PDA

View Full Version : Richard's future in the rotation


thomas35forever
03-27-2009, 07:26 PM
There's no beating around it...Richard flat out sucked today. My question is does this reduce his chances of landing in the rotation? If both Contreras and Colon turn in impressive outings next week, I think it earns him a ticket to Charlotte.

Domeshot17
03-27-2009, 07:30 PM
He needs to be in the bullpen. The kid is going to make a damn fine lefty specialist RP. I know no one wants to relegate him to that role, but what role is he going to more effective for us, Middle Relief throwing 75IP of sub 4 era ball (and I say a high number of IP because he'll dual role 2nd lefty in the bullpen and long/emergency relief) or being our 5th SP and getting shelled the 2nd and 3rd time through lineups, probably looking at an ERA around 5.

MarkZ35
03-27-2009, 07:30 PM
I think it depends more on what they see in Colon and Contreras. He certainly didn't help his cause today. That first inning was one of the worst I've seen in a long time.

sox1970
03-27-2009, 07:31 PM
I would still trust Richard over Marquez.

My only beef is that Egbert didn't get more of a chance to start.

DSpivack
03-27-2009, 08:19 PM
I would still trust Richard over Marquez.

My only beef is that Egbert didn't get more of a chance to start.

Why?

sox1970
03-27-2009, 08:26 PM
Why?

Marquez hasn't really done much this spring, especially lately. He didn't have a good season last year either. He's a suspect.

tm1119
03-27-2009, 08:28 PM
I simply dont think he has the stuff to be an effective major league starter. I hope he proves me wrong, but I'm not very optimistic. As stated above though, he could probably make a pretty effective bullpen arm as long as he doesnt have to go through a lineup more than 2 times.

Frater Perdurabo
03-27-2009, 08:48 PM
How do you know he wasn't working on something - like throwing mostly the same pitch - as some kind of training exercise under Don Cooper's specific direction?

Let's not let one spring training outing lead us to premature conclusions.

I agree that if Colon and Contreras are healthy, that they belong in the rotation. But that was the hope anyway. If Colon and Contreras are healthy and pitching well, there's no reason to even want Richard in the rotation.

Much ado about nothing on March 27.

SOXSINCE'70
03-27-2009, 09:09 PM
How do you know he wasn't working on something - like throwing mostly the same pitch - as some kind of training exercise under Don Cooper's specific direction?

Let's not let one spring training outing lead us to premature conclusions.


Not true,Frater.On the North (Dark) Side,apparently you win the World Series in March,I guess.:D::D:

Frater Perdurabo
03-27-2009, 09:13 PM
Not true,Frater.On the North (Dark) Side,apparently you win the World Series in March,I guess.:D::D:

I'm really pissed that the Sox continue not to win the all-important attendance trophy. That's the real prize.

JB98
03-27-2009, 09:22 PM
Richard is still our backup option if either Contreras or Colon can't make the grade health-wise. I think Richard is best suited to the swing role -- spot starting, long relief, occasional use as a LOOGY.

That was my opinion before the bad outing today. Today changed nothing.

WhiteSox5187
03-27-2009, 09:28 PM
He's had a couple of bad starts or outtings now, hasn't he? Either way, I'm not too worried about it and I think he will be very effective out of the bullpen. I don't think he'll be too effective in the rotation.

SOXSINCE'70
03-27-2009, 09:40 PM
I'm really pissed that the Sox continue not to win the all-important attendance trophy. That's the real prize.

It is, if you listen to clowns like Len "Kermit The Frog" Kasper.:tongue:

Lip Man 1
03-27-2009, 10:32 PM
He needs to be in Charlotte not in the rotation or on the staff.

Lip

JB98
03-27-2009, 11:29 PM
He needs to be in Charlotte not in the rotation or on the staff.

Lip

Why? He pitched well in the playoffs last year, and he was having a good spring until today.

Would you rather have Mike MacDougal on this roster again? Lance Broadway?

