PDA

View Full Version : If KW doesn't get this bullpen fixed in 2009, I will lose my mind


captain54
09-27-2008, 12:25 AM
The Sox have had bullpen issues since mid 2006...

Things seemed to be on the right path the first half of 2008, but it has sucked for MONTHS now....You can't blame it all on Linebrink's injury....

This is sucking the lifeblood out of the team and the fans....I almost hope the Sox don't make the playoffs in order for someone to be held accountable...

Tragg
09-27-2008, 12:29 AM
The lack of internal development of young pitchers has led to the woes imo. That's what you need to fill out the pen, as they prepare for bigger roles on a major league team. some move up to key bullpen spots, others into the rotation. Other than Jenks, who have we developed? Thornton.

As a result, Williams has chased ceiling middle relievers for the last 3 years - and that's a tough way to build a pen (none have worked out).

Dotel and a healthy Linebrink have been okay overall.

Corlose 15
09-27-2008, 12:31 AM
The Sox have had bullpen issues since mid 2006...

Things seemed to be on the right path the first half of 2008, but it has sucked for MONTHS now....You can't blame it all on Linebrink's injury....

This is sucking the lifeblood out of the team and the fans....I almost hope the Sox don't make the playoffs in order for someone to be held accountable...

I think you can blame a lot of it on that as well as Jenks injury. When this bullpen had set roles with Thornton/Dotel in the 7th, Linebrink in the 8th, and Jenks in the 9th it was very good. At that time Logan was also pitching well.

When Jenks got hurt they had to shuffle people out of their roles and Linebrink struggled. When Linebrink got hurt it screwed everything up because you had to shuffle people around again and Dotel started to blow up. Linebrink has never really gotten back to where he was in May. I think it's had a lot to do with the bullpen struggles. He was the glue.

As for Kenny himself, I'm not sure there is much more else he can do to get a solid bullpen, its such a crapshoot. Youngsters, and journeymen formed together one of the best bullpens in Sox history in 2005 and won a title. In 2006 3 of them fell of the face of the Earth. In 2007 he went with young talent and it didn't work out, this year he's gone with established veterans and it hasn't worked out.

It makes you wonder how teams like the Angels do it.

anewman35
09-27-2008, 12:34 AM
People seem to think it's easy to "fix" a bullpen. It's not. Kenny went out and got a few big pieces in the off season, and for a while the pen was great. Then people started getting hurt and sucking, is that all Kenny's fault? Was he supposed to go out and sign 10 big free agent relievers and stash them at AAA, just in case what we had got hurt?

WhiteSox5187
09-27-2008, 12:45 AM
This bullpen looked pretty much fixed heading into July, but **** happens. There is no easy way to fix a bullpen, I'm hard pressed to name three teams in contention right now that have a solid bullpen.

FedEx227
09-27-2008, 12:52 AM
Angels (3.73 ERA, 7th in MLB)
Rays (3.49, 5th)
Red Sox (3.79, 9th)
Phillies (3.22, 2nd)
Dodgers (3.27, 3rd)

Only 1 potential playoff team is in the bottom half of the league, predictably the New York Mets (22nd in league).

LoveYourSuit
09-27-2008, 12:52 AM
I took a beating when back in August I proposed to get our best young arm in the farm up here to help out .... Poreda.


Even with his 1.5 pitch arsenal, I would bet my life on it that he would have beeen a much better option than the car full of clowns we open up from the pen when trotting out Logan, MacDougal, Wasserman, Ramirez, etc. Could Poreda have been any worse than these jokes?

Anyone think differently now?

Lip Man 1
09-27-2008, 12:52 AM
Captain 54:

For what it's worth.

The first three months of the season the Sox pitching staff was the envy of baseball. The starters were consistent and the relief corps was putting up numbers that made fans of a certain generation remember the Sox bullpen’s of the 1960’s. Those were outfits, that if the Sox had a lead in the 7th inning or later, the game was over. Led by Hall of Famer Hoyt Wilhelm and including All-Stars like Wilbur Wood and Eddie Fisher along with the exceptional talents of Bob Locker, Don Mossi and Don McMahon those bullpen’s won games, ate innings and ended threats.

