Mark Buehrle

[Eminor3rd]

Most here say Sale's better than Bumgarner....while someone else said the Giants were a juggernaut (the same team that Ventura easily beat twice in the span of a week)...and if Quintana's better than Shields/Duffy/Ventura, then the White Sox should be in the playoffs on a regular basis.

 

Yet they're not even close.

 

So, of the combined 50 players on each team, you're comparing five of them and concluding that there's a paradox?

 

Also, if a pitcher beats a team, every other better pitcher should always also beat that team? Who is making this argument?

[witesoxfan]

Frankly, that is a Skip Bayless/Colin Cowherd kind of argument. "Oh, so if you think that's better, WHY ARE THEY GOLFING THEN?" Well because the offense featured quite a few bad hitters this year, the back end of the rotation was really quite bad, and the bullpen was hot garbage all year long, nevermind a mediocre defensive team outside of like 2 positions.

 

There are holes to fill but this is a team that could easily be competing in the very near future (as in 2015). They have 4 of the hardest things to find in the game right now - an elite middle of the order threat, a very good top of the order bat, an ace, and another very, very good starting pitcher. It's much easier to fill in those other areas than it is to fill those 3.

[caulfield12]

Well this is some absolutely ridiculous hyperbole. The Giants have a much better back end of the rotation, a much better bullpen, and were a better all around offensive team.

 

It's not absurd or ridiculous to say that the White Sox have a better rotation than the Royals but a worse overall team.

 

Except they don't.

 

After Sale/Shields, most scouts would take Duffy going forward over Quintana, everyone would take Ventura over whoever we're claiming as our 3 and then Guthrie/Vargas have a HUGE advantage over Danks/Noesi/Rienzo/Carroll. (And 90% of scouts would take Ventura over Quintana, as well).

 

It is absurd and/or ridiculous or preposterous when Danks/Noesi/Carroll had 3 of the worst 11 statistical seasons for starters with over 80 IP this season in the entire majors.

Edited October 30, 2014 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Ventura had a 4.76 ERA against the White Sox this season. Therefore, he must suck.

[shysocks]

...most scouts would take Duffy going forward over Quintana...

Uninterested in the rest of this argument, but I'm pretty sure that is false.

[witesoxfan]

Except they don't.

 

After Sale/Shields, most scouts would take Duffy going forward over Quintana, everyone would take Ventura over whoever we're claiming as our 3 and then Guthrie/Vargas have a HUGE advantage over Danks/Noesi/Rienzo/Carroll. (And 90% of scouts would take Ventura over Quintana, as well).

 

It is absurd and/or ridiculous or preposterous when Danks/Noesi/Carroll had 3 of the worst 11 statistical seasons for starters with over 80 IP this season in the entire majors.

 

Nobody is taking Danny Duffy over Jose Quintana, get out of here with that. Danny Duffy averages 5 innings a start. That's Hector Santiago territory. Ventura is the #2 and probably the ace moving forward. The Sox have Rodon waiting in the wings too. Are you going to tell me that teams are going to take Danny Duffy over Carlos Rodon?

 

Barring any severe injuries, I feel entirely comfortable saying that the Sox rotation is going to be better - and perhaps significantly so - than the Royals' next year.

[caulfield12]

Frankly, that is a Skip Bayless/Colin Cowherd kind of argument. "Oh, so if you think that's better, WHY ARE THEY GOLFING THEN?" Well because the offense featured quite a few bad hitters this year, the back end of the rotation was really quite bad, and the bullpen was hot garbage all year long, nevermind a mediocre defensive team outside of like 2 positions.

 

There are holes to fill but this is a team that could easily be competing in the very near future (as in 2015). They have 4 of the hardest things to find in the game right now - an elite middle of the order threat, a very good top of the order bat, an ace, and another very, very good starting pitcher. It's much easier to fill in those other areas than it is to fill those 3.

 

Except it's really NOT THAT EASY, especially when you're looking for a LF who can hit AND field and is not on the wrong side of 30 and declining.

 

For example, LF and DH. Once you get past the headliners in Martinez/Ramirez/Sandoval, then you enter the abyss of guys like Markakis, Cabrera, Rasmus, Morse, Butler, Kendrys Morales, Lind, LaRoche, etc.

 

It's a complete crapshoot....predicting what any of them will do. Who really has a clue how Flowers, or Gillapsie, or Avisail will do in 2015, or if Eaton can even stay healthy?

 

If it was easy to find those offensive pieces, then the Mariners would have been in the playoffs last season. There's a very good chance that Viciedo has a better season than half the guys on that list...but does it for another team.