Taliesinrk
03-27-2009, 11:55 PM
Why? He pitched well in the playoffs last year, and he was having a good spring until today.

Would you rather have Mike MacDougal on this roster again? Lance Broadway?

I agree with this... what's so wrong with Richard, Lip?

Lip Man 1
03-28-2009, 12:04 AM
His ERA was over 5 close to 6 last season and he's gotten lit up his last two starts if memory serves this spring.

Look at the body of work (or non work) and stop focusing on the fact that he pitched well in a post season game.

This is Boone Logan revisited. (and we know how well Boone turned out didn't we?)

Lip

Lip Man 1
03-28-2009, 12:05 AM
JB:

Actually it looks like Williams makes the roster as the 2nd left hander out of the pen. If (granted it's a big if) Contreras and Colon are in the rotation Richard doesn't head north with the club.

Lip

oeo
03-28-2009, 12:08 AM
I agree with this... what's so wrong with Richard, Lip?

Lip doesn't like to give young guys a shot until after they've proven themselves. Weird process and don't ask me how he ever plans on putting young talent in there, but...:dunno:

Lip Man 1
03-28-2009, 12:29 AM
OEO:

Not true, completely false.

The Sox have done fairly well in the past 15 years at plugging young everyday players into the lineup going back to the days of Mags and Lee....pitching?

That's a horse of a different color isn't it? Or do I need to start bringing up the names of guys like Bryan Ward, Brian Keyser, Felix Diaz etc.

Richard is another Logan.

The Sox have been atrocious at developing good young pitching. The last time they had any real sustained success with multiple guys you have to go back to the days of McDowell, Fernandez, Bere etc.

Lip

JB98
03-28-2009, 01:20 AM
JB:

Actually it looks like Williams makes the roster as the 2nd left hander out of the pen. If (granted it's a big if) Contreras and Colon are in the rotation Richard doesn't head north with the club.

Lip

I disagree. I think Richard is headed north no matter what, even if Williams makes the club. Ozzie will carry seven relievers. Jenks, Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel and Carrasco are locks. If Williams makes the team, there's still room for Richard as the seventh guy. I'd definitely take Richard over Marquez, MacDougal, Broadway or any of the others. I don't think Richard is on the bubble at all.

Further, I'm not sold on Williams. This guy is a journeyman, and that's putting it kindly. If we're looking at overall "body of work," I have plenty of evidence that Williams stinks. Sure, he's had a good spring. Maybe he's a late bloomer. I don't know. But I don't see why Williams would be looked at as any more promising than Richard.

I don't see any comparison between Richard and Logan at all, other than they are both left-handed. I can't respond to that argument until you tell me how the two are similar. And FWIW, Lip, I've always agreed with you about Logan. I never liked the guy. But I don't have the same feelings about Richard.

oeo
03-28-2009, 01:33 AM
OEO:

Not true, completely false.

The Sox have done fairly well in the past 15 years at plugging young everyday players into the lineup going back to the days of Mags and Lee....pitching?

That's a horse of a different color isn't it? Or do I need to start bringing up the names of guys like Bryan Ward, Brian Keyser, Felix Diaz etc.

Richard is another Logan.

The Sox have been atrocious at developing good young pitching. The last time they had any real sustained success with multiple guys you have to go back to the days of McDowell, Fernandez, Bere etc.

Lip

This is not an excuse for refusing to give Richard a shot. Richard is punished because of past Sox pitchers? And enough with the 'Richard is another Logan' crap. Not only can both still be solid pitchers at the big league level, the statement makes no sense. The only similarity between the two is that they're both left-handed.

sullythered
03-28-2009, 02:11 AM
Richard finished pretty strong last year, and he looks like he's got good stuff and a pretty good makeup. He just didn't have it today. It happens. I think he's got a bright future, and I wouldn't mind seeing him in the rotation if Jose or Bartolo aren't healthy.

whitesox901
03-28-2009, 02:58 AM
his era was over 5 close to 6 last season and he's gotten lit up his last two starts if memory serves this spring.