The second half of the season was a different story as pitchers like Boone Logan came back to reality and Scott Linebrink’s shoulder soreness was the injury that destroyed the rhythm and continuity of the bullpen.

The Sox have a solid bullpen but the same insurance policy applies there too. You need protection from the almost inevitable injury or year long slump… another reliable arm for the bullpen would be a wise investment. The Sox appear to only be able to count on Bobby Jenks, Matt Thornton, Octavio Dotel and Scott Linebrink (who should be over his tendonitis by next April). Given how often Ozzie Guillen uses his bullpen, that’s simply not enough.

And you might find this hard to believe but the Sox bullpen is better this season in one category at least, they have "only" blown and lost 10 games this season when they had the lead and the ball in the 7th inning or later this year.

Last season that number was 19 games.

Lip

anewman35
09-27-2008, 12:53 AM
I took a beating when back in August I proposed to get our best young arm in the farm up here to help out .... Poreda.


Even with his 1.5 pitch arsenal, I would bet my life on it that he would have beeen a much better option than the car full of clowns we open up from the pen when trotting out Logan, MacDougal, Wasserman, Ramirez, etc. Could Poreda have been any worse than these jokes?

Anyone think differently now?

No, he couldn't have been worse. But he could have been just as bad AND hurt his future development. I suppose we'll never know.

LoveYourSuit
09-27-2008, 01:00 AM
No, he couldn't have been worse. But he could have been just as bad AND hurt his future development. I suppose we'll never know.

It's a risk you need to take to see what you got. Back in August, the future was NOW for the Sox. Like the Yankees did with Jaba, the Cubs this year with Samarja and TB with Price.

LoveYourSuit
09-27-2008, 01:01 AM
Captain 54:

For what it's worth.

The first three months of the season the Sox pitching staff was the envy of baseball. The starters were consistent and the relief corps was putting up numbers that made fans of a certain generation remember the Sox bullpen’s of the 1960’s. Those were outfits, that if the Sox had a lead in the 7th inning or later, the game was over. Led by Hall of Famer Hoyt Wilhelm and including All-Stars like Wilbur Wood and Eddie Fisher along with the exceptional talents of Bob Locker, Don Mossi and Don McMahon those bullpen’s won games, ate innings and ended threats.

The second half of the season was a different story as pitchers like Boone Logan came back to reality and Scott Linebrink’s shoulder soreness was the injury that destroyed the rhythm and continuity of the bullpen.

The Sox have a solid bullpen but the same insurance policy applies there too. You need protection from the almost inevitable injury or year long slump… another reliable arm for the bullpen would be a wise investment. The Sox appear to only be able to count on Bobby Jenks, Matt Thornton, Octavio Dotel and Scott Linebrink (who should be over his tendonitis by next April). Given how often Ozzie Guillen uses his bullpen, that’s simply not enough.

And you might fing this hard to believe but the Sox bullpen is better this season in one category at least, they have "only" blown and lost 10 games this season when they had the lead and the ball in the 7th inning or later this year.

Last season that number was 19 games.

Lip


Yes because now it feels like they are blowing the games in the 6th inning, especially when Danks starts.

captain54
09-27-2008, 01:30 AM
And you might fing this hard to believe but the Sox bullpen is better this season in one category at least, they have "only" blown and lost 10 games this season when they had the lead and the ball in the 7th inning or later this year.

Last season that number was 19 games.

Lip

That 10 blown after the 7th doesn't include all the games the Sox battled back and were only down a run or two or were tied, only to have the bullpen put it out of reach...

there's no doubt that Linebrink and Jenks being down for a while messed with the flow of things....but what transpired as a result of trying to compensate for that has been a travesty. It seems like as long as I can remember in the KW era, his approach to the bullpen is, "well let's throw this #### against the wall and see what sticks".....he got real lucky in 2005...horribly unlucky in 2007, as well as the last half of 2008...

Sox4ever77
09-27-2008, 01:42 AM
Angels (3.73 ERA, 7th in MLB)
Rays (3.49, 5th)
Red Sox (3.79, 9th)
Phillies (3.22, 2nd)
Dodgers (3.27, 3rd)

Only 1 potential playoff team is in the bottom half of the league, predictably the New York Mets (22nd in league).

