PDA

View Full Version : Suppan


gogosoxgogo
01-22-2003, 07:19 PM
What makes this guy so desirable for certain people on here? I'd much rather go with Rauch. Yes, Rauch hasn't proven anythning on the major league level, but hell, neither has Suppan. His stats from last year:

9-16 5.32ERA 33G 33GS 3CG 1SHO 208IP 229H 134R 123ER 32HR 7HBP 68BB 109K

His career stats aren't any better, either. The W/L record I can forgive, he pitched for KC. His ERA is unbelievably high. He gives up more hits than innings pitched and doesn't strike out a ton of hitters. What is the fascination with this guy?

DirtySouthsider
01-22-2003, 08:37 PM
THANK YOU.......I never did understand all the Suppan talk either??
He would add nothing to the rotation.

michigan84
01-23-2003, 12:16 AM
Suppan was pretty bad last year, but he had an okay ERA the year before. I think he would be an okay short term pick up, but the fact that this guy was released by KC who has no pitching speaks volumes!

Lip Man 1
01-23-2003, 12:22 AM
Suppan has been with one of the worst organizations in baseball yet STILL for the past four years he has thrown 200+ innings.

That takes a tremendous load off your bullpen when a "back end" of the rotation type guy can do that. His ERA has also not been obscene either.

Remember what Jack McDowell told me in his interview, "I'd much rather have an underworked bullpen then an overworked one."

Somehow I have a feeling if Rauch makes 20 starts this year the pen is going to see a LOT of time.

Lip

jeremyb1
01-23-2003, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Somehow I have a feeling if Rauch makes 20 starts this year the pen is going to see a LOT of time.

outside of having unfounded doubts about rauch being able to keep his era around five at the most, i don't see why you'd believe rauch is any less capable of throwing 200 innings than suppan. its not like he has a terrible hard time being efficient with his pitches or anything.

hold2dibber
01-23-2003, 08:43 AM
I'd rather have a good pitcher than an innings eater. I agree that Jeff Suppan would be a pretty good 5th starter. He eats up innings and isn't horrible. But I think Rauch could be a great 5th starter (and possibly a great 2nd or 3rd starter). He has MUCH more upside potential than Suppan. And in light of the fact that the Sox have a lot of bullpen depth, I'm willing to take a chance on Rauch in the 5th spot, particularly when we have guys in the 1-4 spots (and especially in the 1 & 2 spots) who have proven they can eat innings.

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Suppan has been with one of the worst organizations in baseball yet STILL for the past four years he has thrown 200+ innings.

That takes a tremendous load off your bullpen when a "back end" of the rotation type guy can do that. His ERA has also not been obscene either.

Remember what Jack McDowell told me in his interview, "I'd much rather have an underworked bullpen then an overworked one."

Somehow I have a feeling if Rauch makes 20 starts this year the pen is going to see a LOT of time.

Lip

Oh come on! I hate this argument. So if Jim Parque threw 200 innings last year, you would want him? Please! I would rather have the best damn pitcher possible starting for us, and I think Rauch is the way to go. Yes, Rauch probably won't throw 200 innings, but we have 4 guys ahead of him in the rotation who will throw over 200, or very close to it. Our bullpen will not be overworked, trust me. We have one of the best bullpens in the majors, so I'm not worried about how long one of our starters stays in the game.

34 Inch Stick
01-23-2003, 09:52 AM
With Colon and Buhrle starting, there are going to be a lot of games that he bullpen never even gets up to throw. Unless Jerry continues to pull pitchers early, I expect the number of relief innings to decrease dramatically this year. Adding to this both Garland and Wright pitched many innings last year. Let Rauch develop. If he has an off night, an underworked bullpen can come in for innings 5-9.

Lip Man 1
01-23-2003, 11:02 AM
Just wondering about a few things.

1. The White Sox in the minds of a lot of fans in the past ten days have suddenly become real "contenders" to win the division and get into the playoffs. Yet these same folks are willing to trust 20% of the starting rotation THIS YEAR, to a pitcher who has appeared in what ten games in the bigs? and who had arm surgery? Also keep in mind that 40% of the rest of the rotation has less then three full seasons in the bigs!

2. These same fans keep talking about his "potential" (as if Sox fans haven't heard THAT word a lot since 1997?) yet also want to win NOW. Somehow that mix seems odd to me, you can't have it both ways.

3. Some of the fans have been stating that they also want the Sox to be able to contend every year. (A reasonable assumption for a team in the 3rd largest market in the U.S.) So I'm wondering, what exactly is WRONG with the idea of the club's top pitching prospects spending three or four years in the high minors actually LEARING how to pitch? Why the rush to promote these guys? Doesn't it make sense to think that by actually learing what to do and how to do it, that this will only INCREASE the Sox chances for consistently "contending?" It's not like keeping Rauch or whomever at Triple A for two or three years is going to make him a free agent any sooner is it?

I'm speaking tonight at 6PM (Chicago time) with a former Sox All Star pitcher for the February Q & A. IN FOUR YEARS this guy threw a TOTAL of 21 innings with the Sox! Every year he went back down to the minors. When he finally was deemed ready for the majors, he exploded and had a stunningly good rookie season. My question is, what EXACTLY is wrong with that philosophy? (and it worked for others of his ilk.)

Lip

pudge
01-23-2003, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
Oh come on! I hate this argument. So if Jim Parque threw 200 innings last year, you would want him? Please! I would rather have the best damn pitcher possible starting for us, and I think Rauch is the way to go. Yes, Rauch probably won't throw 200 innings, but we have 4 guys ahead of him in the rotation who will throw over 200, or very close to it. Our bullpen will not be overworked, trust me. We have one of the best bullpens in the majors, so I'm not worried about how long one of our starters stays in the game.

Lip, you're not going to convince these young bucks what it's really all about. They look at stats, and they buy into the Jon Rauch hype, and when Rauch goes 5-10, like JACK MCDOWELL did in his first full season (followed by another FULL season in the minors) then we can look back and chuckle (and cry).

Everyone is so worried about Rauch's development. Hell, McDowell spent a full season in the minors in '89 before coming up and being a true MLB pitcher in '90.

Is Suppan the answer? Not necessarily - but the fact that everyone is eager to plug Rauch in there is unsettling. It shows me that people just don't get it - when you get a guy like Colon (for possibly one season) you should stock the rotation with as many decent veterans as you can. To have Suppan in the #5 spot would be great (although even better would be Rogers), and if he busts, you move him to the pen and give Rauch his chance to shine.

Does anyone remember Tim Belcher - an underwhelming veteran - coming in and saving Jason Bere's ass in the '93 play-off game? You need these guys when it counts.

On the flipside, people will argue that we can go get a veteran late in the season if Rauch flops. Why give up something later when you can sign someone now?

Here's to hoping Rauch goes 15-5 this season!

Huisj
01-23-2003, 12:12 PM
Todd Ritchie was an "innings eater" too. Heck, I could be an innings eater--let me pitch 200 innings! My ERA would be 26.94, but at least the bullpen would be rested the rest of the week when the good pitchers were pitching deep into games.

