PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie On Wright


Lip Man 1
04-16-2004, 11:09 PM
From Bob Foltman's recap story in the Tribune:

"Wright has failed to go five innings in 18 of his 62 career starts."

"Despite Wright not lasting five innings in either of his first two starts, Guillen said the right-hander will remain his fifth starter and get the ball in his next turn, which is likely to be Friday at U.S. Cellular Field against the Devil Rays again.

"He didn't throw great, but I was happy with the way he was throwing," Guillen said.

"He kept us in the game and he's going to be back out there in five or six days."

Lip

CubKilla
04-16-2004, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
"Wright has failed to go five innings in 18 of his 62 career starts."

That's around 1 out of every 4 outings. That's terrible.

SEALgep
04-17-2004, 12:23 AM
I want to see his next start for sure. However, if he still hasn't shown anything positive after then, I would give serious consideration to Diaz. IMO, I think the next step would be to send Wright down and see if he can develop into a closer.

SoxFan76
04-17-2004, 12:37 AM
I agree, Wright sucks. BUT, remember he only gave up 3 runs today. The Sox had plenty of chances to win this game. Near the end they were crushing Abbott's pitches, but they were all foul. They could of easily won today.

batmanZoSo
04-17-2004, 12:44 AM
Originally posted by CubKilla
That's around 1 out of every 4 outings. That's terrible.

Failure to go 5 innings = reliever.

SoxxoS
04-17-2004, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
Failure to go 5 innings = reliever.

Career ERA over 5.25=Garbageman.

batmanZoSo
04-17-2004, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Career ERA over 5.25=Garbageman.

He's shown he can get guys out over short outings. I think he'll be a good reliever. Gary Glover was always good with us in relief. His era is horrible because we used him as a starter so much. It's the same deal.

mdep524
04-17-2004, 01:46 AM
I agree the guy has potential as a reliever, possibly even a "closer." But he is just way too inefficient with his pitches to be a starter. He can't do it, folks. Let's just get him in the pen and move on.

kittle42
04-17-2004, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
He's shown he can get guys out over short outings.

But aren't most of his starts short outings? :smile:

Cubbiesuck13
04-17-2004, 01:20 PM
how can you guys say that he would be a good reliever or even a closer? if a reliver or a closer gives up 3 runs, then everyone goes back to bashing him again. The sox don't have a great 1-5 but they should not need to. The game should have been won by the offense. With burly and Esteban, the games can be won by the pitcher. With the rest of the staff, a win falls squarly on the shoulders of the hitters. I am not saying that it is ok to pitch poorly, but to pitch poorly and still have a chance to win should equall a win with this team. and for the most part, i think it will. Garland is a prime example.

SEALgep
04-17-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Cubbiesuck13
how can you guys say that he would be a good reliever or even a closer? if a reliver or a closer gives up 3 runs, then everyone goes back to bashing him again. . Typically closers don't go 4 or more innings. Plus he would have a different approach. He no doubtedly would be training differently, which would no doubtedly increase speed on his fastball, and hopefully continue to locate his curve ball as he does well early in ball games. That's Tom Gordon in a nut shell, with the possibility of being much better.

beckett21
04-17-2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by SoxFan76
I agree, Wright sucks. BUT, remember he only gave up 3 runs today.

He wasn't given the opportunity to give up more; he most certainly would have given the chance. He can thank Cotts for stranding the two runners Danny left him as well.

I'm willing to give him one more start...but the leash is getting awful short (awful being the key word there).

Not sure he is suited to close if he is that much of a headcase. If he can't throw strikes without throwing meatballs, he doesn't have much of a future. Just look at Koch.

SoxxoS
04-17-2004, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
He wasn't given the opportunity to give up more; he most certainly would have given the chance. He can thank Cotts for stranding the two runners Danny left him as well.

Don't forget about the 4 webgems behind him, that probably saved about 2-10 runs.

beckett21
04-17-2004, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Don't forget about the 4 webgems behind him, that probably saved about 2-10 runs.

No kidding--almost forgot about that. He looked crappy last night from the second pitch on. He had that deer-in-the-headlights look to me.

It could have been a real merry-go-round if Ozzie didn't pull him when he did. :o:

Gotta give him credit for picking off Crawford though, he did help himself there after the error off the bunt attempt. That's the only thing he did right the whole game.

depy48
04-17-2004, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by mdep524
I agree the guy has potential as a reliever, possibly even a "closer." But he is just way too inefficient with his pitches to be a starter. He can't do it, folks. Let's just get him in the pen and move on.

then who's your fifth starter?

OEO Magglio
04-17-2004, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by depy48
then who's your fifth starter?
I personally would like to see cotts get a chance, also rauch, grilli, and diaz have all had 2 pretty good starts in aaa so far.