I looked at the Dodgers bullpen and amazed at how:

they survived an ineffective closer, Saito, early in the season.

Then the closer going down,

his setup man adjusting to the closer role,

A couple setup men going down.

This bullpen was so good the last few years but they were able to overcome something this season.

Mohoney
09-27-2008, 01:43 AM
Maybe we could sign Juan Cruz? He's done pretty well the past 2 years with the Diamondbacks. I just don't know if there would be enough money around to bring him in.

JB98
09-27-2008, 01:55 AM
The Sox have had bullpen issues since mid 2006...

Things seemed to be on the right path the first half of 2008, but it has sucked for MONTHS now....You can't blame it all on Linebrink's injury....

This is sucking the lifeblood out of the team and the fans....I almost hope the Sox don't make the playoffs in order for someone to be held accountable...

It isn't just Linebrink's injury. It is also the complete and utter collapse of Boone Logan, who was solid in the first half but has been beyond horrible since the All-Star break.

In the first half, we had five relievers throwing the ball well. In the second half, it has been two and a half. Jenks and Thornton have remained solid for us. Dotel has had his moments, both positively and negatively.

All the others have been crap.

Procol Harum
09-27-2008, 02:27 AM
Perhaps one possible solution to our dilemma might be for the Sox to blaze a trail in a bit of baseball re-think in terms of the whole manner in which we approach our bullpen. Is it writen in stone that there is no other way of successfully winning w/o this overblown reliance on bit-player relievers--a 6th inning guy, a 7th inning guy, an 8th-inning guy, and then the big-gun closer--the strategy which all teams seem to have adopted in the last 15-20 years. The big-gun closer seems like a no-brainer, but the other guys seem to be the really rough part to get right--perhaps the alternative to this is to put more emphasis on having starters who can go deeper into a game.

Unfortunately, the emphasis on pitch counts and the move to 5-pitcher rotations seems to have had a negative effect on starters' durability. Tommy John when he was w/ the Sox team in Charlotte used to be a major critic of this whole business, advocating the old-school training regimen of the great Sox pitching coach Ray Berres. Slavish to current fashion like most baseball organizations the Sox would never give him the green light to actually implement a training system that would try to emphasize strengthening and stretching out pitchers and implementing a starting schedule on 3-days rest. This is the approach that baseball used for over a century--does the sterling success of the likes of Mike MacDougall, Octavio Dotel, Horacio Ramirez and others form an unassailable argument against a 4-pitcher rotation of guys for whom a normal start usually would mean going 7 innings?

Nellie_Fox
09-27-2008, 02:32 AM
Perhaps one possible solution to our dilemma might be for the Sox to blaze a trail in a bit of baseball re-think in terms of the whole manner in which we approach our bullpen. Is it writen in stone that there is no other way of successfully winning w/o this overblown reliance on bit-player relievers--a 6th inning guy, a 7th inning guy, an 8th-inning guy, and then the big-gun closer--the strategy which all teams seem to have adopted in the last 15-20 years.You forgot the all-important "one-out guy," be it the LOOGY or the ROOGY. Managers get fired on such whims that they don't dare vary from orthodoxy, lest they provide a reason to dump them.

Mohoney
09-27-2008, 02:37 AM
Perhaps one possible solution to our dilemma might be for the Sox to blaze a trail in a bit of baseball re-think in terms of the whole manner in which we approach our bullpen. Is it written in stone that there is no other way of successfully winning w/o this overblown reliance on bit-player relievers--a 6th inning guy, a 7th inning guy, an 8th-inning guy, and then the big-gun closer--the strategy which all teams seem to have adopted in the last 15-20 years. The big-gun closer seems like a no-brainer, but the other guys seem to be the really rough part to get right--perhaps the alternative to this is to put more emphasis on having starters who can go deeper into a game.