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Just wondering about a few things.

1. The White Sox in the minds of a lot of fans in the past ten days have suddenly become real "contenders" to win the division and get into the playoffs. Yet these same folks are willing to trust 20% of the starting rotation THIS YEAR, to a pitcher who has appeared in what ten games in the bigs? and who had arm surgery? Also keep in mind that 40% of the rest of the rotation has less then three full seasons in the bigs!
Suppan would also lose 3/4 of those games out of 20% of the rotation! He's not a good pitcher! I have no problem with bringing in a veteran pitcher for the 5 role, that's not my complaint. My problem is that why should we go after someone just because he is an innings eater?

2. These same fans keep talking about his "potential" (as if Sox fans haven't heard THAT word a lot since 1997?) yet also want to win NOW. Somehow that mix seems odd to me, you can't have it both ways.
You have to bring up rookies sometime Lip. May as well get them the experience they're going to need.

3. Some of the fans have been stating that they also want the Sox to be able to contend every year. (A reasonable assumption for a team in the 3rd largest market in the U.S.) So I'm wondering, what exactly is WRONG with the idea of the club's top pitching prospects spending three or four years in the high minors actually LEARING how to pitch? Why the rush to promote these guys? Doesn't it make sense to think that by actually learing what to do and how to do it, that this will only INCREASE the Sox chances for consistently "contending?" It's not like keeping Rauch or whomever at Triple A for two or three years is going to make him a free agent any sooner is it?
They have to come up sometime, and they're going to need that adjustment period to get used to MLB hitting sometime. The best way to do that would be to stick him in the #5 role where there won't be a lot of pressure on him. I'd rather that than have him spend 3 years in the minors and become a dominant pitcher and then stick him into our #2 role. I think that would screw him up even more.

I'm speaking tonight at 6PM (Chicago time) with a former Sox All Star pitcher for the February Q & A. IN FOUR YEARS this guy threw a TOTAL of 21 innings with the Sox! Every year he went back down to the minors. When he finally was deemed ready for the majors, he exploded and had a stunningly good rookie season. My question is, what EXACTLY is wrong with that philosophy? (and it worked for others of his ilk.)
Gary Peters! Sweet! I'll be looking forward to this interview, thanks Lip.

kermittheefrog
01-23-2003, 12:59 PM
I like Suppan because before 2002 he had put up 3 straight seasons with 200 IP and an ERA+ of over 100. He'll just be 28 next year so he has a lot left in the tank. He has shown he is a better than average starter for 200 innings. At this point I'd rather go with Rauch but I think it'd be nice to have Suppan around as a long reliever/emergency starter.

For those of you who don't know what ERA+ is, it's ERA against league average. An average ERA+ is exactly 100. For some ideas of good and bad numbers. Todd Ritchie's ERA+ last year was 76. Pedro Martinez's career high is 285. If you have a 4.30 ERA and the league ERA is 4.50 then your ERA+ is 105.

Hangar18
01-23-2003, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Lip, you're not going to convince these young bucks what it's really all about. They look at stats, and they buy into the Jon Rauch hype, and when Rauch goes 5-10, like JACK MCDOWELL did in his first full season (followed by another FULL season in the minors) then we can look back and chuckle (and cry).


This is another reason why I like this site so much.
good mix of "veterans" here and im seeing a lot of "rookies" too,
but like the real team, I agree that we have to start mixing
the Rooks in sometime. Better to do it with a lot of veteran
leadership, preferably Good Pitchers.

kermittheefrog
01-23-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Lip, you're not going to convince these young bucks what it's really all about. They look at stats, and they buy into the Jon Rauch hype, and when Rauch goes 5-10, like JACK MCDOWELL did in his first full season (followed by another FULL season in the minors) then we can look back and chuckle (and cry).


So what is it all about? The hokey pokey?

You sure do seem bitter about people looking at stats and I'd say that the Oakland A's have shown that looking at stats can help you win a lot of baseball games. Am I wrong somehow?

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Lip, you're not going to convince these young bucks what it's really all about. They look at stats, and they buy into the Jon Rauch hype, and when Rauch goes 5-10, like JACK MCDOWELL did in his first full season (followed by another FULL season in the minors) then we can look back and chuckle (and cry).

Seems to me that the only stats being brought up here are some guy throwing 200 innings so we should go and get him. If I really followed stats, I'd say no to Rauch. He sucked last year with us and wasn't amazing in the minors. Yet I'm looking beyond his stats to what he did when he was healthy, what experts are saying about him, and what I've seen him throw.

So much for your little argument.

jeremyb1
01-23-2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Lip, you're not going to convince these young bucks what it's really all about. They look at stats, and they buy into the Jon Rauch hype, and when Rauch goes 5-10, like JACK MCDOWELL did in his first full season (followed by another FULL season in the minors) then we can look back and chuckle (and cry).

so since there was another white sox pitcher who wasn't good in his debut, this one won't either? you could just as easily mention pitchers who have pitched well (buehrle, oakland's big three as kermit mentioned, josh fogg, matt morris, pedro, etc). the reality is that some pitchers do well in their debuts and some don't. based on rauch's two starts at the end of last season, his season in '00, his knowledge of how to pitch, etc. i think he can hold an era below 5.5 and hold down the fifth starters spot.

pudge
01-23-2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
Seems to me that the only stats being brought up here are some guy throwing 200 innings so we should go and get him. If I really followed stats, I'd say no to Rauch. He sucked last year with us and wasn't amazing in the minors. Yet I'm looking beyond his stats to what he did when he was healthy, what experts are saying about him, and what I've seen him throw.

So much for your little argument.

That was only a fraction of what I posted, why haven't you argued the other points? Come on, I like a good argument. :)

pudge
01-23-2003, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
so since there was another white sox pitcher who wasn't good in his debut, this one won't either? you could just as easily mention pitchers who have pitched well (buehrle, oakland's big three as kermit mentioned, josh fogg, matt morris, pedro, etc). the reality is that some pitchers do well in their debuts and some don't. based on rauch's two starts at the end of last season, his season in '00, his knowledge of how to pitch, etc. i think he can hold an era below 5.5 and hold down the fifth starters spot.

Well, we can go back and forth on Suppan vs Rauch forever, and it's probably a wash - I'm really not rah-rah for Suppan. But just because Rauch might "hold down the #5 spot" is not a great reason to have him in there either. Why can't we be a team that has a #3 or #4 quality guy in our #5 spot??

hold2dibber
01-23-2003, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Well, we can go back and forth on Suppan vs Rauch forever, and it's probably a wash - I'm really not rah-rah for Suppan.

Well, who is it that you think the Sox should acquire for the no. 5 spot?

Originally posted by pudge
Why can't we be a team that has a #3 or #4 quality guy in our #5 spot??

We are.

kermittheefrog
01-23-2003, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Well, we can go back and forth on Suppan vs Rauch forever, and it's probably a wash - I'm really not rah-rah for Suppan. But just because Rauch might "hold down the #5 spot" is not a great reason to have him in there either. Why can't we be a team that has a #3 or #4 quality guy in our #5 spot??

