The 5-man rotation

[witesoxfan]

Jeff Sullivan at FanGraphs posted an interesting article today...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/revisiting-...e-man-rotation/

 

basically suggesting that the importance of depth is incredibly important in today's modern game, particularly in the rotation. I think his methodology is a bit off - he removed the 5 pitchers with the most games started for each team, but he admitted to being open to researching further in the future - so his study included Dylan Axelrod as a regular rotation member for the White Sox, but the point is valid. I hadn't considered this in the past due to the durability of the White Sox rotation in years' past, but this past year, the Sox got 34 starts out of pitchers that weren't the "top 5."

 

Now, I still think the Santiago trade was absolutely the right move - they needed to get an influx of offensive talent into the system - but this is also why I think it's wrong to even think about trading any other starters and why, beyond that, adding a starter with the #3 pick is frankly a smart thing to do.

 

Now, consider the Sox depth rotational depth within the system...where do we have guys slotted?

 

1) Sale

2) Quintana

3) Johnson

4) Danks

5) Paulino

6) Rienzo

7) Surkamp

8) Doyle? Stewart? Bassitt? Beck? Snodgress? in the organization?

 

First and foremost, I think this is why that Surkamp addition was important too - if nothing else, it added an arm that can be used in the rotation. Beyond that, I think this idea more than any other is why it's so important to keep adding to the system in all areas, rather than looking to deal prospects away (not that anyone has suggested that to any drastic measures). If Ramirez or Beckham gets hurt, the Sox can look to play Garcia, Elmore, Semien, or perhaps even Johnson (if he continues to produce). I think the Sox are doing this. Third, I think this was a very big flaw under the Williams White Sox - so much of the Sox success during those time periods was due to the Sox top guys producing and staying healthy, and so often that simply did not occur. I think with the way Hahn is setting up the organization now, he's focusing more on depth than at any time in Sox history.

[Buehrle>Wood]

It's the primary reason why trading Hector was a bad idea. Our pitching depth has been GROSSLY overstated on this board, particularly when you consider how durable and fortunate some of guys have been, though it's sort of reversed itself the last couple years. Once you have a pitching premium, you keep it, because that premium can can turn into a depth problem in about 1 day.

 

On our current depth, probably looks about right. I'm not sure Paulino is ready or not. And Leesman is probably number 8 as it stands. That'll likely change.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Buehrle>Wood

[Kyyle23]

Hector was a bullpen burner, he was a big tease. Im not sad he is gone, and it certainly wasnt a bad idea, I love the return. I would much rather run Quintana out there every 5 days than Hector

[ptatc]

The rotation is always the most important part of the team. Each team needs to have 7 starters to have agood season. Over the course of a season things happen and the depth is needed. Hitting feasts o poor toaverage pitching. Good pitching will beat good hitting. Over the course of a season, hitting will beat the vast amount of bad pitching out there. A deep pitching staff will beat this.

[flavum]

If Sale, Quintana, Johnson, and Danks make 32-33 starts each, they'll get by with Paulino/Rienzo/Surkamp.

 

Santiago is an ok pitcher, but it was more important to get high upside offense.

 

Who knows, maybe they get a 1(b) ace pitcher five months from now in the draft.

Edited January 3, 2014 by flavum

[southsider2k5]

Jeff Sullivan at FanGraphs posted an interesting article today...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/revisiting-...e-man-rotation/

 

basically suggesting that the importance of depth is incredibly important in today's modern game, particularly in the rotation. I think his methodology is a bit off - he removed the 5 pitchers with the most games started for each team, but he admitted to being open to researching further in the future - so his study included Dylan Axelrod as a regular rotation member for the White Sox, but the point is valid. I hadn't considered this in the past due to the durability of the White Sox rotation in years' past, but this past year, the Sox got 34 starts out of pitchers that weren't the "top 5."

 

Now, I still think the Santiago trade was absolutely the right move - they needed to get an influx of offensive talent into the system - but this is also why I think it's wrong to even think about trading any other starters and why, beyond that, adding a starter with the #3 pick is frankly a smart thing to do.

 

Now, consider the Sox depth rotational depth within the system...where do we have guys slotted?