Unfortunately, the emphasis on pitch counts and the move to 5-pitcher rotations seems to have had a negative effect on starters' durability. Tommy John when he was w/ the Sox team in Charlotte used to be a major critic of this whole business, advocating the old-school training regimen of the great Sox pitching coach Ray Berres. Slavish to current fashion like most baseball organizations the Sox would never give him the green light to actually implement a training system that would try to emphasize strengthening and stretching out pitchers and implementing a starting schedule on 3-days rest. This is the approach that baseball used for over a century--does the sterling success of the likes of Mike MacDougall, Octavio Dotel, Horacio Ramirez and others form an unassailable argument against a 4-pitcher rotation of guys for whom a normal start usually would mean going 7 innings?

I don't think any GM would be willing to risk this. This is the kind of big risk that, if it goes wrong, costs you your job. It's much safer to just follow the stream.

I'm not saying it can't ever work, I'm just saying that I don't see Kenny Williams as a guy who is willing to be the first GM to put his neck on the chopping block.

captain54
09-27-2008, 02:54 AM
The big-gun closer seems like a no-brainer, but the other guys seem to be the really rough part to get right

Starting pitchers are asked to get guys out over the course of 100 pitches...middle relief guys are asked to get guys out over the course of 20 or 30 pitches...it can't be that hard, or too much to ask...

Someone mentioned before the notion of bringing in guys from the farm to cover the middle, then work their way up to the rotation. This is how is used to be done..

that's the core of the Sox problem, I believe, no one in the farm system worth a damn.....But Please, Please, no more ex Royals cast offs....

this has to be a top priority for the organization, at some point...Ozzie was in the post game mentioning that he told Dotel today to pitch well so Ozzie doesn't have to come back out to the mound and get booed...

Pathetic...especially with so much at stake....inexcusable and embarrasing...

Procol Harum
09-27-2008, 03:14 AM
You forgot the all-important "one-out guy," be it the LOOGY or the ROOGY. Managers get fired on such whims that they don't dare vary from orthodoxy, lest they provide a reason to dump them.

Oh yeah--It's a wonder we haven't seen the advent of the 3-2 guy who's only brought in for that one pitch....

chaerulez
09-27-2008, 03:24 AM
It's a risk you need to take to see what you got. Back in August, the future was NOW for the Sox. Like the Yankees did with Jaba, the Cubs this year with Samarja and TB with Price.

Poreda isn't anywhere close in his development as Joba. Joba was able to have decent success as a starter this season, which shows how far along he is. Jeff Samardzija isn't exactly lights out. He's benefited by not giving up any home runs, and for a reliever giving up a couple multi run home runs can really spike their ERA. And he's walked 15 batters in 27 innings. He's been decent, but he's not as good as everyone thinks he is. And Price was the #1 overall pick. The White Sox haven't had a talent like that in their system since Alex Fernandez. There is no reason to rush Poreda if he's simply just not ready.

NLaloosh
09-27-2008, 05:15 AM
I thought Joe Morgan said that this was the greatest bullpen in the history of baseball ?

Seriously, you can laugh if you want but at the time I said that the Sox could use Nick Masset a lot more than Ken Griffey.

IMO, that trade is one of Kenny's worst at a really bad time.

WhiteSox5187
09-27-2008, 05:38 AM
I don't think any GM would be willing to risk this. This is the kind of big risk that, if it goes wrong, costs you your job. It's much safer to just follow the stream.

I'm not saying it can't ever work, I'm just saying that I don't see Kenny Williams as a guy who is willing to be the first GM to put his neck on the chopping block.
Part of it depends on the owner and what the expectations are for your team. If your team is like the Sox, where winning is expected, it's a big risk. But if you're the GM of the Royals or Pirates and haven't won anything in a long long time you might figure "What the hell? They can't get much worse."

kitekrazy
09-27-2008, 08:31 AM
The lack of internal development of young pitchers has led to the woes imo. That's what you need to fill out the pen, as they prepare for bigger roles on a major league team. some move up to key bullpen spots, others into the rotation. Other than Jenks, who have we developed? Thornton.