How do you expect a guy like Rauch to develope if he isn't given opportunity to pitch?

pudge
01-23-2003, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Well, who is it that you think the Sox should acquire for the no. 5 spot?


We are.


from kermit: How do you expect a guy like Rauch to develope if he isn't given opportunity to pitch?



Okay, if this were a normal season in which we didn't happen to have two aces on the staff, I would agree with you guys completely. (Although calling Rauch a #3 quality guy right now is laughable to me, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.)

My only argument through this whole thing is that we should add another vet to compliment our two aces. I know it won't happen, I just think it should happen. Out of the guys who are left, I suppose Rogers would be my first choice. But that won't happen, I understand we're tapped out of money. I'm also not guaranteeing Rogers will have a great season, I'm just saying he'd be worth the risk if we actually want attempt to win a freakin' play-off series for a change.

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by pudge
That was only a fraction of what I posted, why haven't you argued the other points? Come on, I like a good argument. :)

I believe I argued most of my points with Lip, scroll up :smile:

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by pudge
My only argument through this whole thing is that we should add another vet to compliment our two aces. I know it won't happen, I just think it should happen. Out of the guys who are left, I suppose Rogers would be my first choice. But that won't happen, I understand we're tapped out of money. I'm also not guaranteeing Rogers will have a great season, I'm just saying he'd be worth the risk if we actually want attempt to win a freakin' play-off series for a change.

I do agree with you here. My argument is why we shouldn't get Suppan simply because he can pitch a lot of innings. That logic just doesn't make sense to me. I would have no problem with going after Rogers. I would actually prefer if we did.

hold2dibber
01-23-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by pudge
Okay, if this were a normal season in which we didn't happen to have two aces on the staff, I would agree with you guys completely. (Although calling Rauch a #3 quality guy right now is laughable to me, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.)

My only argument through this whole thing is that we should add another vet to compliment our two aces. I know it won't happen, I just think it should happen. Out of the guys who are left, I suppose Rogers would be my first choice. But that won't happen, I understand we're tapped out of money. I'm also not guaranteeing Rogers will have a great season, I'm just saying he'd be worth the risk if we actually want attempt to win a freakin' play-off series for a change.

My comment about Rauch being a quality #3 or 4 guy right now was a prediction - if he's healthy, I expect him to put up good numbers this year. But, of course, making predictions about young pitchers is a risky business, which I recognize.

I have advocated, all along, that the Sox find someone who will sign a minor league contract, can start or reliever or even work out of Charlotte for the time being. I don't want to sign Suppan or Rogers (both of whom I think are likely to have fair no better than Rauch this season) or someone of that ilk, but I do think the Sox need a little more depth in case Rauch fails or someone gets hurt. The only remaining FA starter who I would feel pretty confident would be better than Rauch is Chuck Finley, but I'd be shocked if he doesn't end up on the West Coast. I would have been happy signing any one of the ex-White Sox pitchers who recently signed minor league deals (Sirotka, JB or Alvarez) or someone like Dustin Hermanson. Those guys are cheap, experienced, and could catch lightening in a bottle.

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
My comment about Rauch being a quality #3 or 4 guy right now was a prediction - if he's healthy, I expect him to put up good numbers this year. But, of course, making predictions about young pitchers is a risky business, which I recognize.

I have advocated, all along, that the Sox find someone who will sign a minor league contract, can start or reliever or even work out of Charlotte for the time being. I don't want to sign Suppan or Rogers (both of whom I think are likely to have fair no better than Rauch this season) or someone of that ilk, but I do think the Sox need a little more depth in case Rauch fails or someone gets hurt. The only remaining FA starter who I would feel pretty confident would be better than Rauch is Chuck Finley, but I'd be shocked if he doesn't end up on the West Coast. I would have been happy signing any one of the ex-White Sox pitchers who recently signed minor league deals (Sirotka, JB or Alvarez) or someone like Dustin Hermanson. Those guys are cheap, experienced, and could catch lightening in a bottle.

Oh come on, sign Finely just to put him in the minors? He'd be a great #3 and would push Garland and Wright even further back in the rotation. Since it's likely that Ginter won't make the squad, Rauch would fall into the long relief role. That would take even more pressure off of Rauch where he could still get acquainted with major league pitching.

pudge
01-23-2003, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
Oh come on, sign Finely just to put him in the minors? He'd be a great #3 and would push Garland and Wright even further back in the rotation. Since it's likely that Ginter won't make the squad, Rauch would fall into the long relief role. That would take even more pressure off of Rauch where he could still get acquainted with major league pitching.

Hey gogo, we really do agree!

hold2dibber
01-23-2003, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
Oh come on, sign Finely just to put him in the minors? He'd be a great #3 and would push Garland and Wright even further back in the rotation. Since it's likely that Ginter won't make the squad, Rauch would fall into the long relief role. That would take even more pressure off of Rauch where he could still get acquainted with major league pitching.


No, no, no, that's not what I said (or at least, that's not what I meant to say :smile: ). Finley is the one guy who is still out there who I do feel confident will be better than Rauch this next season, so he is the one remaining FA who I would probably be willing to sign, even though it would mean taking starts away from Rauch. (Although I don't think I'm as confident in him as you are; despite a slight resurance when he went to the NL, he was no better than mediocre in Cleveland, posting ERAs of 4.17, 5.54 and 4.44 during his three seasons there). I think Kenny Rogers is in for a HUGE drop off in performance, I think Rauch is likely to have a Suppan-like season (ERA right around 5.00) (although, as a #5, he won't pitch as many innings, which is good in light of his injury in '01).

My point (which I apparently was less than clear on) is that I would only take starts away from Rauch in favor of someone who I was quite confident would be better than Rauch this season. Like I said, I can't think of any remaining FAs (other than maybe Finley) who fits the bill. My idea about signing a lesser free agent to a minor league contract is simply to provide the organization with some starting rotation depth, because I for one don't think Malone, Adkins, et al. are anywhere near ready for prime time.

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
No, no, no, that's not what I said (or at least, that's not what I meant to say :smile: ). Finley is the one guy who is still out there who I do feel confident will be better than Rauch this next season, so he is the one remaining FA who I would probably be willing to sign, even though it would mean taking starts away from Rauch. (Although I don't think I'm as confident in him as you are; despite a slight resurance when he went to the NL, he was no better than mediocre in Cleveland, posting ERAs of 4.17, 5.54 and 4.44 during his three seasons there). I think Kenny Rogers is in for a HUGE drop off in performance, I think Rauch is likely to have a Suppan-like season (ERA right around 5.00) (although, as a #5, he won't pitch as many innings, which is good in light of his injury in '01).

My point (which I apparently was less than clear on) is that I would only take starts away from Rauch in favor of someone who I was quite confident would be better than Rauch this season. Like I said, I can't think of any remaining FAs (other than maybe Finley) who fits the bill. My idea about signing a lesser free agent to a minor league contract is simply to provide the organization with some starting rotation depth, because I for one don't think Malone, Adkins, et al. are anywhere near ready for prime time.

