Top of the rotation starters

[scenario]

The point was 'one of the worst bullpens in baseball'. 11th out of 14 AL teams is not good. It is not in the 'middle of the pack'.

 

If you want a real perspective on this... go to one of the Tigers sites and read what they think of their bullpen.

 

Without Zumaya? The answer is "SUCKS".

Edited December 19, 2007 by scenario

[DaTank]

The point was 'one of the worst bullpens in baseball'. 11th is not good. It is not in the 'middle of the pack'.

 

If you want a real perspective on this... go to one of the Tigers sites and read what they think of their bullpen.

 

Without Zumaya? The answer is "SUCKS".

 

I never said that they were good without Zumaya. And with being so close to 8th, if they were 8th, they would be a middle of the pack bullpen.

[gosox41]

When did he say that they were top starters? That was not in the quote I read.

 

 

I'll have to look it up. It was in the Trib late last week. It was when he was talking about how the pitching won't be a problem in 2008.

 

 

 

Bob

[DBAHO]

Still, they shouldn't be called one of the worst bullpens in all of baseball. They've got the second best bullpen in our division next to Cleveland. And IMO they have a middle rank bullpen in all of baseball, with a healthy Zumaya of course.

Minnesota?

[DaTank]

Minnesota?

 

Definately overlooked the fact that they've got guys like Juan Rincon, Dennys Rayes, along with Joe Nathan to form an an above average pen. Unless Joe Nathan gets traded which is unlikely this is a solid pen. I don't completely take back what I said about Cleveland though. With Rafael Betancout, a decent Borowski and adding Kobayashi out of Japan probably won't hurt their pen.

[witesoxfan]

Definately overlooked the fact that they've got guys like Juan Rincon, Dennys Rayes, along with Joe Nathan to form an an above average pen. Unless Joe Nathan gets traded which is unlikely this is a solid pen. I don't completely take back what I said about Cleveland though. With Rafael Betancout, a decent Borowski and adding Kobayashi out of Japan probably won't hurt their pen.

 

You are forgetting Rafael Perez in Cleveland.

 

And Juan Rincon sucks. It's all about Neshek and Guerrier now a days.

[sircaffey]

You are forgetting Rafael Perez in Cleveland.

 

And Juan Rincon sucks. It's all about Neshek and Guerrier now a days.

 

And Perkins if they don't move him back to the rotation.

[GreenSox]

Ok, I was a bit harsh, but I think you're being generous to the guy. I'll modify my statement: 2 of Gavin Floyd's (10) starts were "top of the rotation quality" - or what you would expect to see from your #1 or #2 starter.

Sept. 5 vs, DET: 6 IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 6K, 2BB

Sept. 29 @ DET: 7 IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 2K, 0BB, W

So give him credit for those. A dozen of those a year and you can start talking him up as a "front of the rotation" type pitcher. But that isn't what we saw. He had a few more quality starts, but he pitched more than 6 innings once on the season, he recorded one win in 10 starts, he gave up 17 HRs in 70 innings, had a WHIP of 1.48, and had an ERA of 7.00 until the month of September.

 

If you want to make the argument that he showed some talent and has deserved a chance to crack the starting rotation in 2008, then OK, I'm with you. But what I'm trying to point out is for our general manager to try and sell this guy as a "top of the rotation guy" is absolutely insulting to White Sox fans and it makes me sick. To imply that we might not be aggressively looking for valuable arms to put in our rotation because we have Gavin Floyd on our side is a bad excuse.

 

I never said he was top of rotation. But he had a lot of quality appearances and his numbers are skewed because he was hit really hard in 3 games. He made 6 straight starts to end the season. with a cumulative ERA of 3.40. 5 of those starts would be deemed "effective" (6 innings, 3 or fewer runs; certainly, some on the border). And none were disasters.

He also has very good "stuff".

His problem is that he gives up way too many home runs, problematic with the Cell as your home field.

One of the reasons that the Sox are in this mess, in my opinion, is complete lack of patience with young players and lack of development of young talent. Bad month? Sit on the bench and play the average veteran the rest of the year.

People want to unload players and get prospects in here .....why? So that they are marginalized if they don't produce in a month?

[Vance Law]

Yes i do. But that doesn't change what he has already shown us.

But A) he won't be playing for at least half of the season. It doesn't matter what he's shown us. He's not on the team. And B- having major surgery on his pitching shoulder does change what he has already shown us. He may not be able to pitch like he did in the past. He had major surgery.....on his pitching shoulder.

Edited December 21, 2007 by Vance Law

[DaTank]

But A) he won't be playing for at least half of the season. It doesn't matter what he's shown us. He's not on the team. And B- having major surgery on his pitching shoulder does change what he has already shown us. He may not be able to pitch like he did in the past. He had major surgery.....on his pitching shoulder.

 

How does having surgery change the past? My point is that he was great. Never even mentioned that having surgery on his pitching shoulder will not affect him. It almost 90% will affect him.

