southsider2k5 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:07 PM) I'm all aboard the Peavy train. Choo choo. Peavy would be a great fit right now. No idea what he is looking for though, and I can't see him fitting in dollar wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:08 PM) Peavy would be a great fit right now. No idea what he is looking for though, and I can't see him fitting in dollar wise. With the Cubs signing Lester, I haven't heard a thing about his market. If he can come cheap, he'd be a terrific option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Sorry but Peavy's AL stats and salary makes him a worse option than Noesi. Hell, at this point I would rather have Danks than Peavy and I don't want Danks at all. Just say no to Jake Peavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunt Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 I would love to see Morrow brought in on a 1 year contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (thxfrthmmrs @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:04 PM) With McCarthy, Masterson and Santana gone, it's time for us to look at some high risk high reward type pitcher to compete for a spot in the rotation. Please bring us Medlen, Beachy, or Brett Andersen, in that order. Agree Prefer lottery ticket to Peavy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (GreenSox @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:18 PM) Agree Prefer lottery ticket to Peavy I heard Paulino hasn't signed with anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Danks numbers will continue to decline, he is not going improve in 2015. Sox need 1 more solid #4 starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Soxfest @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 05:31 PM) Danks numbers will continue to decline, he is not going improve in 2015. Sox need 1 more solid #4 starter. On what do you base your assumption? He seemed to be getting a little stronger, regaining some of the lost velocity, as well as learning to pitch with the diminished velocity. Why would he now get worse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Soxfest @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 05:31 PM) Danks numbers will continue to decline, he is not going improve in 2015. Sox need 1 more solid #4 starter. Why? He didn't improve all that much overall but he didn't decline from 2013 to 2014. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:37 PM) On what do you base your assumption? He seemed to be getting a little stronger, regaining some of the lost velocity, as well as learning to pitch with the diminished velocity. Why would he now get worse? He was ranked one of IF not the worst qualified starting pitcher in baseball last year. He is not the same pitcher anymore and HR rate against is terrible. I do not think it is much of a assumption at this point to say he is not starter material anymore on a team looking to win. Edited December 11, 2014 by Soxfest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Soxfest @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:46 PM) He was ranked one of IF not the worst starting pitcher in baseball last year. That is simply not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) I posted it a couple weeks ago, but Danks had 20 quality starts last year. I'll take that from my 5TH starter anytime. He also had 3 other starts that just missed qualifying as "quality starts". That's pretty decent out of 32 starts. He also gave the staff 194 innings. He may be overpaid, but he is not awful. Edited December 11, 2014 by Lillian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 04:51 PM) That is simply not true. Right. He was one of the worst qualified starting pitchers, but that's a huge distinction. The White Sox just traded a starting pitcher away who I would qualify as one of the worst starters in the majors last year. If they can find a deal where they get someone else or they can dump him without eating a huge portion of his contract, great, but I'm OK with going into the year with him as the 4th starter. I'd like for them to acquire another starting pticher, but I don't know that it's in the cards. I see an outfielder being the biggest priority at the moment and they can play the rotation situation by ear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 05:00 PM) I posted it a couple weeks ago, but Danks had 20 quality starts last year. I'll take that from my 5TH starter anytime. He may be overpaid, but he is not awful. What does that mean though? In today's context, a "quality start" in regards to the statistic that tracks games of 3 ER or fewer in 6 IP or more is not always a quality start in the realm of things, because that is, at its worst, a 4.50 ERA, which is below average. It also says that an 8 IP, 0 ER is the exact same thing as a 6 IP, 3 ER game, which is obviously not anywhere close to true, but that's a different argument. Plus, if a guy goes 6 innings and gives up 3 runs, do you really feel, in today's environment, that you have a good chance at winning that game? The Sox had a middle of the pack offense next year - the 8th most runs scored, putting 7 ahead and 7 behind - and in 77 of their games, they scored 3 or fewer runs. That's almost half their games scoring 3 or fewer runs. Frankly, the quality start statistic, as defined, is vague and flawed and I really don't think it should be used. A simple change to say "2 ER or fewer in 6 innings or more" would change things quite a bit, as they scored 2 or fewer runs only 50 times and you do feel pretty good about winning if your starter gives up 2 runs or fewer, geuinely implying a quality performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Or 3 or less ER in at least 7 IP, but that won't happen with the increased focus on the bullpens today around the majors. I'm sure you'd have agents complaining their clients are being forced to pitch "an extra inning" to qualify for a new statistic that would be used in arbitration