PDA

View Full Version : Loiaza sucks


kittle42
05-10-2004, 12:22 AM
It was a one-year miracle. Except for one game against TB, he has been what we in the industry call "not very good."

All comments appreciated.

ChiWhiteSox1337
05-10-2004, 12:28 AM
he's worth a spot in the rotation, but he's definately not the #1 or #2 most people were expecting him to be this year. i'm sure if we won today he wouldn't have looked so bad...

Win1ForMe
05-10-2004, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by kittle42
It was a one-year miracle. Except for one game against TB, he has been what we in the industry call "not very good."

All comments appreciated.

We're playing some stellar defense behind him.

Dan Gelo
05-10-2004, 12:45 AM
I didn't watch the game today, but it seems that all his pitches are mid thigh to waist height. That is just asking to get killed.

JohnBasedowYoda
05-10-2004, 12:47 AM
let's just think of the 1st month of the season as extended spring training.

batmanZoSo
05-10-2004, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by kittle42
It was a one-year miracle. Except for one game against TB, he has been what we in the industry call "not very good."

All comments appreciated.

He only has the most wins on the staff. But I guess he's not winning games according to your specifications. He's not the only one that sucks.

SoxxoS
05-10-2004, 01:02 AM
The hitters adjusted to him. Now he has got to adjust back. It's a process.

:prozac

mdep524
05-10-2004, 01:29 AM
I think Loaiza will be fine. He's not spotting his pitches as well as he'd like right now, but he'll make adjustments and end up doing a good job this season. He might not be the "stopper" that he was last year however, and in fact we don't have one at all. That's why I think it is really important that we get another starter (can you say Freddie Garcia??) in here ASAP. Garcia's not an ace/stopper, but he can balance the rotation and take pressure off Buehrle, Loaiza, Garland and Schoe.

SoxxoS
05-10-2004, 02:06 AM
Originally posted by mdep524
Garcia's not an ace/stopper, but he can balance the rotation and take pressure off Buehrle, Loaiza, Garland and Schoe.

Take away Garcia's off year (last year) and he's an "ace," IMO>

JohnBasedowYoda
05-10-2004, 02:39 AM
i have a lot of faith in the pitching. For some reason it seems easier for pitching to turn around than a slouching offense. If i'm wrong about this don't kill me. All pitchers have to do is trick the batter, whereas the batter has to not be fooled

idseer
05-10-2004, 08:53 AM
don't know whether he sucks or not, but since the beginning of september last year his era is 5.06 covering his last 13 starts.
not impressive.

beckett21
05-10-2004, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Take away Garcia's off year (last year) and he's an "ace," IMO>

I agree that Garcia has ace stuff. People really under-rate him because of his poor season last year. The guy is a #1.

As for the original topic, Loaiza will not be as good this year than he was last year. But he is still a good pitcher, and I do expect him to exceed his career numbers as they were prior to last season's career year.

He had a career year last year no doubt about it. But he is still capable of 15-18 wins and an ERA around 4. He does not suck.

batmanZoSo
05-10-2004, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by beckett21
I agree that Garcia has ace stuff. People really under-rate him because of his poor season last year. The guy is a #1.

As for the original topic, Loaiza will not be as good this year than he was last year. But he is still a good pitcher, and I do expect him to exceed his career numbers as they were prior to last season's career year.

He had a career year last year no doubt about it. But he is still capable of 15-18 wins and an ERA around 4. He does not suck.

I agree all around. Our front four are all just good, no one's an ace. I would really like our chances if we got Garcia.

JoseCanseco6969
05-10-2004, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by kittle42
It was a one-year miracle. Except for one game against TB, he has been what we in the industry call "not very good."

All comments appreciated.

Number one, I wouldn't say he sucks but he does have work to do, two, he's been average at best but not even close to the ace-like year last season(whoever thought a repeat was in store is crazy) and third, when you plan to bash a player, try using correct spelling. Thanks!

Hangar18
05-10-2004, 11:53 AM
Shame on the SOX for thinking he was gonna be exactly like last year, and NOT GETTING another PROVEN starter.

kittle42
05-10-2004, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Hangar18
Shame on the SOX for thinking he was gonna be exactly like last year, and NOT GETTING another PROVEN starter.

Or not signing the one they already had - and yes, I am going to continue to harp on this all year.

Foulke You
05-10-2004, 12:13 PM
I think Loaiza has been serviceable so far this year. He certainly isn't dominating as he was last year but as a previous poster pointed out, he has been leaving a few pitches up and missing some spots. DJ also made a good point yesterday that Loaiza seems to have fallen in love with that cut fastball and seems to be throwing it all the time now and hitters are prepared for it. It is his best pitch but I think he needs to mix it up more. I think I saw Loaiza strike out just as many batters on his changeup last year as his cutter. All things considered, he pitched well enough for us to win yesterday. We just didn't score any runs.

Lip Man 1
05-10-2004, 12:22 PM
Peter Gammons latest column on ESPN.com is entitled "It's The Pitching Stupid!"