Look at the body of work (or non work) and stop focusing on the fact that he pitched well in a post season game.

This is boone logan revisited. (and we know how well boone turned out didn't we?)

lip

+1

Tragg
03-28-2009, 09:11 AM
If you actually look at Richard's body of work, you'll see that in some of those starts, he pitched a productive few innings and THEN blew up. I'll take him.

And there's no way someone can mention "body of work" next to "Williams makes this roster". He's another organizational minor leaguer - unfortunately, he's not alone in that status on this roster the last couple of years. But I guess it's possible to finally put it together at 34.....but I'll take Richard.

soxinem1
03-28-2009, 09:46 AM
It seems to me Richard has the established trend of starting off a game well, then loses it as he goes further. Unless he learns how to pace himself, his future may be in the bullpen.

As for him getting rocked the other day, well, hey, it does happen. All of the pitchers have had a few bad appearances, but I didn't hear anyone wanting to cut Floyd, Colon, Danks or Contreras over a bad game.

As far as Williams making the team, well, if he does and Richard begins in AAA, that would mean they want him to develop as a starter and not get inconsistent work as a mop up guy like Masset did last year. With Williams track record, if he turns out like 2000's Kelly Wunsch, cool. Somehow, I doubt it though.

Taliesinrk
03-28-2009, 10:22 AM
His ERA was over 5 close to 6 last season and he's gotten lit up his last two starts if memory serves this spring.

Look at the body of work (or non work) and stop focusing on the fact that he pitched well in a post season game.

This is Boone Logan revisited. (and we know how well Boone turned out didn't we?)

Lip

I'm not even really taking into account the post-season success... perhaps others are, but not I (plus if I were, wouldn't that make me advocate he be used as a RP?). My argument is mostly just based upon what I saw out of him last year. You throw these stats out here as if they're over a full season of work. He only started like 8 games max and his schedule was not consistent. He needs more time before we pass judgment.

People can improve after their first year in the bigs... look at Danks:

07 - 6-13, 139 IP, 5.50 ERA, 1.54 WHIP
08 - 12-9, 195 IP, 3.32 ERA, 1.226 WHIP

thedudeabides
03-28-2009, 10:57 AM
OEO:

Not true, completely false.

The Sox have done fairly well in the past 15 years at plugging young everyday players into the lineup going back to the days of Mags and Lee....pitching?

That's a horse of a different color isn't it? Or do I need to start bringing up the names of guys like Bryan Ward, Brian Keyser, Felix Diaz etc.

Richard is another Logan.

The Sox have been atrocious at developing good young pitching. The last time they had any real sustained success with multiple guys you have to go back to the days of McDowell, Fernandez, Bere etc.

Lip

Buerhle, Danks, Floyd, and Jenks would disagree with you.

Taliesinrk
03-28-2009, 11:10 AM
Buerhle, Danks, Floyd, and Jenks would disagree with you.

Don't remember abt. Buerhle, but I'm sure his argument (justifiably so) will be that other organizations developed those players.. the Sox did not.

DeuceUnit
03-28-2009, 12:05 PM
Buerhle, Danks, Floyd, and Jenks would disagree with you.

Buerhle was the only one to actually come up in the organization. The other 3 were pretty much good to go. Cooper is a great pitching coach but our development in the minor league blows.

JB98
03-28-2009, 12:14 PM
I'm not even really taking into account the post-season success... perhaps others are, but not I (plus if I were, wouldn't that make me advocate he be used as a RP?). My argument is mostly just based upon what I saw out of him last year. You throw these stats out here as if they're over a full season of work. He only started like 8 games max and his schedule was not consistent. He needs more time before we pass judgment.