Why is it the Sox seem to be better at developing guys from other organizations than their own?

kitekrazy
09-27-2008, 08:42 AM
Bullpens are always inconsistent. You can have the same guys produce one year and tank the next.
McDougal, Logan should be out of the whole organization before next season. All the coaching in the world is not going to change them.

jabrch
09-27-2008, 12:25 PM
This bullpen was just fine until Linebrink went down. That had long term impacts that we are still feeling today. Between other guys being overworked and moved out of comfortable roles, and the fact that Linebrink still doesn't look right, To me, I'm less worried about the pen in 09 than I am in who is going to be the 5th starter, who is going to be our 3B, who will play MI, who will play CF, how Carlos' hand is, etc. etc. etc.

A. Cavatica
09-27-2008, 12:27 PM
It's not going to be easy for Kenny to fix this bullpen. Joakim Soria is not available. Exactly which other KC Royals pitchers do you think he should acquire?

jabrch
09-27-2008, 12:27 PM
I thought Joe Morgan said that this was the greatest bullpen in the history of baseball ?

Seriously, you can laugh if you want but at the time I said that the Sox could use Nick Masset a lot more than Ken Griffey.

IMO, that trade is one of Kenny's worst at a really bad time.

Nick had a 4.6 ERA and a 1.7 WHIP. Hitter his .313 off of him.

Bad trade? *****

sunofgold
09-27-2008, 12:31 PM
This bullpen can turn it around this year. Jenks and Thornton have been consistently good the whole season.

Now, Linebrink pitched well his last outing. He might be getting back into pitching shape/rhythm. He we get him back to full strength, then we have an eighth inning guy.

Dotel was outstanding last night. Now he just has to keep doing that. He has the ability to do so. 7th inning guy with Thornton.

We still need somebody else though to step up when one of our starters goes back like last night. Carrasco had done it before, thus he has the best chance to rebound. Maybe Richard can be a decent long reliever as well. I think that one of those two have to step it up.

canOcorn
09-27-2008, 12:38 PM
I thought Joe Morgan said that this was the greatest bullpen in the history of baseball ?

Seriously, you can laugh if you want but at the time I said that the Sox could use Nick Masset a lot more than Ken Griffey.

IMO, that trade is one of Kenny's worst at a really bad time.

I thought it was a good trade at the time.

It's not even one of Kenny's worst trades this year.

Looking back, with hindsight, we never should have made that trade. Masset is much better than the fluff we're running out there and it would have taken a toy away from Ozzie. The downside is that Owens would be starting, so the more I type the more I don't know. Masset vs. our current pile of dung or Ozzie playing the role of Mr. Tinker with the OF.

downstairs
09-27-2008, 12:38 PM
I'll say it again, as I've said in every bullpen thread:

Every team has middle-relief problems. Always, except for fleeting times of luck. Your middle relievers are your worst pitchers. If they were good, they'd be starters somewhere. They are ALWAYS second-rate pitchers.

When they're lights out, they're either overachieving or misplaced (e.g. they should be your 5th starter).

Tell me one team that has had good middle relief over 2-3 years. No one.

Its the nature of the game. You need a good starter to go 6 innings, pray for nothing bad to happen in the 7th and 8th, then on to the closer.

Sox4ever77
09-27-2008, 12:42 PM
Part of it depends on the owner and what the expectations are for your team. If your team is like the Sox, where winning is expected, it's a big risk. But if you're the GM of the Royals or Pirates and haven't won anything in a long long time you might figure "What the hell? They can't get much worse."

But the Sox fanbase has been spoiled since winning the WS. We want to win NOW. Not tomorrow. Not next year.

At some point, for some they are at the point, the core of the WS team will be on the downside of their career. At some point there will be younger players taking over. But with the impatient fanbase, that day will be a long way away.

Martinigirl
09-27-2008, 01:26 PM
You don't think Kenny won't lose his mind if the bullpen doesn't improve? You honestly believe you are more invested in this team than Kenny?

captain54
09-27-2008, 02:45 PM
You don't think Kenny won't lose his mind if the bullpen doesn't improve? You honestly believe you are more invested in this team than Kenny?

Kenny has some form of control as to whether the situation improves. I, as a typical fan, do not. It's like standing on an overpass overlooking an expressway, and watching a 30 car pile up unfold before your very eyes. All you can do is watch in horror as the agony and carnage unfolds.