hearings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 05:37 PM) On what do you base your assumption? He seemed to be getting a little stronger, regaining some of the lost velocity, as well as learning to pitch with the diminished velocity. Why would he now get worse? How? 1st half: 3.99 ERA/4.59 FIP 2nd half: 5.96 ERA/5.04 FIP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 05:35 PM) How? 1st half: 3.99 ERA/4.59 FIP 2nd half: 5.96 ERA/5.04 FIP He bounced back in September a little bit. Amd started throwimg a couple of MPH higher according to the guns. Edited December 11, 2014 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lillian Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 (edited) Ok, so they ought to change the parameters of a "quality start". The point is that he was reasonably effective in a lot of his outings. Regarding his second half stats: He had 8 quality starts in the last 3 months of the season. He had 12 in his last 21 starts. ERA is very misleading, because as we all know, one or two really bad starts can destroy a pitcher's ERA. In this case, he had one really bad start, in each of the last 4 months, of the season. He gave up 6 earned runs in one June start, 7 in a July start, 9 in his first August start and 7 in his first September outing. That will pretty much mess up a guy's ERA. Other than those 4 outings, he was pretty decent. 11 of those 12 quality starts, during the last 4 months, would actually meet the higher standard of 6 innings and 2 or less earned runs. Look, I'm not trying to say that he was terrific. But 11 wins, a .500 record, and 21 quality starts is more than acceptable for a 5TH starter. That said, I want the Sox to sign Scherzer, resulting in their claiming the best pitching staff in baseball. In the meantime, Danks will do as a 5TH starter, until they come up with something better. Edited December 12, 2014 by Lillian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 with the trades that LAD did yesterday, does anyone think that there still might be a trade with chi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlSoxfan Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 12, 2014 -> 07:49 AM) with the trades that LAD did yesterday, does anyone think that there still might be a trade with chi? I don't think so, at least not with Danks for one of their outfielders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 You also have to remember that Noesi is relatively young, right-handed, not coming off of a surgery, and put up those numbers after not at all being prepared to be a starting pitcher. They're not the same thing, even if they put up similar numbers. Danks has shown that he can be an upper echelon starter in MLB, but also is getting older and hasn't produced since his surgery. Noesi may have more upside in that we know he's healthy and he did alright out there despite a lot of things working against him last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 I'm fine with Danks and Noesi at 4/5. Anyone else you get at this point is going to be just as much of a risk. I think Noesi could have a solid year. He had to overcome a lot last year to pitch 170 innings. He was dumped by two teams, pitched out of the bullpen then started the rest of the year. I think he has three good pitches and with a little vote of confidence could be a great pickup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSox Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 I think some forget just how dominating Noesi can be. He didn't even get a full year w/ Coop. He also has 3 more years of control and fits that 5th spot very well, IMO. Danks is probably 2-3 good months away from a trade and Rodon sliding into it all. Overall, I think adding Samardzija makes their top 3 just as good as anyone's. IF they can slide into the playoffs, they are going to have a rotation that can run with anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 i have no prob going into the new season with Danks and Noesi as the #4 and 5 in the pen. i really wanted another pitcher, a really good pitcher at #4 i would feel more comfortable with 6 SP. The reason is well for starter in case of injury, spread the work load and keep all the pitchers fresh. now the idea is to keep the pitchers fresh, why? well when the sox makes the playoff, how many innings have the pitchers pitched? how young are they or better yet how many have been in the playoff? and lastly ease on the work load to get to the playoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boopa1219 Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 QUOTE (Lillian @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 06:13 PM) Ok, so they ought to change the parameters of a "quality start". The point is that he was reasonably effective in a lot of his outings. Regarding his second half stats: He had 8 quality starts in the last 3 months of the season. He had 12 in his last 21 starts. ERA is very misleading, because as we all know, one or two really bad starts can destroy a pitcher's ERA. In this case, he had one really bad start, in each of the last 4 months, of the season. He gave up 6 earned runs in one June start, 7 in a July start, 9 in his first August start and 7 in his first September outing. That will pretty much mess up a guy's ERA. Other than those 4 outings, he was pretty decent. 11 of those 12 quality starts, during the last 4 months, would actually meet the higher standard of 6 innings and 2 or less earned runs. Look, I'm not trying to say that he was terrific. But 11 wins, a .500 record, and 21 quality starts is more than acceptable for a 5TH starter. That said, I want the Sox to sign Scherzer, resulting in their claiming the best pitching staff in baseball. In the meantime, Danks will do as a 5TH starter, until they come up with something better. FIP is a way better metric than ERA to determine how good a pitcher really is. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/chicago-...t-jake-arrieta/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.