People can improve after their first year in the bigs... look at Danks:

07 - 6-13, 139 IP, 5.50 ERA, 1.54 WHIP
08 - 12-9, 195 IP, 3.32 ERA, 1.226 WHIP

I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare Richard to Danks -- I don't think Richard has the talent that Danks has. But I still think Richard can be an effective big-league pitcher, especially in the swing role. He can give us a spot start, pitch in long and middle relief and occasionally be used as a LOOGY.

If he improves, maybe he's a regular in the 2010 rotation. He still has some upside to him.

I just can't fathom why Randy Williams would be considered a better bet to pitch well than Clayton Richard.

Lip Man 1
03-28-2009, 12:41 PM
Dude:

Someone beat me to the punch. Three of the four pitchers you cite were drafted by and came up with other organizations.

OEO:

I forgot you were a big Logan fan. You still think he's going to be the "second coming..." LOL. Logan's downfall was he was mentally weak, even Ozzie called him out on it remember? I think Richard is the same way. History will show which one of us is correct on both pitchers. So far the numbers for both in the major leagues are backing my contention.

---------------------

Regarding Clayton making the roster, well for what it's worth Cowley suggests today that he may not, if (and again that's a big if...) both Colon and Contreras make the rotation.)

Lip

Frater Perdurabo
03-28-2009, 12:42 PM
I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare Richard to Danks -- I don't think Richard has the talent that Danks has. But I still think Richard can be an effective big-league pitcher, especially in the swing role. He can give us a spot start, pitch in long and middle relief and occasionally be used as a LOOGY.

If he improves, maybe he's a regular in the 2010 rotation. He still has some upside to him.

I just can't fathom why Randy Williams would be considered a better bet to pitch well than Clayton Richard.

I agree with this. I too think Richard is destined for a #5 starter/long man/swing man role.

Frater Perdurabo
03-28-2009, 12:45 PM
Dude:

Someone beat me to the punch. Three of the four pitchers you cite were drafted by and came up with other organizations.

OEO:

I forgot you were a big Logan fan. You still think he's going to be the "second coming..." LOL. Logan's downfall was he was mentally weak, even Ozzie called him out on it remember? I think Richard is the same way. History will show which one of us is correct on both pitchers. So far the numbers for both in the major leagues are backing my contention.

---------------------

Regarding Clayton making the roster, well for what it's worth Cowley suggests today that he may not, if (and again that's a big if...) both Colon and Contreras make the rotation.)

Lip

Lip, I think it is very premature to say that Richard will be another Logan. Logan never cracked the rotation. He had some success in the LOOGY role, but also crapped the bed. Richard has had some success as a starter. Maybe you will be proven right in the long run, but we'll never know unless he has an opportunity to prove you right or wrong. Until then, I'm suspending judgment until comprehension is complete.

guillen4life13
03-28-2009, 12:55 PM
Lip, I think it is very premature to say that Richard will be another Logan. Logan never cracked the rotation. He had some success in the LOOGY role, but also crapped the bed. Richard has had some success as a starter. Maybe you will be proven right in the long run, but we'll never know unless he has an opportunity to prove you right or wrong. Until then, I'm suspending judgment until comprehension is complete.

FWIW, as to Richard's pressure handling abilities, I think that playing as a quarterback for Michigan, even as a number 2, would have helped him out with dealing with pressure.

I think Boone will be alright and when he's 26 or 27 years old he will become a reliable big league reliever.

I still haven't passed judgement on Boone. He's still very young and it's apparent that he has the physical stuff to be a dominant pitcher in the big leagues. The mental aspect can be rebuilt. Ask Gavin Floyd.

Frater Perdurabo
03-28-2009, 01:11 PM
FWIW, as to Richard's pressure handling abilities, I think that playing as a quarterback for Michigan, even as a number 2, would have helped him out with dealing with pressure.

I think Boone will be alright and when he's 26 or 27 years old he will become a reliable big league reliever.

I still haven't passed judgement on Boone. He's still very young and it's apparent that he has the physical stuff to be a dominant pitcher in the big leagues. The mental aspect can be rebuilt. Ask Gavin Floyd.