Ok, so we're actually on the same page here. My first intent of this thread was saying how Suppan is not the answer to our problems as he wouldn't be any better than Rauch IMO. The only thing I disagree with you on is Rogers' performance this season, but I can see why you'd think that. I actually think Rogers will have a better year than Finely. I also see your point with signing another free agent to a minor league contract, but I don't think that that is really necessary. If the emergency arose, Glover or Ginter could make an emergency start for us.

My main point of this thread to clear things up for everyone is how I simply want the best pitchers possible in our rotation. I don't think Suppan is the answer for this. If Rauch is the best out of what we have, fine, then let him start. I'd prefer going out and signing a Finely or a Rogers, but since I don't think that that's going to happen, I think Rauch is the answer to our #5 role.

Lip Man 1
01-23-2003, 10:15 PM
Couple of points here.

One, some of the folks are talking about the A's as an example of what happens when you let good young talent develop.

A. Just wondering how many World Series the A's have been to the past three years?

B. These are the White Sox, unfortunately even if they had pitchers of the caliber of Zito, Mulder and Hudson they'd find some way to screw up, that's just the way it is with the Sox. I realize it's totally unscientific but how else do you explain the bizarre things that have happened to this franchise.

I push for Suppan (and Helling) because Suppan's ERA playing in the AL for a very bad team has been fairly good all things considered so it's not just the 200+ innings. This guy is not a bad pitcher.

Andrew (and others) asks how Rauch will ever develop if he isn't given the opportunity to pitch.

A. He CAN pitch... just in Triple A

B. He can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.

I posed the two sides of this coin to the former Sox pitcher that I interviewed tonight. This is a rough reply. (I haven't transcribed the interview into a completed form yet so please bear with me.)

This former player said that different organizations have different philosophies. The Yankees and White Sox he said, never rushed kids because they never had to. They always had stacked pitching staffs. This person said he knows of Rauch.. that he has the ability and could be a major factor under the right circumstances. He said Rauch is going to get work in the spring and if he shows something he recommends that the Sox take him North and get him some work. If he can't do the job, the Sox can send him down and at least he'll know what went wrong and what he has to work on. He would be disappointed but it wouldn't be a shock to him. My interview guest said the Sox would be making a major, serious mistake (as they have in the past) to bring these kids up in the MIDDLE OF THE SEASON, stick them in the rotation and expect them to perform, especially if it's in a pennant race.

So my question then would be if the Sox take Rauch North and he flops (or Garland or Wright) what's the back up plan? Or do you want to have Manager Gandhi said to the media AGAIN this year "we don't really have any other options..."

Get someone NOW while you still can before the price of poker is astronomical in July.

Just for what it's worth.

Lip

Bmr31
01-23-2003, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Couple of points here.

One, some of the folks are talking about the A's as an example of what happens when you let good young talent develop.

A. Just wondering how many World Series the A's have been to the past three years?

B. These are the White Sox, unfortunately even if they had pitchers of the caliber of Zito, Mulder and Hudson they'd find some way to screw up, that's just the way it is with the Sox. I realize it's totally unscientific but how else do you explain the bizarre things that have happened to this franchise.

I push for Suppan (and Helling) because Suppan's ERA playing in the AL for a very bad team has been fairly good all things considered so it's not just the 200+ innings. This guy is not a bad pitcher.

Andrew (and others) asks how Rauch will ever develop if he isn't given the opportunity to pitch.

A. He CAN pitch... just in Triple A

B. He can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.

I posed the two sides of this coin to the former Sox pitcher that I interviewed tonight. This is a rough reply. (I haven't transcribed the interview into a completed form yet so please bear with me.)

This former player said that different organizations have different philosophies. The Yankees and White Sox he said, never rushed kids because they never had to. They always had stacked pitching staffs. This person said he knows of Rauch.. that he has the ability and could be a major factor under the right circumstances. He said Rauch is going to get work in the spring and if he shows something he recommends that the Sox take him North and get him some work. If he can't do the job, the Sox can send him down and at least he'll know what went wrong and what he has to work on. he' would be disappointed but it wouldn't be a shock to him. My interview guest said the Sox would be making a major, serious mistake (as they have in the past) to bring these kids up in the MIDDLE OF THE SEASON, stick them in the rotation and expect them to perform, especially if it's in a pennant race.

Just for what it's worth.

Lip


Suppan sucks dude.......have u ever seen him pitch? Have you looked at his stats. Hell, i could pitch 200 innings for KC. That just says he didnt get injured. They have no other options. Fifth starters are easy to find, why bother with Suppan?

gogosoxgogo
01-23-2003, 11:10 PM
Couple of points here.

One, some of the folks are talking about the A's as an example of what happens when you let good young talent develop.

A. Just wondering how many World Series the A's have been to the past three years?
Oh come on, that A's are a superier team by any measurement. What matters is that they've actually gotten to the post season, while the Sox have been sitting on their asses.

B. These are the White Sox, unfortunately even if they had pitchers of the caliber of Zito, Mulder and Hudson they'd find some way to screw up, that's just the way it is with the Sox. I realize it's totally unscientific but how else do you explain the bizarre things that have happened to this franchise.
There's no accountability in this, and you know it Lip :cool:

I push for Suppan (and Helling) because Suppan's ERA playing in the AL for a very bad team has been fairly good all things considered so it's not just the 200+ innings. This guy is not a bad pitcher.
Oh come on, his ERA was disqusting. And besides his stats, he sucked in general. I saw him pitch on several occasions last year and I was not impressed in any of them! Yes, he played for a bad team, so I'm not taking into account his W/L record, but just because a guy throws 200 innings, it doesn't make him a Cy Young contender. Stamina is just one of many things which determines how good a pitcher is, not the only.

Andrew (and others) asks how Rauch will ever develop if he isn't given the opportunity to pitch.

A. He CAN pitch... just in Triple A
There's a HUGE difference between minor league hitting and major league hitting. We may as well let him get acustomed to major league hitting in a non-pressure situation where he can just relax.

B. He can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.
That's assuming that the Sox will be 12 games out in July. I don't think they will be. What then? Are you going to throw him into the middle of a division race? You said yourself below how that would not be a good idea and would put unneeded pressure on him. And then you want to throw him into a game in a future year when we stink? That would really do a lot for his confidence when he's a 15 game loser like your friend Suppan over there.

I posed the two sides of this coin to the former Sox pitcher that I interviewed tonight. This is a rough reply. (I haven't transcribed the interview into a completed form yet so please bear with me.)

This former player said that different organizations have different philosophies. The Yankees and White Sox he said, never rushed kids because they never had to. They always had stacked pitching staffs. This person said he knows of Rauch.. that he has the ability and could be a major factor under the right circumstances. He said Rauch is going to get work in the spring and if he shows something he recommends that the Sox take him North and get him some work. If he can't do the job, the Sox can send him down and at least he'll know what went wrong and what he has to work on. He would be disappointed but it wouldn't be a shock to him. My interview guest said the Sox would be making a major, serious mistake (as they have in the past) to bring these kids up in the MIDDLE OF THE SEASON, stick them in the rotation and expect them to perform, especially if it's in a pennant race.
So bring him up at the beginning of the season. Even during the season and as it winds down, the #5 pitcher is going to have the least amount of pressure on him. BTW (OT), I'm really looking forward to this interview with Peters, I think it will be a good one.