Edited October 30, 2014 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Except it's really NOT THAT EASY, especially when you're looking for a LF who can hit AND field and is not on the wrong side of 30 and declining.

 

For example, LF and DH. Once you get past the headliners in Martinez/Ramirez/Sandoval, then you enter the abyss of guys like Markakis, Cabrera, Rasmus, Morse, Butler, Kendrys Morales, Lind, LaRoche, etc.

 

It's a complete crapshoot....predicting what any of them will do. Who really has a clue how Flowers, or Gillapsie, or Avisail will do in 2015, or if Eaton can even stay healthy?

 

If it was easy to find those offensive pieces, then the Mariners would have been in the playoffs last season. There's a very good chance that Viciedo has a better season than half the guys on that list...but does it for another team.

It's pretty hopeless.

[witesoxfan]

Except it's really NOT THAT EASY, especially when you're looking for a LF who can hit AND field and is not on the wrong side of 30 and declining.

 

For example, LF and DH. Once you get past the headliners in Martinez/Ramirez/Sandoval, then you enter the abyss of guys like Markakis, Cabrera, Rasmus, Morse, Butler, Kendrys Morales, Lind, LaRoche, etc.

 

It's a complete crapshoot....predicting what any of them will do. Who really has a clue how Flowers, or Gillapsie, or Avisail will do in 2015, or if Eaton can even stay healthy?

 

If it was easy to find those offensive pieces, then the Mariners would have been in the playoffs last season. There's a very good chance that Viciedo has a better season than half the guys on that list...but does it for another team.

 

It's a hell of a lot easier to find a competent left fielder than an elite slugger. I didn't say it was easy overall.

 

Also, the Mariners missed the playoffs by 2 games and had a 5 game losing streak late in the year to essentially seal their fate. If the Sox missed the playoffs by 2 games next year and won 87 games, I'd be perfectly happy with that season.

 

 

[Eminor3rd]

Except it's really NOT THAT EASY, especially when you're looking for a LF who can hit AND field and is not on the wrong side of 30 and declining.

 

For example, LF and DH. Once you get past the headliners in Martinez/Ramirez/Sandoval, then you enter the abyss of guys like Markakis, Cabrera, Rasmus, Morse, Butler, Kendrys Morales, Lind, LaRoche, etc.

 

It's a complete crapshoot....predicting what any of them will do. Who really has a clue how Flowers, or Gillapsie, or Avisail will do in 2015, or if Eaton can even stay healthy?

 

If it was easy to find those offensive pieces, then the Mariners would have been in the playoffs last season. There's a very good chance that Viciedo has a better season than half the guys on that list...but does it for another team.

 

Which is completely unrelated to the point you were arguing.

 

The Royals were obviously a better team than the White Sox this year. The whole point about pitching rotations was that greg mentioned that the Royals rotation was something that was good enough that it would be a difficult factor for us to surmount going forward. I just wanted to point out that that is not true, that I'm not even sure it's better than OUR rotation, which isn't even good.

 

You could definitely argue that the Royals rotation is better -- you just have to say that depth is more important than peak talent. Our depth sucks and it's a huge issue. But there isn't ANYONE who would take any of the Royals pitchers of either Sale or Quintana. The point is it's arguable either way and therefore they do not have some juggernaut rotation.

[caulfield12]

Nobody is taking Danny Duffy over Jose Quintana, get out of here with that. Danny Duffy averages 5 innings a start. That's Hector Santiago territory. Ventura is the #2 and probably the ace moving forward. The Sox have Rodon waiting in the wings too. Are you going to tell me that teams are going to take Danny Duffy over Carlos Rodon?

 

Barring any severe injuries, I feel entirely comfortable saying that the Sox rotation is going to be better - and perhaps significantly so - than the Royals' next year.

 

http://www.faketeams.com/2014/10/7/6932991...duffy-next-year

 

One person agrees with you. Of course, they use the Royals' Defensive Efficiency Rating as 12th (whatever that means) to justify that he will regress because of his SIERA, FIP and FIP+.

 

That's why everyone's frustrated with WAR and ratings for guys like Alex Gordon and Heyward.

 

UZR ratings often don't agree with Defensive Runs Saved, for example.

 

If you looked at Jose Quintana's numbers in 2012 and 2013, the exact same type of article would have been written...and I'm going to guess that the guy who wrote the article has never even watched Duffy pitch a single game, watched how hitters react to his stuff and has never pitched above the middle school level.

 

 

This guy clearly should be a GM or stock picker, as he has the game of baseball completely figured out....