Oh, I agree that overall Logan has an opportunity to redeem himself and have a decent MLB career in the bullpen. But he wore out his welcome with the Sox and needs that change of scenery.

Taliesinrk
03-28-2009, 04:22 PM
I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare Richard to Danks -- I don't think Richard has the talent that Danks has. But I still think Richard can be an effective big-league pitcher, especially in the swing role. He can give us a spot start, pitch in long and middle relief and occasionally be used as a LOOGY.

If he improves, maybe he's a regular in the 2010 rotation. He still has some upside to him.

I just can't fathom why Randy Williams would be considered a better bet to pitch well than Clayton Richard.

I wasn't trying to compare the two. The use of Danks' stats were merely a point to how players should be judged only after being given a reasonable amount of time. Danks' numbers weren't the best after his rookie season. I'm not looking for Richard to put up 200IP and a 3.3 ERA next season... I was just saying that only time will tell how Richard performs, but he's far from doomed.

SoxSpeed22
03-28-2009, 04:35 PM
Danks and Logan are probably the two extremes for Richard. I think that he's shown enough to get a roster spot. Until he learns how to pitch to right-handers, I would consider him as a bullpen/ LOOGY guy. He doesn't have electric stuff, but at least he's shown more than Logan has. If he can contribute as a spot-starter and long reliever, that should be enough for this year. At the same time, I expect him to improve.

Lip Man 1
03-28-2009, 05:34 PM
Frater:

You do have a valid point but as I have asked in the past, will someone please set for me a guideline on how much time a player gets to prove himself?

ESPECIALLY if you are "contending".

What are we talking about here? Five hundred at bats? Two hundred innings pitched? what?

And how many games may be thrown away in the finding out process? Games that you can't get back...

See my point? It's not quite as easy as you make it sound and I say that with all due respect.

Lip

thedudeabides
03-28-2009, 06:13 PM
Buerhle was the only one to actually come up in the organization. The other 3 were pretty much good to go. Cooper is a great pitching coach but our development in the minor league blows.

I'm well aware of the other pitchers backgrounds, and Floyd and Jenks were far from finished products. Danks also added a cutter here, which has been a big part of his success.

My point being, and I'm not sure why so many people ignore it, that the most important part in developing a young pitcher, is their development at the big league level. It's by far the most difficult jump, and the Sox have been very good at this lately. So, I would say to write off Richard as another Boone Logan, as some are, is very premature.

Frater Perdurabo
03-28-2009, 06:29 PM
Frater:

You do have a valid point but as I have asked in the past, will someone please set for me a guideline on how much time a player gets to prove himself?

I think it completely depends on the player.

If he's a gifted defender at an important defensive position and solid baserunner who has hit at all levels of college and minor league ball, and has only heretofore struggled with hitting at the MLB level, I'm inclined to give him 1,000 MLB plate appearances to show he can hit MLB pitching before casting him aside.

If he's slugging 1B/DH type, I might only wait 500 ABs.

If he's a pitcher with great stuff but has not yet put everything together, I give him plenty of time. (Patience with Gavin Floyd has paid off.)

If he's a middling, crafty pitcher who throws junk and has just gotten by through the minors, I might not give him much rope at the MLB level. (That's why Dewon Day shouldn't get much rope.)

Mark Buehrle succeeded almost immediately upon making the majors. He had 19 wins in his first MLB season (2001). Not everyone has that much success that soon.

I want to see more from Richard before I'm willing to cast him aside. I don't know exactly how much. I do know that if Colon and Contreras are healthy and pitching well, Richard belongs in Charlotte or the pen.

Daver
03-28-2009, 06:54 PM
Frater:

You do have a valid point but as I have asked in the past, will someone please set for me a guideline on how much time a player gets to prove himself?

ESPECIALLY if you are "contending".

