PDA

View Full Version : Schoeneweis vs. Colon


elrod
05-21-2004, 12:32 AM
This off-season we lost Colon and added Schoeneweis to the rotation. Up to this minute Schoeneweis is 4-1 with a 3.33 ERA. Colon is about to be 4-3 with a 5.17 ERA. So far so good.

StepsInSC
05-21-2004, 12:36 AM
Who knows if it will stay this way, but Colon has looked like crap up until this point. Everytime I see him I forget how fat he actually is.

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by elrod
This off-season we lost Colon and added Schoeneweis to the rotation. Up to this minute Schoeneweis is 4-1 with a 3.33 ERA. Colon is about to be 4-3 with a 5.17 ERA. So far so good.

He didn't do anything for us last year. We're not missing him at all. We're missing an ace, but he isn't it.

ode to veeck
05-21-2004, 12:47 AM
He didn't do anything for us last year.

Batman, what are you talking about here?!?!

I'm not for moaning that he's gone either, but Barto was a stud pitcher for us last year, and was winning some tough gutsy games for us in Sept (when he was 4-2) when others were faltering.

Barto did drop that 3rd game of the sweep at the Twinkie Dome, but only got 3 runs of support that day. He did beat them earlier in the month at the Cell in a great game and also beat the YankMes in between. Prior to the 5-3 loss at Minn, he had given up only 10 runs total in his 5 previous starts and afterwards finished his season up with wins against Yanks and Royals. His only other loss in Sept was 2-1 against the WrongSox where he gave up only two runs in a complete game effort.

not dependable?, never won big games? I thunk you got da wrong guy here ... Barto's 4-2 with 30 something Ks at this point with da Halos, not a bad start , & wish he'da taken Kenny's offer, but we gott win with what we got & I'd hate to face Barto in the playoffs (even if the Sox are a fastball hitting club)

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
Batman, what are you talking about here?!?!

I'm not for moaning that he's gone either, but Barto was a stud pitcher for us last year, and was winning some tough gutsy games for us in Sept (when he was 4-2) when others were faltering.

Barto did drop that 3rd game of the sweep at the Twinkie Dome, but only got 3 runs of support that day. He did beat them earlier in the month at the Cell in a great game and also beat the YankMes in between. Prior to the 5-3 loss at Minn, he had given up only 10 runs total in his 5 previous starts and afterwards finished his season up with wins against Yanks and Royals. His only other loss in Sept was 2-1 against the WrongSox where he gave up only two runs in a complete game effort.

not dependable?, never won big games? I thunk you got da wrong guy here ... Barto's 4-2 with 30 something Ks at this point with da Halos, not a bad start , & wish he'da taken Kenny's offer, but we gott win with what we got & I'd hate to face Barto in the playoffs (even if the Sox are a fastball hitting club)

What was he 15-13? Goodbye.

ode to veeck
05-21-2004, 12:57 AM
Barto was arguably our toughest pitcher in the stretch last year when it was all on the line. Who cares about 15-13? Sox fans should care about guts and effectiveness in the heat of battle. Barto had both last year. Saying he was 15-13 and nothin is either a sabremetrics lost the forest through the trees view or just plain blind bitterness for his leaving. Yeah I hated him when was killed us as a tribesman, but just cause he's gone, doesn't make me blind to what he accomplished as a Sox starter last year.

davidleeroth
05-21-2004, 01:02 AM
bartolo logged a TON of innings for us down the stretch last year. almost every start was 7 innings long and most were 8 or 9. to say that we dont miss that sort of performance is plain out ignorant

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
Barto was arguably our toughest pitcher in the stretch last year when it was all on the line. Who cares about 15-13? Sox fans should care about guts and effectiveness in the heat of battle. Barto had both last year. Saying he was 15-13 and nothin is either a sabremetrics lost the forest through the trees view or just plain blind bitterness for his leaving. Yeah I hated him when was killed us as a tribesman, but just cause he's gone, doesn't make me blind to what he accomplished as a Sox starter last year.

He didn't beat Minnesota when it counted. He wasn't great he was just "well he pitched good enough to win." He never seemed to get a big win when we needed it.

There was a time when I wanted him re-signed but that was because of all the dismantling talk and "the sox are gonna suck next year." But at his price? Gimme a break. No f-in way.

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by davidleeroth
bartolo logged a TON of innings for us down the stretch last year. almost every start was 7 innings long and most were 8 or 9. to say that we dont miss that sort of performance is plain out ignorant

Yeah, that's all he's good for--logging a ton of innings but well...not quite good enough to win us the big games we need. The Angels aren't in first because of him.

We'd be better of with him, but are we going all the way by adding him? No. Look at his numbers right now. That money would be better spent elsewhere.

OurBitchinMinny
05-21-2004, 01:44 AM
He was good for us last year. His record may not have shown it, but he ate up innings and gave us a chance to win almost every night. Im glad they didnt give him as much money as he wanted, but to say he was useless or didnt do anything is wrong. I wouldnt mind him in the rotation, but schoenweis has more than stepped up

StillMissOzzie
05-21-2004, 01:59 AM
I'll jump on this bandwagon too. I'm glad that they didn't give him the extra year that the Angels did, but it's much too early to be gloating about the difference between Bartolo & Shoney. Heck, we're only at the 25% mark today!

SMO

elrod
05-21-2004, 10:55 AM
The point of the original post was not to say that Colon wasn't important for us last year (he was) or that I wouldn't have liked to see him in a White Sox uniform (I would), but to say that Schoeneweis has more than held his own so far. This could change but right now, for the money saved, Schoeneweis is doing a great job and I'm less bitter over losing Colon. Of course we could have had BOTH Colon and Schoeneweis and our 5th starter problem would be gone.

rahulsekhar
05-21-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
What was he 15-13? Goodbye.