[heirdog]

Yes. I think Danks and Floyd could be top of the rotation starters in the bigs. [weak attempt to get this thread back on topic]

 

Seriously, I think given their stuff, Floyd is a potential ace and Danks #1 or 2 but with their make-up and development, I think Danks will end up as a 1 or 2 (a Buehrle type that is a #1 but not an ace) and Floyd a #3. Out of all our guys, I think Gio is a budding ace and Danks, Floyd are more low-top or middle of the rotation. Jury is still out on Poreda and DLS, although their is potential there. Broadway, Egbert and McCulloch are bottom of the rotation or bullpen arms.

[iamshack]

Yes. I think Danks and Floyd could be top of the rotation starters in the bigs. [weak attempt to get this thread back on topic]

 

Seriously, I think given their stuff, Floyd is a potential ace and Danks #1 or 2 but with their make-up and development, I think Danks will end up as a 1 or 2 (a Buehrle type that is a #1 but not an ace) and Floyd a #3. Out of all our guys, I think Gio is a budding ace and Danks, Floyd are more low-top or middle of the rotation. Jury is still out on Poreda and DLS, although their is potential there. Broadway, Egbert and McCulloch are bottom of the rotation or bullpen arms.

 

Why so eager to throw Egbert into the lowly back-end rotation or bullpen category, given his success this past year, and amazing ability to keep the ball in the ballpark?

[Balta1701]

Why so eager to throw Egbert into the lowly back-end rotation or bullpen category, given his success this past year, and amazing ability to keep the ball in the ballpark?

Right now, none of our guys will fit into that great stuff, highly drafted, highly viewed category that guys like Garza, Price, Kershaw, etc. fit into. Not Danks, not Gio, not Egbert, not Floyd, etc. Egbert doesn't throw 98 with a killer slider, so most baseball people will not count on him for anything until he proves it in the big leagues. And they probably shouldn't.

 

But as we all know, just because someone isn't highly touted doesn't mean they won't crack the big leagues or will be stuck at the back end of the bullpen. I'll give you an example. This pitcher named Mark Buehrle never once appeared in BA's top 100 prospect list. Garland appeared once, ranked #32.

 

Teams may not give you Delmon Young for guys like Egbert or give you a top ranked guy like say, Corey Patterson in 2000 for a guy like Buehrle, but sometimes the game of baseball is a funny one. And hopefully we can get a little luckier with these guys than people think we will.

[heirdog]

Right now, none of our guys will fit into that great stuff, highly drafted, highly viewed category that guys like Garza, Price, Kershaw, etc. fit into. Not Danks, not Gio, not Egbert, not Floyd, etc. Egbert doesn't throw 98 with a killer slider, so most baseball people will not count on him for anything until he proves it in the big leagues. And they probably shouldn't.

 

But as we all know, just because someone isn't highly touted doesn't mean they won't crack the big leagues or will be stuck at the back end of the bullpen. I'll give you an example. This pitcher named Mark Buehrle never once appeared in BA's top 100 prospect list. Garland appeared once, ranked #32.

 

Teams may not give you Delmon Young for guys like Egbert or give you a top ranked guy like say, Corey Patterson in 2000 for a guy like Buehrle, but sometimes the game of baseball is a funny one. And hopefully we can get a little luckier with these guys than people think we will.

 

I would argue that Floyd had the same type of hype when he came up as the names mentioned above. Danks was considered one of, if not the best lefty prospect a couple years ago. Danks has been pushed up very quickly and Floyd hasn't met expectations. Those names mentioned above may face a similar fate.

 

But in terms of stuff, some of our guys have it or had it and we will see how it plays out. Gio and Egbert have both performed well last year. In my opinion, Gio has the stuff to be an ace and Egbert could overachieve but I think he's more bottom of the rotation on a good staff.

 

[Balta1701]

I would argue that Floyd had the same type of hype when he came up as the names mentioned above. Danks was considered one of, if not the best lefty prospect a couple years ago. Danks has been pushed up very quickly and Floyd hasn't met expectations. Those names mentioned above may face a similar fate.

 

But in terms of stuff, some of our guys have it or had it and we will see how it plays out. Gio and Egbert have both performed well last year. In my opinion, Gio has the stuff to be an ace and Egbert could overachieve but I think he's more bottom of the rotation on a good staff.

Actually, I can speak on Danks and how he's been viewed from the BA lists. Typically, people move up those lists as they move up in the minors, especially young guys. Danks came in at #59 on the 2006 list, but only jumped to 56 in 2007 despite moving up to AAA and performing at a young age. Danks really hasn't been viewed as highly by BA/that community as he has been by the White Sox. And yes, Floyd definitely had that kind of hype, but the only reason we were able to get him as basically a throw in is that the hype was gone after he struggled when he hit the bigs. But, again, just as we've seen guys come up and rule who weren't highly regarded (Buehrle is clearly better than say Kip Wells, who was several hundred spots above MB in BA's rankings), we've also seen guys come up, struggle for a while, then find it. But in both of those cases, the guys had to make a big step at some point before their value would go up, and that's what we need for our guys to do. They have very little value until they prove themselves over a full season in the big leagues.