Top of the rotation starters

[knightni]

We have nothing from Gavin Floyd to show us that he's even a capable 5th starter. Outside of two encouraging starts last year, he looked downright ugly.

 

That was the neck beard.

[WCSox]

I would take anything that Kenny or any other GM says with a liberal dosage of salt. If they're smart, they're only going to make comments that either help or have a chance of helping their organization... and that often does not include the truth. They're glorified salesmen. They need to sell the team to the fans and to free agents that they're courting. They need to sell their players and prospects to other GMs. They don't have a vested interest in being honest.

 

[Punch and Judy Garland]

I would feel much better about bringing back Freddy Garcia and then using FLoyd as the #5 until the summer when Garcia may be ready. If Floyd is pitching well, then we would have a surplus of starters and if not then we have a guy we know how to work with as well as a potential trading chip. I don't feel Garcia will end up signing a long term deal unless its of the recent Mark Mulder variety that is heavily tied to incentives. I think this deal would be win-win for the Sox and Freddy as he tries to reestablish his value before taking another shot at free agency

[R.J.]

Actually 7 of his last 10 appearances were excellent. Too bad he didn't pitch more - but Ozzie was still wheeling his crappy veteran middle relievers out there in late September

 

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.

 

Williams said: "Most people in the industry view them as top-of-the-rotation guys." That's crap. That's crap that he has to put in the papers to try and get people not to become livid over the lack of improvement of this team. That's the same as talking up Brian Anderson as a quality starting center fielder after BURYING HIM for an entire year. It's just working the media.

 

If Gavin Floyd wins 10 games next year, be thrilled and hope we can trade him for something valuable.

[AWhiteSoxinNJ]

What exactly are you saying here when you mention "top talent?" Are you suggesting in the league, or as a slot in the rotation? Are you arguing he has a 0.0% chance of being a #5 starter?

 

Sorry, I meant Top 5 talent in terms of rotation. Floyd is a horrible pitcher. Living close to Philly, he was horrible there as well and was pissed he was in the Garcia deal because he was pretty much a throw in.

[gosox41]

Whenever a pitcher is a high first round draft pick, it's reasonable to assume there are scouts that believe he has top of the rotation potential.

 

But I don't think anyone (including KW) expects Danks and Floyd to assume that type of role or responsibility next year.

 

I'll be extremely happy if they just do an average to above average job in the #4-5 slots in 2008.

 

 

I'm just basing it off KW's quotes about how pitching won't be a problem. He singled out Danks and Floyd as being top starters. I'm not making that claim at all.

 

 

 

Bob

[gosox41]

I would take anything that Kenny or any other GM says with a liberal dosage of salt. If they're smart, they're only going to make comments that either help or have a chance of helping their organization... and that often does not include the truth. They're glorified salesmen. They need to sell the team to the fans and to free agents that they're courting. They need to sell their players and prospects to other GMs. They don't have a vested interest in being honest.

 

 

It's one thing to be a salesman and another to try to sell a Yugo saying it's a Rolls Royce. We've all seen both Danks and Floyd. In 2008 KW is choosing to go for it and not rebuild. Who is he really trying to sell Floyd as a top starter to? The fans don't buy it. Any Do you think the scouts would buy it? It's almost insulting to a Sox fans intelligence to say Floyd can be a top starter.

 

As for Danks, IMHO he can be a #2 starter, but he won't reach that level in 2008, which unfortunately for KW is what he's banking on.

 

 

 

Bob

[witesoxfan]

Sorry, I meant Top 5 talent in terms of rotation. Floyd is a horrible pitcher. Living close to Philly, he was horrible there as well and was pissed he was in the Garcia deal because he was pretty much a throw in.

 

And Gavin Floyd is a better pitcher than he was when he was with Philadelphia. Why must you hold onto previous experience? Players change and improve, or they get the hell out. Floyd is starting to improve.

[Jack Parkman]

Danks was 22 years old for most of the season, spent only 2 and a half years in the minors out of HS, and never pitched in AAA. The fact that he pitched league average for the first half of the season(4.5 ERA) at that age, with that amount of minor league experience shows me what kind of pitcher he is. IMO he knows how to pitch. If he can throw that curve for strikes and learn to utilize the cutter he's supposedly learning, I don't see why he can't be a #2 starter. If all goes well, he could be Buehrle with a 7 or 8 K/9 because Mark's fastball is 86-89 and John's is 91-94. He could potentially blow hitters away with low 90s heat coming from the left side, because most leftys don't throw that hard. I think that Danks' ceiling is what Erik Bedard is now. For Floyd, I still hold hope that he could turn out to be Roy Halladay part deux. A top ten pick who flamed out in his early 20s, but then learns to harness his stuff, and becomes awesome. Granted this is highly unlikely, but he has the stuff to do it. What is good to know is that he still possesses the 93-96 mph fastball that he was drafted with, and that we have a pitching coach who was anointed a genius about 2 years ago when he helped turn a pitcher who had the classic million dollar arm, 10 cent head syndrome into the most dominant in the AL for a year. If Contreras wasn't 39-40 years old in 2006, but rather Floyd's age, I think he'd still be awesome. If Coop can get Floyd's head straight and teach him to trust his stuff, there's no reason that he can't at least be a serviceable #3, if not a #2. I don't think that either of them can be aces, but if everything goes right, there's no reason that either of them can't be a #2 or 3 starter. Unfortunately for the Sox, I may be just looking at these guys with rose colored glasses.