SOXandILLINI
09-27-2008, 03:40 PM
is there a problem with the bullpen? :tongue:

Frontman
09-27-2008, 04:25 PM
Besides the bullpen, can the Sox finally get an outfielder to replace Rowand? He left us in the 2005 off-season.

NLaloosh
09-28-2008, 07:32 AM
Nick had a 4.6 ERA and a 1.7 WHIP. Hitter his .313 off of him.

Bad trade? *****

Wouldn't that make him about our best relief pitcher ? And, seriously, he's a swingman so it could've really helped down the stretch for him to start a game or two.

Griffey is completely unnecessary. Judging by his decline over the last 3 years, no one should have expected him to play any better than he has. The Anderson and Wise combination is just as effective.

A. Cavatica
09-28-2008, 09:50 AM
The conventional wisdom is that a strong bullpen helps a team overachieve -- to have a better won-loss record than it deserves for the number of runs it scores. In 2005, we had a terrific bullpen, but even more significantly we had strong starters who went deep into games, reducing the load on the bullpen.

We have too many starters who throw 100 pitches over 5 innings.

voodoochile
09-28-2008, 10:20 AM
I think you can blame a lot of it on that as well as Jenks injury. When this bullpen had set roles with Thornton/Dotel in the 7th, Linebrink in the 8th, and Jenks in the 9th it was very good. At that time Logan was also pitching well.

When Jenks got hurt they had to shuffle people out of their roles and Linebrink struggled. When Linebrink got hurt it screwed everything up because you had to shuffle people around again and Dotel started to blow up. Linebrink has never really gotten back to where he was in May. I think it's had a lot to do with the bullpen struggles. He was the glue.

As for Kenny himself, I'm not sure there is much more else he can do to get a solid bullpen, its such a crapshoot. Youngsters, and journeymen formed together one of the best bullpens in Sox history in 2005 and won a title. In 2006 3 of them fell of the face of the Earth. In 2007 he went with young talent and it didn't work out, this year he's gone with established veterans and it hasn't worked out.

It makes you wonder how teams like the Angels do it.

I agree 100% with the analysis of what went wrong and the highlighted part really says it all.

I won't be surprised if the bullpen comes back almost intact next year with the addition of MacDougal it actually maybe gives them one too many arms if we count Carrasco into the mix then there's even more live arms to work with.

Dotel
Linebrink
Jenks
Thornton
MacDougal
Carrasco
Russell/Richard

At one point this year we were touting this bullpen as one of the best we'd ever had, then injuries and overwork took their toll. However how it's fallen so completely apart over the last month is a mystery. It's like they've all completely lost their minds...

captain54
09-28-2008, 12:49 PM
However how it's fallen so completely apart over the last month is a mystery. It's like they've all completely lost their minds...

Its been more than the last month....If you can't be consistent over the course of the year, maybe you're not that good to begin with..

asindc
09-29-2008, 11:23 AM
Angels (3.73 ERA, 7th in MLB)
Rays (3.49, 5th)
Red Sox (3.79, 9th)
Phillies (3.22, 2nd)
Dodgers (3.27, 3rd)

Only 1 potential playoff team is in the bottom half of the league, predictably the New York Mets (22nd in league).

This is a situation where numbers don't tell the whole story. The only guy Boston have confidence in out of their bullpen is Papelbon, with good reason. They don't have a reliable 8th inning guy, and everyone else is strictly hit or miss.

Among the playoff teams, only the Angels, Dodgers, Cubs, and to a lesser extent Phillies have a bullpen that I would have confidence in going through the playoffs. The Rays don't really have a lock-down closer.

palehozenychicty
09-29-2008, 11:58 AM
Besides the bullpen, can the Sox finally get an outfielder to replace Rowand? He left us in the 2005 off-season.