What are we talking about here? Five hundred at bats? Two hundred innings pitched? what?

And how many games may be thrown away in the finding out process? Games that you can't get back...

See my point? It's not quite as easy as you make it sound and I say that with all due respect.

Lip

You can't arbitrarily put a number on it, people that do crack me up.

In the case of a hitter, are you trading offense for defense? Does he have a correctable flaw in his swing that would be diffucult to work out against minor league pitching? Is his problem purely timing, and therefore best to work out against MLB pitching?

Pitchers are almost always better off working out their problems in the minors, unless their problem is the fact that they can't get MLB quality hitters out, and generally if that is the case the answer is to find them a new career.

WhiteSox5187
03-28-2009, 07:05 PM
I think it completely depends on the player.

If he's a gifted defender at an important defensive position and solid baserunner who has hit at all levels of college and minor league ball, and has only heretofore struggled with hitting at the MLB level, I'm inclined to give him 1,000 MLB plate appearances to show he can hit MLB pitching before casting him aside.

If he's slugging 1B/DH type, I might only wait 500 ABs.

If he's a pitcher with great stuff but has not yet put everything together, I give him plenty of time. (Patience with Gavin Floyd has paid off.)

If he's a middling, crafty pitcher who throws junk and has just gotten by through the minors, I might not give him much rope at the MLB level. (That's why Dewon Day shouldn't get much rope.)

Mark Buehrle succeeded almost immediately upon making the majors. He had 19 wins in his first MLB season (2001). Not everyone has that much success that soon.

I want to see more from Richard before I'm willing to cast him aside. I don't know exactly how much. I do know that if Colon and Contreras are healthy and pitching well, Richard belongs in Charlotte or the pen.
I think it was in 2002 that he had 19 wins. He woulda won 20 if he weren't on a piss poor team that year.

As to the question at hand, it's an interesting question and as Daver said, there isn't really a set number. Joe Crede was lost at the plate but in the second half of '05 he seemed to have finally had it all figured out (until he hurt his back). If you're a contending team, it is hard to have patience with a guy, but if you're a team like Pittsburgh and you have a kid who has all the tools to be a big league star, why not give him 1000 ABs to see if he can figure it out? It takes some guys awhile to adjust, and sometimes they wind up having great careers.

Frater Perdurabo
03-28-2009, 07:19 PM
I think it was in 2002 that he had 19 wins. He woulda won 20 if he weren't on a piss poor team that year.

As to the question at hand, it's an interesting question and as Daver said, there isn't really a set number. Joe Crede was lost at the plate but in the second half of '05 he seemed to have finally had it all figured out (until he hurt his back). If you're a contending team, it is hard to have patience with a guy, but if you're a team like Pittsburgh and you have a kid who has all the tools to be a big league star, why not give him 1000 ABs to see if he can figure it out? It takes some guys awhile to adjust, and sometimes they wind up having great careers.

You're right; his 19-win season was in 2002. He still had a great season in 2001 with 16 wins.

WhiteSox5187
03-29-2009, 02:14 AM
You're right; his 19-win season was in 2002. He still had a great season in 2001 with 16 wins.

He's had a flat out great career. I still think if he were on a better team in '07 he could have won at least 15, maybe even 20. But thank God he's with us! THIS year he'll win 20!

oeo
03-29-2009, 02:54 AM
I forgot you were a big Logan fan. You still think he's going to be the "second coming..." LOL. Logan's downfall was he was mentally weak, even Ozzie called him out on it remember? I think Richard is the same way. History will show which one of us is correct on both pitchers.

Yeah, I said he was the second coming. At 24 with a very good arm, I think he'll be fine. His weakness, if he had one, was inconsistency, which I would attribute to jumping up straight from A. Ozzie never called him out on mental weakness, he called him out for sucking ass.

Richard has shown so far that not much gets to him, so I don't know where you're pulling that crap from.

