pure stuff.

Edited April 6, 2007 by caulfield12

[alk3kevin]

If Baseball Prospectus actually likes ANYTHING connected with the White Sox, it makes me leery. Which is probably why I'm down on Haeger, because almost nothing they say is correct. In reality, you just assume the direct opposite of whatever they say.

You are an idiot. That is the worst reason I have ever heard for, I don't know, anything. BP likes Charlie because he has dominated absolutely every level and has been an absolute freak at not allowing the longball. How many times have you read BP caulfield? I know that they're idiots for not seeing that freak, anomaly, once in a lifetime pitching WS season we had in 2005. But other than that, what evidence do you have for such ridiculously misleading, outlandish, and foolish statements?

[Balta1701]

If we're talking potential...Andy Sisco. He *could* be the best of the 3. Big lefty with a big fastball. That has Randy Johnson written all over it. But his problem is of course control. He throws strikes at 95+ for 7 innings, and it's shutdown time for everyone else.

 

But right now, who *would* be the best starter? Nick Masset, plain and simple. He has the pitch selection to be a starter, what with a breaking ball, 2 seamer, and 4 seamer, with the latter 2 in the low-mid 90's and possibly better as the season goes on. And he knows how to throw them all for strikes. Sisco at the top of his potential is a better starter than Masset, but right now, Masset would be.

[caulfield12]

You are an idiot. That is the worst reason I have ever heard for, I don't know, anything. BP likes Charlie because he has dominated absolutely every level and has been an absolute freak at not allowing the longball. How many times have you read BP caulfield? I know that they're idiots for not seeing that freak, anomaly, once in a lifetime pitching WS season we had in 2005. But other than that, what evidence do you have for such ridiculously misleading, outlandish, and foolish statements?

 

At WSI, BP is regularly quoted/posted/ripped apart. I've read TOO many articles there, to tell you the truth. There's still a war going on between the SABR (Beane, James, Ricciardi, DiPodesta, Epstein) world and the "real world" of scouting.

 

Seriously, how many times can they rip Scott Podsednik? Enough already.

 

And the main reasons for the White Sox winning 72 games this year? Dye isn't going to repeat his 06 season, Thome, Konerko and Iguchi are getting older. Brilliant. (Bill) PECOTA predicts that, but it's been how many years since the White Sox lost 90 games? Would any of their own writers go to Vegas and bet their houses on that 72 game line, taking the under?

 

Who overachieved in 2005? Definitely not Garcia, he wasn't the ace we were promised. Just a solid 3. The only pitcher who dramatically improved was Contreras. Maybe he'll never be the same pitcher as that 4 month run he had from 05 through the postseason and into 06.

 

But El Duque was below average, Garland pitched well, but he repeated that with 18 more wins last season, so we can't really say he reached his full potential at age 26 or 27....McCarthy just had a few starts.

 

Buehrle was classic Buehrle....holding the opposition when he needed to, giving just enough with the offense winning games 3-2 or 4-3 or 5-4 behind him. But he still wasn't as good as he was at times earlier in his career.

[alk3kevin]

If you actually read anything at BP, you would know that they too don't buy into the PECOTA projections for the White Sox. But with the division the Sox are in, and the horrid quality of our manager, I'd bet my house on 75 wins or less.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(Craig Grebeck @ Apr 6, 2007 -> 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you actually read anything at BP, you would know that they too don't buy into the PECOTA projections for the White Sox. But with the division the Sox are in, and the horrid quality of our manager, I'd bet my house on 75 wins or less.

 

You wanna know why you would? Because :

 

QUOTE(Craig Grebeck @ Apr 6, 2007 -> 10:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are an idiot.

[caulfield12]

If you actually read anything at BP, you would know that they too don't buy into the PECOTA projections for the White Sox. But with the division the Sox are in, and the horrid quality of our manager, I'd bet my house on 75 wins or less.

 

What managers would win the division (since Cleveland, Minnesota and Detroit all will end up with better team ERA's IMO) with the pitching staff the White Sox CURRENTLY have?

 

Everyone says they could have won the WS as the Sox manager in 2005, but how many of you would have held that team together when everything almost collapsed?

 

It's easy when every reliever knows his role, and gets out and throws strikes. It's not so easy when your choices are Nelson, Tracey, Montero, Riske (amazingly average despite his overall stats), Cotts and Politte. You either destroy your closer (which is what happened the second half) or you leave your starters in too long...no good options when your starters are giving up 3-6 runs per game and your 4-6 relievers are garbage.

 

Heck, I think we already have more blown 7th and 8th inning leads than the Twins had all of last year. Is that Ozzie's fault, or Thornton's? Is he supposed to use Sisco or Logan in those situations now, instead of Thornton? Tell me what you would do to fix all of the bullpen problems since April. 06.