We'll see about that one. As much as people want to clown him and deny his influence, the team hasn't improved since he left. He isn't the only reason why that is, but it's a reason.

kitekrazy
09-29-2008, 12:07 PM
I guess there is a reason why starters are more valued on innings pitched than other stats.

esbrechtel
09-29-2008, 12:09 PM
Bullpens are crapshoots....one year they can be awesome, the next year they can be the worst ever....see Cotts, Neil...

palehozenychicty
09-29-2008, 12:11 PM
Bullpens are crapshoots, in general. But certain teams like the Angels, Rangers, Jays, Mariners et al always put out some quality arms. Who knows?

khan
09-29-2008, 12:41 PM
Unfortunately, the emphasis on pitch counts and the move to 5-pitcher rotations seems to have had a negative effect on starters' durability.

This is the approach that baseball used for over a century

Look, this is no attack on you, but I just get tired of lazy old-timers trying to tell us how the world "should be," rather than these same geezers accepting that the world has changed.

Yeah, it was great for me as a kid in the late '70s and early '80s, watching teams go with a 4-man rotation. But the world has changed. It used to be that a SS and/or 2B were light-hitting, 5' 6", 140# glovemen. Now, guys like Jeter look like 3rd basemen used to look like. Even Alexei Ramirez is a tall guy at 6'3". The opposition that pitchers have to face is stronger than ever before, and that's not including the effects of PEDs.

No longer do pitchers in the AL get 3 free outs by facing a bum of a hitter in the form of the other teams' pitchers.

No longer do pitchers face 2 or 3 players that can't hit in a lineup.

There are far more franchises than ever before, which means that the talent pool for SPs has been diluted somewhat. Many, if not most kids no longer choose baseball as their first love in sport. More and more kids get into the other sports, which means more and more top athletes are playing football, basketball, soccer, or hockey instead of chasing the dream of playing in the bigs. As a result, fewer would-be MLB SPs are running the shotgun in football, or playing the point in basketball, for example.

We could go on and on and on and on about why MLB SP nowadays can't go on 3 days' rest anymore. And YES, I'll agree with you: PART of the reason why SPs can't go on 3 days rest, PART of the reason why MLB managers/GMs don't go with a 4-man rotation is the training.

But the 4-man rotation is as obsolete technology as the 8 track tape. As is the vinyl record. As is the v-8, 350 cubic inch gas-guzzling engine. [By the way, these are all things I love(d), but dropped as times changed.] And it is fools' gold to hope for a return to a 4-man rotation, OR to any of these archaic relics of the past.

Again, the world has changed. We won't have $.50/gallon LEADED gasoline available anytime soon. We won't be watching our 26 inch Zenith console set anytime soon. We won't be enjoying $5 bleacher seats anytime soon. And we won't see 4-man rotations anytime soon.

--does the sterling success of the likes of Mike MacDougall, Octavio Dotel, Horacio Ramirez and others form an unassailable argument against a 4-pitcher rotation of guys for whom a normal start usually would mean going 7 innings?

If anything, the White Sox's SP's ERAs since going with the 4-man rotation is reason enough not to want it anymore. Because the failure of this team's best pitchers is more disappointing than watching MacDougal crap his pants. I expect good things out of Buehrle/Danks/Floyd/Vazquez, while I only HOPE that MacDougal/Logan/Dotel/H. Ramirez don't **** themselves. Too bad Kenny thought it to be a better idea to add yet another slow, plodding DH in Griffey than it would've been to add a 5th starter in say a Paul Byrd-type.

jabrch
09-29-2008, 12:42 PM
Bullpens are crapshoots, in general. But certain teams like the Angels, Rangers, Jays, Mariners et al always put out some quality arms. Who knows?

Sorry - I can't think of great Ranger bullpen arms since John Wetteland. Who am I missing? Seattle has a park that is friendly to pitching. Anaheim has done a nice job developing arms lately - but that's a recent (5ish years) thing. And I can't think of too many great Jays relievers either.

Maybe I am not thinking clear...

Nellie_Fox
09-29-2008, 12:50 PM
I just get tired of lazy old-timers trying to tell us how the world "should be,"I don't understand what's "lazy" about it?

Jurr
09-29-2008, 12:54 PM
Isn't the bullpen (except for the closer) usually a crap shoot anyway?
Cotts and Politte were lights out in '05. They crapped themselves in '06. Cliff isn't even in the league anymore!