So far the numbers for both in the major leagues are backing my contention.:lol: You judge a young player off of a few months, of course the numbers are going to 'back you up.' Apparently, in your world, there's no such thing as improvement. You will see a guy throw a few innings, say he sucks, and that's that. Sounds logical...

Frater Perdurabo
03-29-2009, 06:54 AM
In the late 60s, the saying was "Don't trust anyone over thirty."

Lip's saying is, "Don't trust anyone under thirty." :tongue:

Lip Man 1
03-29-2009, 11:02 AM
OEO:

A reporter who works for the Idaho State Journal is a big Braves fan and I remember what he told me the day the Sox shipped off Vazquez and Logan to that organization.

"Thanks, he said. The Braves now have the two biggest head cases in major league baseball..."

Keep on chasing that dream OEO, I'm sure Boone appreciates your support (while his ERA continues to skyrocket...)

:D:

Lip

Lip Man 1
03-29-2009, 11:04 AM
OEO:

Also you are dead wrong on Ozzie's comment. The exact quote was "I need men on this team..." This after Logan blew up again in a game and was booed off the field.

It was at that moment that Chris Rongey and others said Logan's days were numbered. In fact re-read Chris' interview with White Sox Interactive.

Lip

palehozenychicty
03-29-2009, 07:30 PM
Using a reporter's words to back up your theory on a player's potential, regardless of his limited track record? Brilliant!

Lip Man 1
03-30-2009, 12:20 PM
Pale Hose:

The point is Logan's reputation as mentally weak is well known.

----------------------------------

Looks like Richard has made the team. We'll see what happens with this.

Lip

EndemicSox
04-02-2009, 12:53 PM
Nothing about Richard(stats/eyes) shouts MLB starter. He is probably a MR, at best, at the MLB level. Just my opinion...

soxinem1
04-02-2009, 12:56 PM
Nothing about Richard(stats/eyes) shouts MLB starter. He is probably a MR, at best, at the MLB level. Just my opinion...

He just seems a little more confident in the pen. Not just in the playoffs, but during the regular season last year as well.

But as several note, he is just a pup. Let's see how he does now that everyone knows who he is, and how he adjusts.

cws05champ
04-02-2009, 01:18 PM
Nothing about Richard(stats/eyes) shouts MLB starter. He is probably a MR, at best, at the MLB level. Just my opinion...
Which stats are you talking about? His 6 ERA from a small sample size in a swing role last year or his minor league stats over the last few years?

I think his minor league stats show everything you are looking for in adjustments and improvements after moving up several levels:

2006
Kanny(A) 3.76 ERA, 1.52 WHIP
W/S (A+) 4.56 ERA, 1.48 WHIP (4 starts)
2007
W/S (A+) 3.63 ERA, 1.35 WHIP
2008
BIR (AA) 2.47 ERA, 0.98 WHIP
CHA (AAA) 2.45 ERA, 0.84 WHIP

> His BB/9 has gone down, his K/9 has gone up every year

I think if given the chance Richard could give us Danks #'s from 2007...around 5 ERA with some rookie inconsistency start to start. If he learned to throw a cutter and improved his change you never know, he could be a decent mid rotation starter in a year or so.

soxinem1
04-02-2009, 01:43 PM
Which stats are you talking about? His 6 ERA from a small sample size in a swing role last year or his minor league stats over the last few years?

I think his minor league stats show everything you are looking for in adjustments and improvements after moving up several levels:

2006
Kanny(A) 3.76 ERA, 1.52 WHIP
W/S (A+) 4.56 ERA, 1.48 WHIP (4 starts)
2007
W/S (A+) 3.63 ERA, 1.35 WHIP
2008
BIR (AA) 2.47 ERA, 0.98 WHIP
CHA (AAA) 2.45 ERA, 0.84 WHIP

> His BB/9 has gone down, his K/9 has gone up every year

I think if given the chance Richard could give us Danks #'s from 2007...around 5 ERA with some rookie inconsistency start to start. If he learned to throw a cutter and improved his change you never know, he could be a decent mid rotation starter in a year or so.