Edited December 18, 2007 by Elgin Slim

[Heads22]

I like your optimism.

[Balta1701]

Unfortunately for the Sox, I may be just looking at these guys with rose colored glasses.

Well, IMO, you're looking at them the right way, because they're exactly the kind of guys we need right now. Guys who other teams might have some questions about, guys who aren't looked at as top 10 in baseball prospects, but guys who still have some stuff and who can be had cheaply. Why? Because these are the kind of guys we can get without giving up too much, and if we could coach them to their potential, their return could be really high. They're the definition of low risk, high reward. If they flop, then all we do is get another top 10 draft pick next year and find someone to replace them.

 

So, let's go ahead and look at them with the rose colored glasses. The only harm in that is that we'd have another losing season, which is what would happen if we tried to fix the pitching staff issues by spending $100 million to sign Silva and Lohse and rebuild the Twins Rotation by signing all the crappy guys at the bottom of it.

[sircaffey]

And Gavin Floyd is a better pitcher than he was when he was with Philadelphia. Why must you hold onto previous experience? Players change and improve, or they get the hell out. Floyd is starting to improve.

 

I hope you're right, but Gavin did the same thing with Philly. He came up in 2004 and showed flashes in a handful of quality outings like he did with us at the end of last season. The next 2 seasons he bombed.

[Leonard Zelig]

I'm just basing it off KW's quotes about how pitching won't be a problem. He singled out Danks and Floyd as being top starters. I'm not making that claim at all.

Bob

 

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

[scenario]

Here's a summary of Floyd's minor league career/numbers. He had a very nice year at Charlotte and showed signficant improvement in several key stats.

 

[DBAHO]

Obviously a key for Floyd is to keep the HR's he gives down to a manageable level.

 

We all remember his 1st game for us, how many dingers he gave up in that outing at the Cell. It's probably the biggest question mark I have over him right now.

 

But then again, Javier Vaaquez is a flyball pitcher and he was able to cut down the HR's he gave up in 2007, so it can be done.

[Jack Parkman]

Well, IMO, you're looking at them the right way, because they're exactly the kind of guys we need right now. Guys who other teams might have some questions about, guys who aren't looked at as top 10 in baseball prospects, but guys who still have some stuff and who can be had cheaply. Why? Because these are the kind of guys we can get without giving up too much, and if we could coach them to their potential, their return could be really high. They're the definition of low risk, high reward. If they flop, then all we do is get another top 10 draft pick next year and find someone to replace them.

 

So, let's go ahead and look at them with the rose colored glasses. The only harm in that is that we'd have another losing season, which is what would happen if we tried to fix the pitching staff issues by spending $100 million to sign Silva and Lohse and rebuild the Twins Rotation by signing all the crappy guys at the bottom of it.

If that is the case, then by all means they should keep Masset on the 25 man roster in case Contreras doesn't have it. Nick has awesome stuff, the same thing I said about Floyd can be said for him. BTW, when we got Floyd in the trade, I said that Philly gave up on him too early in the seasons, and didn't let him take his lumps in the majors. He only had 57 IP over a 2 year span, with about 24 each year and a few as a September callup in 2004. Even Verlander had a 7.00 ERA his first goaround in the majors. If Philly would have stuck with him when they weren't going anywhere, then maybe he would have lived up to the #4 draft position for them. On another note, the Sox should go around finding players, both position and pitchers, that are at the 23-26 age range who are blocked by in the depth chart or that organizations have just soured on that have good speed/OBP/power potential for the position guys and great stuff for pitchers. These are the guys that KW should be going after through our minor league system.(sans DLS/Gio/Danks)I want to see more Carlos Quentin like deals. If we get enough of them, then 4 or 5 will turn out to be keepers. IMO a GM should be looking for Carlos Quentin type deals every year.

Edited December 19, 2007 by Elgin Slim

[Balta1701]

If that is the case, then by all means they should keep Masset on the 25 man roster in case Contreras doesn't have it. Nick has awesome stuff, the same thing I said about Floyd can be said for him. BTW, when we got Floyd in the trade, I said that Philly gave up on him too early in the seasons, and didn't let him take his lumps in the majors. He only had 57 IP over a 2 year span, with about 24 each year and a few as a September callup in 2004. Even Verlander had a 7.00 ERA his first goaround in the majors. If Philly would have stuck with him when they weren't going anywhere, then maybe he would have lived up to the #4 draft position for them. On another note, the Sox should go around finding players, both position and pitchers, that are at the 23-26 age range who are blocked by in the depth chart or that organizations have just soured on that have good speed/OBP/power potential for the position guys and great stuff for pitchers. These are the guys that KW should be going after through our minor league system.(sans DLS/Gio/Danks)I want to see more Carlos Quentin like deals. If we get enough of them, then 4 or 5 will turn out to be keepers. IMO a GM should be looking for Carlos Quentin type deals every year.