So my question then would be if the Sox take Rauch North and he flops (or Garland or Wright) what's the back up plan? Or do you want to have Manager Gandhi said to the media AGAIN this year "we don't really have any other options..."
How many teams have an experienced major league pitcher in the minors "just in case"? If an emergency arose, we do have guys who could fill in the number five role, Ginter or Glover, or one of our minor leaguers if we were REALLY desperate.

Get someone NOW while you still can before the price of poker is astronomical in July.
I wouldn't mind this, I just don't agree with your choice of Suppan as one of the guys whom we should acquire.

Lip Man 1
01-23-2003, 11:47 PM
GoGo:

Fine...let's get Rick Helling (15 starts two or fewer earned runs last year) and we can both be happy.

Also I think you misunderstood this quote:

B. He can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.

By that I mean in 2004. The Sox ARE NOT going to resign all these free agents and will probably blow. With nothing to lose you can bring up rauch etc and let them lose to their hearts content. Nothing will be at stake. As far as THIS year, a lot is riding on the line. You've already got Buehrle, Garland AND Wright each with less then three years experience. And you want to add a 4th guy to that mix with less then ten starts?

One final point, somebody else brought this out. They said a #5 starter only makes about 20 starts in a season and that really doesn't matter. Respectfully I disagree and recent history shows that it DOES matter. Look at the overall record for 5th starters in 1996 when the Sox blew a Wild Card spot. Guys like a young Mike Sirotka, Mike Bertotti and their ilk were like 5-16. That's a real nut cruncher to over come when that kind of pressure is applied to your other starters. You can't have regular rotation guys putting you in that kind of hole since it's unrealistic to have the other starters all go say 18-5 to make up for it.

Lip

gogosoxgogo
01-24-2003, 12:00 AM
Fine...let's get Rick Helling (15 starts two or fewer earned runs last year) and we can both be happy.
I'll admit to not knowing much about Helling. I don't follow the NL nearly as well as the AL. However, if he had 15 starts where he gave up less than 2 earned runs, that tells me he must have been extremely inconsistent from what I see from his overall stats last year. I don't think we need another inconsistent guy behind Garland and Rauch! However, like I said, I don't know much about him, so I can't formulate too much of an opinion on him. Looks like I'd still rather have Rogers or Finely though.


Also I think you misunderstood this quote:

B. He can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.

By that I mean in 2004. The Sox ARE NOT going to resign all these free agents and will probably blow. With nothing to lose you can bring up rauch etc and let them lose to their hearts content. Nothing will be at stake. As far as THIS year, a lot is riding on the line. You've already got Buehrle, Garland AND Wright each with less then three years experience. And you want to add a 4th guy to that mix with less then ten starts?
And then let him pitch when we suck? That would be a great confidence booster when he loses 15 games. You stated how Suppan had horrible numbers because he pitched for a sub-par team. Is that what you want to happen to Rauch?

I think we can all agree that Buehrle is no ordinary pitcher with less than 3 years experience. Garland and Wright showed major signs of improvement in the last couple months of the season under Coop. Let's not forget that the Oakland staff is one of the best in the majors yet they're all under 27.

Bmr31
01-24-2003, 12:03 AM
I think lip man and gogo are in love......get a room, guys. :D:

jeremyb1
01-24-2003, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Couple of points here.

One, some of the folks are talking about the A's as an example of what happens when you let good young talent develop.

A. Just wondering how many World Series the A's have been to the past three years?

this is incredible. first i'm ridiculed because i said that we could do much worse than averaging 83 wins per season and i appretiate the fact we haven't had to suffer the ordeals of fans of teams like kc or detroit. now, you're saying the a's situation isn't desirable because despite the fact that they've average over 90 wins the last few seasons, they haven't made it to the world series yet?!?!

all you can really ask is for your organization to put the pieces in place to advance to the postseason and have the opportunity to advance. outside of that, its largely just luck and good execution. oakland has assembled oustanding teams and has an excellent core. just because success has (barely) eluded them in the playoffs, doesn't mean their organization is a failure. please. i'd kill to have our team in the championship series two out of three seasons. once you get that far, anything can happen.

B. These are the White Sox, unfortunately even if they had pitchers of the caliber of Zito, Mulder and Hudson they'd find some way to screw up, that's just the way it is with the Sox. I realize it's totally unscientific but how else do you explain the bizarre things that have happened to this franchise.

i can't really argue against the idea of a curse. all i can do is suggest that we're not even doing all that poorly developing pitchers. i'm sure that pitchers such as buehrle, sirotka (before injury), mcdowell, alvarez, and even garland could tell you they don't feel cursed. as i'm fond of saying, in buehrle, we've developed one more ace than most teams in baseball. just off the top of my head, the d-backs, orioles, yankees, royals, rangers, and dodgers amongst others have all failed to develop a home grown ace in the last five to ten years.

[rauch] can pitch with the Sox when they are twelve games out in July some year. Not right now when this team actually has a chance to win something. When the Sox don't resign all these free agents and they suck next year Jon can get all the pitching he wants.

what i can't understand for the life of me is why you consider it to be a given that rauch will fail. you've given no reason at any time why he won't succeed other than that he's young and unproven. those are reasons he might not succeed but not reasons he can't succeed. certainly numerous players such as buehrle have proven that some young pitchers are capable of pitching successfully off the bat. why can't rauch?

you're sitting here arguing that rauch should not even be considered for the rotation until '04 when you think we'll be out of contention. why? he's already 24 years old. he has a decent amount of minor league experience. how is it that he shouldn't be given the chance to pitch now? what if we had refused buehrle the chance to pitch in '01? what if he were still in the minors right now waiting til the team was out of contention for his shot? what if rauch can win games (perhaps even many of them) for us this season. i know you find that too be highly unlikely but shurely you must at least be able to admit that its possible. the fact that that possibility exists should be reason enough to give rauch a shot.

no one here is advocating that rauch should be given the job unconditionally even if he appears as though he's not ready to face major leaguers. as far as i know no one is opposing the idea of bringing in a veteran starter signed to a minor league deal or a swingman reliever who could start if called upon. we just want rauch to be given the opportunity to win the job as we suspect he will.

kermittheefrog
01-24-2003, 02:08 AM
Jeremy you are fighting a losing battle. Lip wants a risk adverse GM who spends tons of cash. Risk adverse means going with expensive vets, not trusting the young guys unless you're rebuilding and going with "traditional wisdom" that pitching is the most important thing ever and that you can win with a good pitching staff but nothing else. And most importantly never ever rebuilding. Young players are evil! They are untested! They have never played in the majors!