Good points. I think Danks is much more refined mechanically, but it is a valid argument.

Like Danks and Floyd, maybe getting knocked around a bit will assist in the development of the pitcher. We shall see.

jabrch
04-02-2009, 06:17 PM
I'm glad we don't have to start Clayton in the rotation. But if we did, at least I feel like he CAN pitch at this level. He may not be ready (and he may never get there) to start every 5th day, but at least he has shown us he COULD be effective.

Lip Man 1
04-03-2009, 11:45 AM
Jab:

True but unfortunately you can say that about a lot of former Sox pitchers....Arnie Munoz and Danny Wright come to mind for example.

Lip

russ99
04-03-2009, 12:01 PM
Marquez hasn't really done much this spring, especially lately. He didn't have a good season last year either. He's a suspect.

Marquez was in AA last year, so let's give him some time, and if he can work in that sinker of his for strikes, he'll do great at the Cell.

Richard really hasn't shown me much more this spring than he showed last season, which is stopgap at best. I don't see where this guy projects to much more than a 5th starter. And, yes I've seen his minor league numbers, but he's never really been considered a prospect until this season either. Broadway has a higher ceiling, and that's not saying much either.

thedudeabides
04-03-2009, 12:07 PM
Jab:

True but unfortunately you can say that about a lot of former Sox pitchers....Arnie Munoz and Danny Wright come to mind for example.

Lip

Those guys have nothing to do with Clayton Richard. He flew threw the minors and was probably rushed a bit, but I love his makeup and the numbers are there for him. I think the bullpen is the best spot for him, for now. Too many around here give up on prospects too fast. Young pitchers need time to develop and I like the potential Richard has.

doublem23
04-03-2009, 12:25 PM
Those guys have nothing to do with Clayton Richard. He flew threw the minors and was probably rushed a bit, but I love his makeup and the numbers are there for him. I think the bullpen is the best spot for him, for now. Too many around here give up on prospects too fast. Young pitchers need time to develop and I like the potential Richard has.

Even if he doesn't pan out as a starter (which, I admit, I doubt he will), I think he still has the stuff to be an effective lefty reliever, and that's nothing to scoff at. Yes, starters are more valuable, but also think it would be a shame if they ruined Richard's career trying to force him to be something he's not.

sox1970
04-03-2009, 12:28 PM
Marquez was in AA last year, so let's give him some time, and if he can work in that sinker of his for strikes, he'll do great at the Cell.

Richard really hasn't shown me much more this spring than he showed last season, which is stopgap at best. I don't see where this guy projects to much more than a 5th starter. And, yes I've seen his minor league numbers, but he's never really been considered a prospect until this season either. Broadway has a higher ceiling, and that's not saying much either.

Marquez had 14 starts at AAA. 6-7, with a 4.69 ERA. 24 BB and 33 K in 81 innings.

Also gave up 12 homers. Not good for a so-called ground ball pitcher.

I'm not saying he has no chance to succeed in the big leagues, but he's not ready. I hope he gets 27 starts at Charlotte this year, and proves he has the stuff to come up and win next year.

Taliesinrk
04-03-2009, 12:30 PM
those guys have nothing to do with clayton richard. He flew threw the minors and was probably rushed a bit, but i love his makeup and the numbers are there for him. I think the bullpen is the best spot for him, for now. Too many around here give up on prospects too fast. Young pitchers need time to develop and i like the potential richard has.

+1

jabrch
04-03-2009, 01:51 PM
Jab:

True but unfortunately you can say that about a lot of former Sox pitchers....Arnie Munoz and Danny Wright come to mind for example.

Lip

That's true - but we are not the only franchise who can make this claim. And you can't say that Richard = Munoz. That's unfair to Richard, and it very well may end up untrue. (it may end up true also - but you can't just mention one and tie the other two him just because they both are Sox pitching prospects.