Edited October 30, 2014 by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

Especially if Shields leaves KC, the gap between the White Sox isn't as large as you might think.

[caulfield12]

Which is completely unrelated to the point you were arguing.

 

The Royals were obviously a better team than the White Sox this year. The whole point about pitching rotations was that greg mentioned that the Royals rotation was something that was good enough that it would be a difficult factor for us to surmount going forward. I just wanted to point out that that is not true, that I'm not even sure it's better than OUR rotation, which isn't even good.

 

You could definitely argue that the Royals rotation is better -- you just have to say that depth is more important than peak talent. Our depth sucks and it's a huge issue. But there isn't ANYONE who would take any of the Royals pitchers of either Sale or Quintana. The point is it's arguable either way and therefore they do not have some juggernaut rotation.

 

 

I would take Ventura over Quintana in a heartbeat because you simply can't teach a 97 MPH average fastball velocity.

 

He has much better stuff and is going to get better and better unless he gets injured, whereas Quintana's already reached pretty close to his peak.

 

I would probably take Duffy over Quintana as well...but it would be VERY close.

 

In the end, Ventura had proven he can be the "ace" in a World Series at his young age already...and Quintana's not the type since his elite run at the very beginning of his career in 2012 where he will consistently put up shutouts or only give up a single run or maybe two.

Edited October 30, 2014 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

Especially if Shields leaves KC, the gap between the White Sox isn't as large as you might think.

 

 

If we had the equivalent of Finnegan, Manaea, Lamb and Zimmer, in the upper levels of the minors, I would agree with you.

 

We have Rodon.

 

Then, after that, Montas, who's either 3-4 months away as a reliever or mid 2016 as a starter.

 

 

Nobody can even predict with 100% certainty that Finnegan won't end up having the best big league career of all the 1st round pitchers drafted in 2015.

[witesoxfan]

I would take Ventura over Quintana in a heartbeat because you simply can't teach a 97 MPH average fastball velocity.

 

He has much better stuff and is going to get better and better unless he gets injured, whereas Quintana's already reached pretty close to his peak.

 

I would probably take Duffy over Quintana as well...but it would be VERY close.

 

In the end, Ventura had proven he can be the "ace" in a World Series at his young age already...and Quintana's not the type since his elite run at the very beginning of his career in 2012 where he will consistently put up shutouts or only give up a single run or maybe two.

 

You also can't teach people how to pitch and command like Quintana. Plus Ventura wouldn't be the first pitcher with huge velocity to suddenly fall off or lose control and command of his stuff, especially with the innings jump he had this year.

 

I really like Ventura moving forward too, but you just can't make the assertions you are at this point in his career.

 

I also don't agree with your argument that Quintana couldn't be an ace for a team moving forward. You simply can't say that. All you can do is point to how successful he's been up to this point, which is to say he's been very good and is still seemingly improving. If you gave him the kind of defense the Royals have, his ERA might drop below 3.

[caulfield12]

You also can't teach people how to pitch and command like Quintana. Plus Ventura wouldn't be the first pitcher with huge velocity to suddenly fall off or lose control and command of his stuff, especially with the innings jump he had this year.

 

I really like Ventura moving forward too, but you just can't make the assertions you are at this point in his career.

 

I also don't agree with your argument that Quintana couldn't be an ace for a team moving forward. You simply can't say that. All you can do is point to how successful he's been up to this point, which is to say he's been very good and is still seemingly improving. If you gave him the kind of defense the Royals have, his ERA might drop below 3.

 

 

And yet, in your heart of hearts, you would never start Quintana over Ventura in a must-win World Series game for the White Sox.

[witesoxfan]

And yet, in your heart of hearts, you would never start Quintana over Ventura in a must-win World Series game for the White Sox.

 

I'd have no problem whatsoever starting Quintana over Ventura.

 

Just to follow up on this: in 2014, Jose Quintana had a better K% (21.5% to 20.3%), better BB% (6.3% to 8.8%), better HR/9 (0.45 to 0.69), and allowed fewer homers overall in more innings (10 in 200.1 to 14 in 183). Ventura's ground ball rate was a better better (47.6% to 44.7%), but that's OK.

[Kyyle23]

Most here say Sale's better than Bumgarner....while someone else said the Giants were a juggernaut (the same team that Ventura easily beat twice in the span of a week)...and if Quintana's better than Shields/Duffy/Ventura, then the White Sox should be in the playoffs on a regular basis.

 

Yet they're not even close.