All and all it's a pretty (rhymes with "wussy") way of looking at things. If you manage a team in fear of taking risks like giving talented young players opportunity then you're just going to fail. Fortunately Lip man isn't our GM.

hold2dibber
01-24-2003, 08:50 AM
Two points:

(1) I agree with Lip that the Sox need more depth in their starting rotation; I have no problem bringing in someone to compete with Rauch. I don't like the idea of bringing in someone and simply handing him a job in favor of Rauch. I feel pretty confident that Rauch will be better than virtually all of the remaining FAs out there. Lip, you seem to be unwilling to admit to that possibility.

(2) Who are all of the FAs that we won't be re-signing after the '03 campaign? The only ones I can think of are Colon, Valentin and Alomar (maybe Gordon?). I know CLee is in the last year of his contract, but I don't know if he is eligible for FA after the season or if he has one more year to go. And I guess Frank could leave if neither he nor the Sox exercise his option. I know Maggs, PK, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Koch, Wright, Rauch, Jimenez, Rowand, Borchard, White, Marte, Glover, Harris and Ginter are all coming back. So I don't buy into the idea that the Sox are going to sink into the abyss in '04.

gogosoxgogo
01-24-2003, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
(2) Who are all of the FAs that we won't be re-signing after the '03 campaign? The only ones I can think of are Colon, Valentin and Alomar (maybe Gordon?). I know CLee is in the last year of his contract, but I don't know if he is eligible for FA after the season or if he has one more year to go. And I guess Frank could leave if neither he nor the Sox exercise his option. I know Maggs, PK, Crede, Buehrle, Garland, Koch, Wright, Rauch, Jimenez, Rowand, Borchard, White, Marte, Glover, Harris and Ginter are all coming back. So I don't buy into the idea that the Sox are going to sink into the abyss in '04.

We have a whole sh*tload of arbitration eligible players after this season, who are all going to be making a LOT more money.

Hangar18
01-24-2003, 09:27 AM
Im from the Old School. I believe a P should earn
his stripes. do a couple yrs down on the farm.
There are guys like Mark Prior, though very good on a college
team, want to circumvent the System, get Paid BEFORE
throwing a professional pitch, and then move right into
the Rotation. isnt it funny, how after he Cashed that
$10 Million dollar check, and finished Waxing that new
solid gold Lexus, that he said "hey, i'll come up whenever
they call me up, im not in a rush."
Of course your not JackA**, you already got paid!
most pitchers are eager to prove themselves, so as to
make good financially/professionally later.
same thing with Bobby Million Dollar Hill

maurice
01-24-2003, 10:19 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
One final point, somebody else brought this out. They said a #5 starter only makes about 20 starts in a season and that really doesn't matter.

First, you're misstating the point. Obviously every additional win counts. The point was that the #5 starter counts less than the #1 through #4 starters, since he starts significantly fewer games (not "20%" of them) and doesn't start in the playoffs. On a related note, bringing in a new #5 who would win 11 games is not such a great move if Rauch would have won 10, especially if it stunts Rauch's development. (I'm sure everyone agrees that it certainly would be a nice luxury to have an experienced starter who could step in if Rauch, Garland, or Wright don't get the job done.)

Second, your rule that starting prospects must pitch in the minors until a team is out of contention is silly. That would prohibit a perrenial contender from ever working a stud prospect into the rotation. While bringing a prospect up too early may stunt their growth, the opposite is also true.

Lip Man 1
01-24-2003, 01:00 PM
Andrew says:

Fortunately Lip man isn't our GM

That's true and it's also fortunate that Beane and Epstein aren't either or else the Sox would turn into one big "fantasy" league team built solely on stats completely ignoring the history and tradition of the franchise that has its roots in pitching, speed and defense.

The Sox have tried it your way Andrew by bashing the ball at the expense of everything else the past few years.

How do you like the results?

Other GM's like Cashman, Sabean, Gillick, Jocketty, Hart Stoneman, Evans, and Scherholz seem to have done quite well havent they down through the years without subscribing to your beliefs.

Personally I'd wish that the Sox had any of those guys.

Lip

Hangar18
01-24-2003, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Andrew says:

Fortunately Lip man isn't our GM

The Sox have tried it your way Andrew by bashing the ball at the expense of everything else the past few years.

How do you like the results?

Lip

Thats Excellent! heh heh

kermittheefrog
01-24-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
The Sox have tried it your way Andrew by bashing the ball at the expense of everything else the past few years.

How do you like the results?



And that shows exactly how little you know about what you're talking about.

Case in point the A's. You are implying Beane and Epstein, the games most prominent statheads, place focus almost exclusively on offense. The A's have commited premium draft picks in recent years to pitching. Most notably Mark Mulder and Barry Zito. In addition Billy Beane went out and found Cory Lidle in baseball hell aka Tampa Bay. Last year the A's won with an offense ranked in the middle of the pack but a defense (pitching included) that prevented more runs than everyone but the Anaheim Angels. Does that seem like a team bashing the ball at the expense of everything else?

And if you think the Sox have tried Beane and Epstein's methodology in the last couple years you're clueless. You are so clueless about what stathead methodology is and so ambivalent about actually finding out that it's not worth arguing with you. You don't know what you're talking about and you don't care that you don't know. You're essentially saying "I don't care what your argument might be, I know I'm right." It'd be one thing if you admitted what you do and don't know and took that attitude but you constantly assume you know things that you're clueless about. And I get the feeling you take this high and mighty road because you've interviewed a handful of baseball players. Well wup dee do. If you don't pay attention to a ton of the information available (i.e. info from statheads) even the good information you get from the baseball men you've talked to isn't worth a damn.

When I started to get into the whole stathead thing I made a bunch of dumb statements on this very message board because I made the mistake of ignoring all other information. I dont' make that same mistake anymore. Anyone that blatantly disregards what statheads bring to the table without cause is just making the same mistake I did. At least I was only 15 or so when I made such stupid mistakes.

Hangar18
01-24-2003, 02:28 PM
Man. thats a good point too.
I love curling up with a cold beer, and watching the
reponses. Kind of like a modern day Plato and his Symposium
Except drinking beer instead of wine.

jeremyb1
01-24-2003, 02:31 PM
all very well put kermit.

voodoochile
01-24-2003, 02:58 PM
Getting back to the original point...

I don't care for Suppan either, based on his stats he is James Baldwin and I don't seem to recall a big clammor to bring back JB.

I'd take a flyer on Finley, if the Sox are going to go out and get a CF and/or a veteran C, otherwise, they ought to let Rauch pitch, IMO.

Bmr31
01-24-2003, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
all very well put kermit.

Stats are a guide. If you dont use stats, youre being unrealistic. If all you use is stats, youre being unrealistic. God gave us a brain for a reason....

gogosoxgogo
01-24-2003, 03:18 PM
You need to find the right balence between stats and actually watching a player play. That's the basis of good recruiting. You have to look at what kind of numbers they are putting up in addition to watching them in person, reading what experts are saying about them etc. If you lean too heavily either way, you aren't going to be evaluting players the best way possible.