 

1) Sale

2) Quintana

3) Johnson

4) Danks

5) Paulino

6) Rienzo

7) Surkamp

8) Doyle? Stewart? Bassitt? Beck? Snodgress? in the organization?

 

First and foremost, I think this is why that Surkamp addition was important too - if nothing else, it added an arm that can be used in the rotation. Beyond that, I think this idea more than any other is why it's so important to keep adding to the system in all areas, rather than looking to deal prospects away (not that anyone has suggested that to any drastic measures). If Ramirez or Beckham gets hurt, the Sox can look to play Garcia, Elmore, Semien, or perhaps even Johnson (if he continues to produce). I think the Sox are doing this. Third, I think this was a very big flaw under the Williams White Sox - so much of the Sox success during those time periods was due to the Sox top guys producing and staying healthy, and so often that simply did not occur. I think with the way Hahn is setting up the organization now, he's focusing more on depth than at any time in Sox history.

 

 

As of today that is how I would line them up. Past 7, I would imagine that 2014 would sort out who would be next in line if needed. I would imagine Molina would be in the mix, because he is on the 40 man roster, if another starter was needed past that point. There could also be a late camp invite or two that is floating around.

[witesoxfan]

It's the primary reason why trading Hector was a bad idea. Our pitching depth has been GROSSLY overstated on this board, particularly when you consider how durable and fortunate some of guys have been, though it's sort of reversed itself the last couple years. Once you have a pitching premium, you keep it, because that premium can can turn into a depth problem in about 1 day.

 

On our current depth, probably looks about right. I'm not sure Paulino is ready or not. And Leesman is probably number 8 as it stands. That'll likely change.

 

The problem with this ideology is that you are making the assumption that the depth and future of CF was strong as well. The risk, reward, and marginal utility for Eaton is far greater than it was for Hector for the Sox going forward, which is why he was traded. The Sox have shown capable of producing MLB quality pitching, but this is simply not the case with offensive players. The same can be said for Addison Reed too - he was absolutely a great reliever, and the Sox bullpen depth is overstated too (I'd put it on par with the rotation), but the Sox have proven capable of identifying and acquiring quality relievers over the last 5 years, whereas a guy like Matt Davidson has upside like no one else in the system does [at 3B].

 

Beyond that, they did have more depth in both aspects of the pitching staff compared to the offense. I think that's why these moves make sense. Yes, I do agree the depth for the entire pitching staff was overstated, but there still IS depth there. The offense is just now beginning to assimilate some sort of depth, which is necessary in today's game, whether to fill in for injured players or to acquire others at a later time.

Edited January 3, 2014 by witesoxfan

[Jake]

FWIW, Hahn said on the day we signed Paulino that they aren't expecting him to be ready for opening day

[sin city sox fan]

I think Surkamp is a solid #3 for us this year (and possibly a #2)

[southsider2k5]

I think Surkamp is a solid #3 for us this year (and possibly a #2)

 

That is pretty high expectations for a guy even the Astros didn't claim.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think Surkamp is a solid #3 for us this year (and possibly a #2)

I'd call that his absolute ceiling, and the chances of him reaching it are slim. I hope you're right of course, but... incredibly unlikely.

 

[sin city sox fan]

I'd call that his absolute ceiling, and the chances of him reaching it are slim. I hope you're right of course, but... incredibly unlikely.

 

I agree that's his ceiling this year. No way he passes Sale in 2014. However, he will win a Cy Young award in a White Sox uniform down the road.

 

[witesoxfan]

I agree that's his ceiling this year. No way he passes Sale in 2014. However, he will win a Cy Young award in a White Sox uniform down the road.

 

You really are something else

[Quin]

If Surkamp pitches like a number two, then Coop becomes the GOAT pitching coach.

[BlackSox13]

If I had to guess right now I'd say the rotation ends up 1- Sale 2- Quintana 3- Johnson 4- Danks 5- Surkamp with Paulino as the long man in the pen. I'm no scout but I just don't see Rienzo amounting to much of anything at all as long as he continues to walk the amount of batters that he does. There's just nothing impressive at all about the guy as far as I can tell, but again, im no scout.