I think Masset will likely be penciled in as the 12th man in the bullpen, the long man to go along with having Floyd/Danks/Contreras in the rotation. Whether or not he'll earn the spot who knows, but I doubt they're going to let him walk.

[DaTank]

The Tigers gave away too much pitching in Jurrjens and Miller.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm very envious of the Tigers and their expectations next year...but they'll wish they had one of those guys when they find out that D-Train can't get anyone out. Not to mention their bullpen is one of the worst in baseball.

 

I expect big things from the Tigers next year, but their potential "Achilles Heel" is obvious.

 

The thing that stands out to me here is that "their bullpen is of the worst in baseball. How do you figure that? Joel Zumaya, 23 and already has proven to be top talent throwing over 100MPH quite often. Todd Jones, 39, their closer, a member of the 300 save club, and yes I realize he is aging and has had an up and down career but you can't really call this guy "bad" compared to some relievers we have. Fransisco Rodney, 30, set-up man, yes he had Tommy John surgery after the 03' campaign, but with a mid-90's fastball and a devastating change-up, this guy is able to dazzle hitters. So really you cannot call this bullpen bad, at all compared to ours. We have 1 trusty bullpen guy in closer Bobby Jenks. They have 3 proven guys.

[Balta1701]

The thing that stands out to me here is that "their bullpen is of the worst in baseball. How do you figure that? Joel Zumaya, 23 and already has proven to be top talent throwing over 100MPH quite often. Todd Jones, 39, their closer, a member of the 300 save club, and yes I realize he is aging and has had an up and down career but you can't really call this guy "bad" compared to some relievers we have. Fransisco Rodney, 30, set-up man, yes he had Tommy John surgery after the 03' campaign, but with a mid-90's fastball and a devastating change-up, this guy is able to dazzle hitters. So really you cannot call this bullpen bad, at all compared to ours. We have 1 trusty bullpen guy in closer Bobby Jenks. They have 3 proven guys.

You do know Zumaya is out for 1/2 the season right?

[DaTank]

You do know Zumaya is out for 1/2 the season right?

 

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

[ptatc]

The thing that stands out to me here is that "their bullpen is of the worst in baseball. How do you figure that? Joel Zumaya, 23 and already has proven to be top talent throwing over 100MPH quite often. Todd Jones, 39, their closer, a member of the 300 save club, and yes I realize he is aging and has had an up and down career but you can't really call this guy "bad" compared to some relievers we have. Fransisco Rodney, 30, set-up man, yes he had Tommy John surgery after the 03' campaign, but with a mid-90's fastball and a devastating change-up, this guy is able to dazzle hitters. So really you cannot call this bullpen bad, at all compared to ours. We have 1 trusty bullpen guy in closer Bobby Jenks. They have 3 proven guys.

 

 

Zumaya is out for most if not all of the year with an injured knee from moving boxes when those CA fires came near his house.

[DBAHO]

The thing that stands out to me here is that "their bullpen is of the worst in baseball. How do you figure that? Joel Zumaya, 23 and already has proven to be top talent throwing over 100MPH quite often. Todd Jones, 39, their closer, a member of the 300 save club, and yes I realize he is aging and has had an up and down career but you can't really call this guy "bad" compared to some relievers we have. Fransisco Rodney, 30, set-up man, yes he had Tommy John surgery after the 03' campaign, but with a mid-90's fastball and a devastating change-up, this guy is able to dazzle hitters. So really you cannot call this bullpen bad, at all compared to ours. We have 1 trusty bullpen guy in closer Bobby Jenks. They have 3 proven guys.

I would call them below average because;

 

1 - Zumaya out for half the season obviously and he's their most dominant reliever

2 - Jones would be one of the bottom 5 closers in baseball. He's on a level with Borowski.

3 - Rodney got hit hard at times last season IIRC.

 

And other than those 3, who else do they have? Jason Grilli? Not much else there that I can remember off the top of my head.

 

I wouldn't call Jones a "proven" guy, in terms of yes he has over 300 saves, but recently his ERA has not been good, especially at a pitchers park.

[DaTank]

I would call them below average because;

 

1 - Zumaya out for half the season obviously and he's their most dominant reliever

2 - Jones would be one of the bottom 5 closers in baseball. He's on a level with Borowski.

3 - Rodney got hit hard at times last season IIRC.

 

And other than those 3, who else do they have? Jason Grilli? Not much else there that I can remember off the top of my head.

 

I wouldn't call Jones a "proven" guy, in terms of yes he has over 300 saves, but recently his ERA has not been good, especially at a pitchers park.

 

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.

Edited December 19, 2007 by jenks45monster

[scenario]

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.

 

The Sox relievers as a team were 12th in the AL in 2007.

 

The Tigers? 11th.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...ng&type=reg

[DaTank]

The Sox relievers as a team were 12th in the AL in 2007.

 

The Tigers? 11th.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...ng&type=reg

 

With the Sox having 1.10 point more ERA then Detroit. And Detroit only being .13 away from being number 8 on that list.