Bmr31
01-24-2003, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
You need to find the right balence between stats and actually watching a player play. That's the basis of good recruiting. You have to look at what kind of numbers they are putting up in addition to watching them in person, reading what experts are saying about them etc. If you lean too heavily either way, you aren't going to be evaluting players the best way possible.

I agree with everything except the "experts" part. I try not to listen to people who are wrong more often than not...

gogosoxgogo
01-24-2003, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31
I agree with everything except the "experts" part. I try not to listen to people who are wrong more often than not...

By experts, I mean former ball players, scouts, etc., not necessarily writers. I wrote that in reference to Lip always bringing up the ex ball players' he's interviewed.

kermittheefrog
01-24-2003, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
all very well put kermit.

Thanks Jeremy.

Lip Man 1
01-24-2003, 07:09 PM
All hail Andrew the king of stat freaks. He is the great and powerful Oz (and ignore the man behind the curtain...) If you doubt it just ask him!

You're not an accountant or work for the IRS in life are you?

That being said, I think Billy Beane is an exceptional GM and would love to have him in Chicago bit his way has produced the exact same number of championships as the Sox. ZERO. And all Epstein has done according to reports is get demolished by the Yankees in his first year as GM.

The real test of Andrew's beliefs will come when Zito, Mulder and Hudson are gone (within the next four years?). We'll see if Andrew/ Beane's high OBP stat which is paramount in their religion will compensate for those defections. (or is it WHIP?)

The White Sox have tried to score eight runs a game the last three years at the expense of all else and you can see what has happened (but the "stats" say Carlos Lee is an "adequate" left fielder! How dare we call him a stumblebum?)

That's all for now, I've go to go do research on Jeremy Giambi's OBP against left handed pitchers born in Latin America with a last name that has eight letters or less, in day games on even numbered days. (I need that info so that I can dominate my ten fantasy leagues! I'll be the KING!)

Lip

baggio202
01-25-2003, 10:08 PM
i came into this thread late and just got through reading all 4 pages...i skimmed through some of the longer posts so if i missed this point and someone else hit on it please forgive me...

im one for signing suppan...i think at 28 and to be able to throw 200 plus innings in each of the last 4 years is big...i think he is on the verge of moving to the next level and right now would be a good time to get him cheap..


now here is my point that i didnt see raised in this thread (again sorry if i missed it)..when was the last time a team went through an entire season with only using 5 starters??..i remember back in '01 the cardinals made it to august before using a 6th starter and that was big news..who is gonna be that 6th starter that we might need for 10 starts of so during the season???..gary glover???..lord save us...

with both colon and buehrle we have a chance this year...unfortunately chances are that one wont be back next year...this very well could be a one year shot with our pitching this strong....get that 5th starter in suppan , helling or whoever...let them battle rauch for the 5th spot..if rauch wins thats fine...it would be better for him anyways to actually win the job instead of it just being handed to him..we will still need that other pitcher to starts games somewhere down the road...if it turns out rauch isnt ready or someone gets hurt atleast you have a real back up plan to take the sting out of it...

i dont understand why so many are against strengthening our staff??..imo...competition will only bring out the best in rauch , and whoever his is in competition with

Tragg
01-25-2003, 10:51 PM
Personally, I'd like to see the Sox take their young pitchers and put them in the pen for a year before starting them. But, since the Sox never do that, let JR start. We certainly don't need any more mediocre players on this team.
and for every million we throw away here (hello sandy alomar) or there on a crappy player, it makes it that much more difficult to get great players when the rare opportunities arise.

Bmr31
01-25-2003, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by baggio202
i came into this thread late and just got through reading all 4 pages...i skimmed through some of the longer posts so if i missed this point and someone else hit on it please forgive me...

im one for signing suppan...i think at 28 and to be able to throw 200 plus innings in each of the last 4 years is big...i think he is on the verge of moving to the next level and right now would be a good time to get him cheap..


now here is my point that i didnt see raised in this thread (again sorry if i missed it)..when was the last time a team went through an entire season with only using 5 starters??..i remember back in '01 the cardinals made it to august before using a 6th starter and that was big news..who is gonna be that 6th starter that we might need for 10 starts of so during the season???..gary glover???..lord save us...

with both colon and buehrle we have a chance this year...unfortunately chances are that one wont be back next year...this very well could be a one year shot with our pitching this strong....get that 5th starter in suppan , helling or whoever...let them battle rauch for the 5th spot..if rauch wins thats fine...it would be better for him anyways to actually win the job instead of it just being handed to him..we will still need that other pitcher to starts games somewhere down the road...if it turns out rauch isnt ready or someone gets hurt atleast you have a real back up plan to take the sting out of it...

i dont understand why so many are against strengthening our staff??..imo...competition will only bring out the best in rauch , and whoever his is in competition with

Apparently, you dont consider the financial side of the situation. What the heck is the point of signing suppan if he has to battle Rauch for the 5th spot in the rotation. I dont know about you, but im sure the sox dont just like throwing money away.

MarkEdward
01-25-2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31
Apparently, you dont consider the financial side of the situation. What the heck is the point of signing suppan if he has to battle Rauch for the 5th spot in the rotation. I dont know about you, but im sure the sox dont just like throwing money away.

I'm sure Suppan wouldn't get more than 900K.

Bmr31
01-25-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
I'm sure Suppan wouldn't get more than 900K.

so why would we throw away 900k when our rookies can be just as good or better?

hold2dibber
01-26-2003, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by baggio202
i came into this thread late and just got through reading all 4 pages...i skimmed through some of the longer posts so if i missed this point and someone else hit on it please forgive me...

im one for signing suppan...i think at 28 and to be able to throw 200 plus innings in each of the last 4 years is big...i think he is on the verge of moving to the next level and right now would be a good time to get him cheap..


now here is my point that i didnt see raised in this thread (again sorry if i missed it)..when was the last time a team went through an entire season with only using 5 starters??..i remember back in '01 the cardinals made it to august before using a 6th starter and that was big news..who is gonna be that 6th starter that we might need for 10 starts of so during the season???..gary glover???..lord save us...

with both colon and buehrle we have a chance this year...unfortunately chances are that one wont be back next year...this very well could be a one year shot with our pitching this strong....get that 5th starter in suppan , helling or whoever...let them battle rauch for the 5th spot..if rauch wins thats fine...it would be better for him anyways to actually win the job instead of it just being handed to him..we will still need that other pitcher to starts games somewhere down the road...if it turns out rauch isnt ready or someone gets hurt atleast you have a real back up plan to take the sting out of it...

i dont understand why so many are against strengthening our staff??..imo...competition will only bring out the best in rauch , and whoever his is in competition with

Exactly. This is a point I've been trying to make for the last few weeks. The Sox do not have a back up plan for when one of the 5 starters goes down with injury/fails. It is going to happen. It always happens. For those of you who contend that Rauch is ready to go and is a damn good #5 (and I'm one of you), do you think that Corwin Malone (who, I believe, had more BBs than Ks in AA last year) a damn good #5? Or Brian West? Or Dennis Ulacia? I find it hard to believe that anyone would say "yes" to any of those guys. And although I think Munoz has potential, I don't think he's a starter. And Ginter isn't a starter either. Glover can start, but he's not very good at it, and using him to start disrupts the bullpen. The Sox need more depth in the rotation. KW needs to find another starter or two.

hold2dibber
01-26-2003, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by Bmr31
so why would we throw away 900k when our rookies can be just as good or better?