 

yea, thats exactly what I said. Dont be mad that I disagree with your theory that KC is now an unstoppable juggernaut and Hahn betta' watch his back!

 

 

[Eminor3rd]

I would take Ventura over Quintana in a heartbeat because you simply can't teach a 97 MPH average fastball velocity.

 

He has much better stuff and is going to get better and better unless he gets injured, whereas Quintana's already reached pretty close to his peak.

 

I would probably take Duffy over Quintana as well...but it would be VERY close.

 

In the end, Ventura had proven he can be the "ace" in a World Series at his young age already...and Quintana's not the type since his elite run at the very beginning of his career in 2012 where he will consistently put up shutouts or only give up a single run or maybe two.

 

The problem is that velocity does NOT improve with age. It typically peaks around age 22 and declines steadily. Ventura will have to learn how to be as good as Quintana as he loses velocity on his fastball. Quintana on the other hand, is already Quintana.

 

As for the Proven Ace™ by throwing some good games in the postseason: this is simply bad logic, caulfield. How do you know that Quintana "isn't the type?" He's never been IN the postseason. Also, over the relatively small number of post-season careers that comprise large enough samples to be predictive, they ALL regress to career averages. Ventura's "ballsy" performance is comendable, but simply NOT predictive.

 

And finally: Taking Duffy over Quintana is insanity.

Edited October 30, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[Eminor3rd]

And yet, in your heart of hearts, you would never start Quintana over Ventura in a must-win World Series game for the White Sox.

 

I would choose Quintana every time, because he's better.

[caulfield12]

The problem is that velocity does NOT improve with age. It typically peaks around age 22 and declines steadily. Ventura will have to learn how to be as good as Quintana as he loses velocity on his fastball. Quintana on the other hand, is already Quintana.

 

As for the Proven Ace™ by throwing some good games in the postseason: this is simply bad logic, caulfield. How do you know that Quintana "isn't the type?" He's never been IN the postseason. Also, over the relatively small number of post-season careers that comprise large enough samples to be predictive, they ALL regress to career averages. Ventura's "ballsy" performance is comendable, but simply NOT predictive.

 

And finally: Taking Duffy over Quintana is insanity.

 

 

Next someone will say that Bumgarner's sample in the post-season isn't large enough...that it's the equivalent of saying David Ortiz is "clutch."

[witesoxfan]

Next someone will say that Bumgarner's sample in the post-season isn't large enough...that it's the equivalent of saying David Ortiz is "clutch."

 

Bumgarner is a very good pitcher who went on an incredible run in the World Series this year. If you give him another 120 or so innings, I'm guessing his ERA will be around 2.50-3.00 for his post season career because that's about his true talent level.

[Eminor3rd]

Next someone will say that Bumgarner's sample in the post-season isn't large enough...that it's the equivalent of saying David Ortiz is "clutch."

 

 

Bumgarner is a very good pitcher who went on an incredible run in the World Series this year. If you give him another 120 or so innings, I'm guessing his ERA will be around 2.50-3.00 for his post season career because that's about his true talent level.

 

Wite's got it exactly. It ISN'T long enough. Do you think he's a true talent 0.81 ERA pitcher now?

 

Saying the sample is small isn't taking anything away from the player's performance. Dude pitched lights out and earned a WS ring. But it's not PREDICTIVE of his future performance. He's not the greatest pitcher of all-time now that he threw 50 incredible innings in the postseason.

[greg775]

Especially if Shields leaves KC, the gap between the White Sox isn't as large as you might think.

I think the gap is huge because they can play defense and have great pitching all around. The White Sox bullpen is just plain putrid; the Sox defense is very poor and the Sox team speed can't match KC's. Frankly they are going to own us head to head again next year.

[shysocks]

I think the gap is huge because they can play defense and have great pitching all around. The White Sox bullpen is just plain putrid; the Sox defense is very poor and the Sox team speed can't match KC's. Frankly they are going to own us head to head again next year.

If I have to keep reminding people that the 2008 Rays took their worst-of-all-time bullpen and turned it into a positive in one offseason, I'll keep doing it. So: the 2008 Rays took their worst-of-all-time bullpen and turned it into a positive in one offseason. Bullpens can be quick to shape up.

 

As for team speed, the three LCS teams besides the Royals were 28th, 29th, and 30th in stolen bases, and six of the ten playoff teams were below average at baserunning. The playoffs included both the best baserunning team in the majors (Washington) and the worst (Cardinals). It's nice but not essential.

 

The defensive gap is a real concern and KC will have a very strong defense again next year, especially if they let Aoki go and Dyson sees more time.