Gammons says there is a reason you see the same teams in the playoffs every season...it's because they spend the most money of starting pitching.

He looks at different staffs, relates it to the price of starting pitchers salaries and says the only 'exceptions' are the staffs in Oakland and Florida. He also said that only once in the past nine years has an average staff won the World Series he says the 'fluke' year was 2002.

I'm always felt the Sox lack of stressing how important starting pitching is has hurt them tremendously since 1994, it costs them playoff spots in 1996 and 2003 and it cost them going further in the playoffs in 2000. ( They basically had zero healthy starters left had the Seattle series extended...)

Of course pitching cost money, big money and the Sox just don't have it. LOL

Lip

SoxxoS
05-10-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Peter Gammons latest column on ESPN.com is entitled "It's The Pitching Stupid!"

Gammons says there is a reason you see the same teams in the playoffs every season...it's because they spend the most money of starting pitching.

He looks at different staffs, relates it to the price of starting pitchers salaries and says the only 'exceptions' are the staffs in Oakland and Florida. He also said that only once in the past nine years has an average staff won the World Series he says the 'fluke' year was 2002.

I'm always felt the Sox lack of stressing how important starting pitching is has hurt them tremendously since 1994, it costs them playoff spots in 1996 and 2003 and it cost them going further in the playoffs in 2000. ( They basically had zero healthy starters left had the Seattle series extended...)

Of course pitching cost money, big money and the Sox just don't have it. LOL

Lip

Lip-

The Sox had Colon, a 2nd runner up in Cy Young, and Mark Buerhle is our 1-2-3 last year, and we were sitting watching the playoffs as usual. That 1-2-3 would have been good enough to win a championship. But we didn't get there...for whatever reason. It definitely just isn't the pitching...last year was a perfect example.

:jerry

"ZZZZZZzzzzzzz"

mdep524
05-10-2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
I'm always felt the Sox lack of stressing how important starting pitching is has hurt them tremendously since 1994, it costs them playoff spots in 1996 and 2003 and it cost them going further in the playoffs in 2000. ( They basically had zero healthy starters left had the Seattle series extended...)

2003?? Are you kidding? Do you seriously believe lack of starting pitching cost the Sox a trip to the playoffs last year? Come on Lip.

TaylorStSox
05-10-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Peter Gammons latest column on ESPN.com is entitled "It's The Pitching Stupid!"

Gammons says there is a reason you see the same teams in the playoffs every season...it's because they spend the most money of starting pitching.

He looks at different staffs, relates it to the price of starting pitchers salaries and says the only 'exceptions' are the staffs in Oakland and Florida. He also said that only once in the past nine years has an average staff won the World Series he says the 'fluke' year was 2002.

I'm always felt the Sox lack of stressing how important starting pitching is has hurt them tremendously since 1994, it costs them playoff spots in 1996 and 2003 and it cost them going further in the playoffs in 2000. ( They basically had zero healthy starters left had the Seattle series extended...)

Of course pitching cost money, big money and the Sox just don't have it. LOL

Lip


You had me up until you said "Peter Gammons." :D:

OEO Magglio
05-10-2004, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Peter Gammons latest column on ESPN.com is entitled "It's The Pitching Stupid!"

Gammons says there is a reason you see the same teams in the playoffs every season...it's because they spend the most money of starting pitching.

He looks at different staffs, relates it to the price of starting pitchers salaries and says the only 'exceptions' are the staffs in Oakland and Florida. He also said that only once in the past nine years has an average staff won the World Series he says the 'fluke' year was 2002.

I'm always felt the Sox lack of stressing how important starting pitching is has hurt them tremendously since 1994, it costs them playoff spots in 1996 and 2003 and it cost them going further in the playoffs in 2000. ( They basically had zero healthy starters left had the Seattle series extended...)

Of course pitching cost money, big money and the Sox just don't have it. LOL
The sox starting pitching last year was the best quality of the team. The sox had some bullpen problems and that huge hitting slump they went in for a while also was a huge reason they didn't make the playoffs the last thing that cost the sox a playoff spot last year was starting pitching.

Lip

santo=dorf
05-10-2004, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by mdep524
2003?? Are you kidding? Do you seriously believe lack of starting pitching cost the Sox a trip to the playoffs last year? Come on Lip.

No fifth starter, an inconsistent 4th starter, and a 1-2 punch that didn't start pitching to their capabilities until June. :angry: :angry: :angry:

Lip Man 1
05-10-2004, 08:43 PM
Santo:

Thank you...you beat me to it.

Lip

OEO Magglio
05-10-2004, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Santo:

Thank you...you beat me to it.

Lip
Ok for some reason my first post didn't show up, but anyways the last thing that cost the sox the division last year was starting pitching, the thing that cost the sox the division was an inconsistent offense which went into huge hitting slumps and the lack of more then two consistent relievers for the majority of the year. The White Sox starting pitching last year was the reason that they were in the race, not what lost them the division.