Because one of our starters is going to get hurt, or is going to regress. Happens every year.

Bmr31
01-26-2003, 12:21 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
Because one of our starters is going to get hurt, or is going to regress. Happens every year.

So when or if that happens, you make a move.

baggio202
01-26-2003, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by Bmr31
Apparently, you dont consider the financial side of the situation. What the heck is the point of signing suppan if he has to battle Rauch for the 5th spot in the rotation. I dont know about you, but im sure the sox dont just like throwing money away.

my perspective on this changed when the sox traded for colon...that trade , especially when considering that he is in the last year of his contract means to me that the sox are serious about winning it all this year...maybe thats naive on my part..maybe they are just hoping to put a good enough enough product on the field to jusr be in contention at the all star break so they arnt a total embarrassment...i dont know for sure but i would hope they are serious about winning it all this year

if thats the case (and maybe hosting the all star game has some added incentive here) then i think its a very wise move to sign an insurance policy like jeff suppan...its only gonna cost a million or so and if that million helps us secure a post season spot it will more than pay for itself...

had we not made the colon trade and i didnt feel the sox were going to be serious contenders then letting rauch and who pitch in the final spots would have been fine ... taking their rookie beatings in a season that was lost anyways...but it would be a dam shame in my eyes if we missed the playoffs by a game or two and looked back on the season and saw the problem being the 5th spot in the rotation when relatively speaking, a measley few dollars could have prevented that...

others who dont see this as a problem area disagree and feel its a waste of money..if we dont get another starter before the season starts then i hope to god they are right and im wrong...i hope so anyways..i hope rauch kicks ass and moves past garland and wright into the 3 spot..but i cant count on it...

whoever said wait until the problem happens and then fix it to me thats a bad way to go...right now we can prevent that problem w/o giving up any young talent..in the season if we are desperate it will cost us the way it cost san francisco when they needed a CF....the yankees just signed like their 8th starter in lieber as insurance for the end of the season and '04...im only asking for a proven 5th starter...

ive rambled enough ..sorry :smile:

Bmr31
01-26-2003, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by baggio202
my perspective on this changed when the sox traded for colon...that trade , especially when considering that he is in the last year of his contract means to me that the sox are serious about winning it all this year...maybe thats naive on my part..maybe they are just hoping to put a good enough enough product on the field to jusr be in contention at the all star break so they arnt a total embarrassment...i dont know for sure but i would hope they are serious about winning it all this year

if thats the case (and maybe hosting the all star game has some added incentive here) then i think its a very wise move to sign an insurance policy like jeff suppan...its only gonna cost a million or so and if that million helps us secure a post season spot it will more than pay for itself...

had we not made the colon trade and i didnt feel the sox were going to be serious contenders then letting rauch and who pitch in the final spots would have been fine ... taking their rookie beatings in a season that was lost anyways...but it would be a dam shame in my eyes if we missed the playoffs by a game or two and looked back on the season and saw the problem being the 5th spot in the rotation when relatively speaking, a measley few dollars could have prevented that...

others who dont see this as a problem area disagree and feel its a waste of money..if we dont get another starter before the season starts then i hope to god they are right and im wrong...i hope so anyways..i hope rauch kicks ass and moves past garland and wright into the 3 spot..but i cant count on it...

whoever said wait until the problem happens and then fix it to me thats a bad way to go...right now we can prevent that problem w/o giving up any young talent..in the season if we are desperate it will cost us the way it cost san francisco when they needed a CF....the yankees just signed like their 8th starter in lieber as insurance for the end of the season and '04...im only asking for a proven 5th starter...

ive rambled enough ..sorry :smile:

OUCH!! You win. Its too late to read all that, lol. :)

baggio202
01-26-2003, 03:17 AM
Originally posted by Bmr31
OUCH!! You win. Its too late to read all that, lol. :)

sorry..im a nightshift guy so its the middle of the day for me :D:

MarkEdward
01-26-2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31
so why would we throw away 900k when our rookies can be just as good or better?

I'm against signing Suppan also. We wouldn't be breaking the bank if we did sign him, however.

maurice
01-27-2003, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by Bmr31
Apparently, you dont consider the financial side of the situation. What the heck is the point of signing suppan if he has to battle Rauch for the 5th spot in the rotation. I dont know about you, but im sure the sox dont just like throwing money away.

Great point.

I'm sure we all wish the Sox would spend like the Yankees and sign the top 8 available starters, but that's not going to happen. Frankly, I'm surprised they've spent as much as they have this offseason. I seriously doubt they'll spend another mil or so on (essentially) a #6 starter. That does not overly concern me, given the other uncertainties that are more likely to affect the Sox record in 2003 (team defense, Frank's offense, numerous young and unproven position players, etc.).

Admittedly, there is a realistic chance that one of our young starters will faulter and need to be replaced. I imagine they plan on plugging Sanders or Stewart in their place, since Honel, et al. are not ready. While this is less than ideal, the Sox are no worse off than almost all other good teams in this respect.

EnricoPallazzo
01-31-2003, 10:11 AM
Suppan is a 28 year old veteran. If he shows improvement at this stage it wouldn't be the 1st time this has happened. I would feel much more comfortable with a young veteran in his prime on this staff of unproven youngsters, for depth if nothing else. It is worth the gamble to sign him. Like any grizzled, scarred, weary Sox fan I don't expect a miracle here, nor do I expect Garland, Wright, and especially Rauch to turn into McDowell, Alvarez, and Fernandez this season.

hold2dibber
01-31-2003, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by EnricoPallazzo
Suppan is a 28 year old veteran. If he shows improvement at this stage it wouldn't be the 1st time this has happened. I would feel much more comfortable with a young veteran in his prime on this staff of unproven youngsters, for depth if nothing else. It is worth the gamble to sign him. Like any grizzled, scarred, weary Sox fan I don't expect a miracle here, nor do I expect Garland, Wright, and especially Rauch to turn into McDowell, Alvarez, and Fernandez this season.

EnricoPallazzo (a/k/a Saluki Dan) - don't I know you from somewhere?

Hmmm. A young veteran in his prime. Maybe someone like, oh, I don't know, Bartolo Colon? Works for me.

I wouldn't mind adding someone else of that ilk, of course. But they're hard to come by and cost you. But I think the Sox have a window of opportunity here, and if they could deal prospects for another starter along the lines you describe, I'd be thrilled (i.e., withoug giving up anyone who is expected to contribute now). Suppan wouldn't do much for me, though. If he would have agreed to battle for a spot in the rotation and take a seat in the bullpen if he didn't win, I'd be fine with that. But I would be opposed to just handing a spot to someone like that, who I really don't think is going to be better than the guys we already have. In fact, I think both Garland and Wright were better than Suppan last year and, in light of their ages, are more likely to improve at this stage than is Suppan.