 

Is that because Gardenhire can ESP/Jedi Mind Trick the Twins into being the best bullpen, year after year, no matter who is on the roster....from Romero, Hawkins and Guardado to the current version?

 

Maybe we should just trade OG and KW for Ryan and Gardenhire. Although we'd probably end up like the Braves and A's and Twins and never make a single dent in the playoffs.

[alk3kevin]

What of that had anything to do with my post?

 

What manager on earth would continue to stick with Erstad/Pods in the lineup, albeit at the top-despite viable replacements? Ozzie

 

What manager would alienate his younger players in order to serve veterans that don't deserve playing time? Ozzie

 

Who will hopefully be gone in one year or less? Ozzie

 

And to answer your original question-I think Masset probably has the best chance of being a good 5 man. I kinda wish he would've earned the spot out of ST that way Danks could have some time in AAA

[caulfield12]

What of that had anything to do with my post?

 

What manager on earth would continue to stick with Erstad/Pods in the lineup, albeit at the top-despite viable replacements? Ozzie

 

What manager would alienate his younger players in order to serve veterans that don't deserve playing time? Ozzie

 

Who will hopefully be gone in one year or less? Ozzie

 

And to answer your original question-I think Masset probably has the best chance of being a good 5 man. I kinda wish he would've earned the spot out of ST that way Danks could have some time in AAA

 

I love it when Sox fans run off the only manager to bring them a World Series title less than two seasons later. We gave Manuel the 01-03 seasons when he was obviously incompetent, and I think Bevington had a similar amount of time.

 

Obviously, you love Brian Anderson. That's your prerogative. If he had played like he was expected to, there would be NO Erstad this year. Second, which of the following players would u have signed?

 

Matthews Jr, Roberts or Pierre? And you don't mind spending that much money for those guys? Glad you don't have my checkbook.

 

Who's the better option to replace Pods? A platoon of Mackowiak and Ozuna? Sure.

 

What younger players have been alienated? Sean Tracey? Brandon McCarthy? Tracey was never going to see the White Sox roster again...we'll just have to wait and see with young Brandon, but I'm not optimistic he ever becomes an "ace" type of pitcher.

 

Erstad could get on base five times in one game and you'd still rather have Anderson out there.

 

Well, if the White Sox finish with 75 losses, Anderson WILL be out there everyday in 2008, so you might want to be a little patient for your Owens/Fields/Anderson/Sweeney outfield.

 

Stilll waiting for the name of one manager who would have won it all with the White Sox last year? Probably Cito Gaston, right?

[witesoxfan]

What of that had anything to do with my post?

 

What manager on earth would continue to stick with Erstad/Pods in the lineup, albeit at the top-despite viable replacements? Ozzie

 

What manager would alienate his younger players in order to serve veterans that don't deserve playing time? Ozzie

 

and Erstad and Podsednik could put up OBP's of .310 throughout the course of the year and the offense would still score 800 runs. That argument sucks. Of course, it would be nice if the Sox had two guys in the 1-2 spot that would put up OBP's of around .350-.380, thus resulting in about 900-925 runs, but the offense will be good and inconsistent.

 

The rise or fall of the White Sox depends upon pitching and pitching only. If they pitch, the will win. If they don't pitch, they will lose. I think the first 3 games of the season have illustrated that pretty well.

[Kalapse]

and Erstad and Podsednik could put up OBP's of .310 throughout the course of the year and the offense would still score 800 runs. That argument sucks. Of course, it would be nice if the Sox had two guys in the 1-2 spot that would put up OBP's of around .350-.380, thus resulting in about 900-925 runs, but the offense will be good and inconsistent.

 

The rise or fall of the White Sox depends upon pitching and pitching only. If they pitch, the will win. If they don't pitch, they will lose. I think the first 3 games of the season have illustrated that pretty well.

And what if the pitching is somewhere between '05 and '06 this year? What if they allow 4.29 R/G with a 4 team ERA? What then? Is that good enough to cover up any offensive deficiencies?

[witesoxfan]

And what if the pitching is somewhere between '05 and '06 this year? What if they allow 4.29 R/G with a 4 team ERA? What then? Is that good enough to cover up any offensive deficiencies?

 

Then the team is right around the 90-72 they were last year, in which case, the lack of a leadoff hitter may cost them because I don't see 90-72 winning the division.

[southsider2k5]

If all things were equal, and they all had a chance to prepare as starters, I think today Massett would be the best followed by Sisco, and then Thornton. I think Andy Sisco could be the best if he get a year at AAA to refine his secondary pitches and stretch out to 180 innings or so.