If a pitcher was really a standout, he would be a starter. Bullpens are, in my opinion, one of the luckier situations in baseball. They are flawed from the get-go, and you just have to hope that they all fall in line together. That, or you have 2 or 3 guys going good at the same time.

oeo
09-29-2008, 12:56 PM
No, he couldn't have been worse. But he could have been just as bad AND hurt his future development. I suppose we'll never know.

How would it have hurt his development to come up for a month and see what he's got? It's not like we were calling him up in May to start. He would have been called up in late August to pitch out of the bullpen.

Now I don't know if he would have helped, but why not give it a try?

Jurr
09-29-2008, 01:02 PM
How would it have hurt his development to come up for a month and see what he's got? It's not like we were calling him up in May to start. He would have been called up in late August to pitch out of the bullpen.

Now I don't know if he would have helped, but why not give it a try?
Seriously! What's the worst that could happen...he throws a slider past Pierzynski with the go-ahead run on third? A big inning at a crucial time? We've seen the worst that can happen.

This development stuff kills me. Pitchers, no matter what level they are, should be able to hit a mitt with a pitch and get outs. These are men, not infants. Here, kid. Here's the ball. Get that guy out. Period.

khan
09-29-2008, 01:12 PM
I don't understand what's "lazy" about it?

It's a sign of a lazy mind to hope for the world to revert back to how things "used to be." In this instance, a 4 man rotation doesn't work anymore for all of the reasons I listed, and for many, many, many, many more as well. We have neither the time nor the space here to list all of the legitimate and logical reasons for a 4-man rotation's obsolescence(sp?).


Having said that:

The ability to adapt to changing times and changing ideas is ONE sign of an active, alert mind. Being able to see things AS THEY ARE NOW, rather than as they "used to be" enables one to better live in harmony with one's environment and in society as a whole. In other words, Mike Ditka had it right [though not in the words that I'd choose]: "The past is for cowards and losers." It takes courage and an alert mind to change one's view of the world to a current POV from an obsolete POV from which one had previously been comfortable.


So, it's fine if old-timers want to spin a yarn about how it was back in the '40s, '50s, and '60s, but we don't live in those times anymore. And it kind of comes off as screaming at the damn kids to "get off my yard."

soxrme
09-29-2008, 01:23 PM
Why is it the Sox seem to be better at developing guys from other organizations than their own?
Because we are horrible drafting. The Twins have drafted just about the same level as us yet they bring up players. Not only the drafts but our minor league system must just not good coaches, maybe Bell can clean this up.

Jimmy Piersall
09-29-2008, 01:29 PM
It's a sign of a lazy mind to hope for the world to revert back to how things "used to be." In this instance, a 4 man rotation doesn't work anymore for all of the reasons I listed, and for many, many, many, many more as well. We have neither the time nor the space here to list all of the legitimate and logical reasons for a 4-man rotation's obsolescence(sp?).


Having said that:

The ability to adapt to changing times and changing ideas ONE sign of an active, alert mind. Being able to see things AS THEY ARE NOW, rather than as they "used to be" enables one to better live in harmony with one's environment and in society as a whole. In other words, Mike Ditka had it right [though not in the words that I'd choose]: "The past is for cowards and losers." It takes courage and an alert mind to change one's view of the world to a current POV from an obsolete POV from which one had previously been comfortable.


So, it's fine if old-timers want to spin a yarn about how it was back in the '40s, '50s, and '60s, but we don't live in those times anymore. And it kind of comes off as screaming at the damn kids to "get off my yard."

Damn right kid,get off my grass and if you hit anymore balls over
here i'm 'keepin 'em...how'z that grab 'ya ?

russ99
09-29-2008, 01:53 PM
I think we'll be fine with Jenks, a healthy Linebrink and Thornton at the back end next year.

It's the middle inning filler we need to work on. And history has proven a younger player or rookie reliever or two has a vastly greater impact than spending on an older middle reliever.

Logan, Ramirez, Russell and Wassermann aren't the answer now, but next year one of them could be.

I wouldn't mind seeing Dotel back next year as well.

Griffey and Ramirez over a 5th starter hasn't really helped, but there wasn't much else our there.