Won-loss record is a terrible thing to use as the primary metric of a pitcher's effectiveness. The extreme case is a guy who regularly gives up 2ER but loses 2-1 or 2-0. Does that guy suck?

In any case - Bartolo had en ERA of 3.87 last year, 22 quality starts out of 34, and a September ERA of 2.63. I'm among the first in line to say he got overpaid and is an injury risk because of his weight so I don't miss him here. But to say he didn't have a VERY good year with the Sox in '03 is just plain wrong.

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 11:30 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
Won-loss record is a terrible thing to use as the primary metric of a pitcher's effectiveness. The extreme case is a guy who regularly gives up 2ER but loses 2-1 or 2-0. Does that guy suck?

In any case - Bartolo had en ERA of 3.87 last year, 22 quality starts out of 34, and a September ERA of 2.63. I'm among the first in line to say he got overpaid and is an injury risk because of his weight so I don't miss him here. But to say he didn't have a VERY good year with the Sox in '03 is just plain wrong.

You know why he WAS 15-13---because of 3.87. Tis not good enough for an "ace." Sorry, he did not have a "very good year" are you kidding me?

rahulsekhar
05-21-2004, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
You know why he WAS 15-13---because of 3.87. Tis not good enough for an "ace." Sorry, he did not have a "very good year" are you kidding me?

I'm hoping that was meant to be in teal (or whatever color is for sarcasm, I lose track). 3.87 puts him in the top 15 AL starters, and he did it with the 2d highest IP for the top 15. By comparison, such "stalwarts" as Roger Clemens and Mark Buehrle were worse.

Note, I didn't say he had a studly, CY Young type ofyear, but given a rough 5 starters * 15 teams = 75, to be in the top 15 is what I woudl consider "very good".

ode to veeck
05-21-2004, 01:10 PM
He didn't beat Minnesota when it counted. He wasn't great he was just "well he pitched good enough to win." He never seemed to get a big win when we needed it

Yeah, that's all he's good for--logging a ton of innings but well...not quite good enough to win us the big games we need.

I hate to say it Batman, but you're wayyyyy off the mark here. Barto did beat Minnesota when it counted, at the Cell in early Sept. In a streak from mid August through late Sept where he averaged 2 runs against per game and a high percentage W-L record throughout the stretch run (all big games), pitching into late innings nearly everytime. He gave up three runs in his single loss in a big game at the twinkie dome and then finished with two more wins. Arguably, we wouldn't have been in position to finish off the Twinkies in Sept when we were, if Barto hadn't been such a stud on the mound from mid August to mid September, when it counted against the Twinks, YankMes and WrongSox.

Saying he only had a 15-13 WL and 3.87 ERA is total stathead mindlessness. Were you even watching the games!?!

JRIG
05-21-2004, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by ode to veeck


Saying he only had a 15-13 WL and 3.87 ERA is total stathead mindlessness. Were you even watching the games!?!

Actually, I think most statheads would agree with me that Colon was very effective last season. He ate up a ton of innings and his numbers were about what we should have expected if not a touch better.

That said he was nowhere near the money Anaheim shelled out for him and I'm happy we didn't tie ourselves down with another huge contract.

DirtySouthsider
05-21-2004, 01:21 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by batmanZoSo
[B] The Angels aren't in first because of him.



The Angels are in first......and have the best record in baseball.

Kuzman
05-21-2004, 01:23 PM
i actually agree with batman on this one, he wanted too much for what he had offered and im glad he is gone. So if you guys are impressed with the 15-13 record he had last year why dont we just bring back danny WRONG and have him pitch, he had a good stretch at the end of the 200 season.. thats all bartolo is, a fat danny wrong

Mickster
05-21-2004, 01:23 PM
Interesting Colon Notes about his struggles:

LINKY (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=fanball-angelscolonstrugglin&prov=fanball&type=lgns)

DirtySouthsider
05-21-2004, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by Kuzman
i actually agree with batman on this one, he wanted too much for what he had offered and im glad he is gone. So if you guys are impressed with the 15-13 record he had last year why dont we just bring back danny WRONG and have him pitch, he had a good stretch at the end of the 200 season.. thats all bartolo is, a fat danny wrong


Why even post something as ignorant as that???

longshot7
05-21-2004, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by DirtySouthsider
[QUOTE]Originally posted by batmanZoSo
[B] The Angels are in first......and have the best record in baseball.

But not because of Colon. I loved him last year with the Sox - big inning eater, gave us a chance to win every ballgame, but he's struggled in this still-early season.

As an Angels season ticketholder, I've seen him pitch twice so far this year. His command isn't what it was, and he takes so much time on that mound between pitches, I'm surprised his defense doesn't fall asleep. I'm not convinced it's the weight - but something's different. BTW, the Angels won both games I saw him pitch because of timely hitting and a stellar bullpen. the fact that they're in first despite losing Anderson, Glaus, Salmon, and Erstad is a testament to their depth and bench, who have really stepped up. Chone Figgins is carrying that team, believe it or not.

If Bartolo can turn it around, watch out.

SpringfldFan
05-21-2004, 01:41 PM
If the thread is supposed to gauge the how much it hurt to lose Colon, then the premise of this thread is inaccurate. Whether or not we kept Colon has nothing to do with Schoenwise. He was going to be part of the rotation anyway this year. Therefore, who is really replacing Colon this year? Yep, that's right - the fifth starter. The title of this thread would more aptly be "Colon vs Wright, Diaz, and Cotts". Now tell me how much it didn't hurt our rotation to lose Colon.

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by ode to veeck


Saying he only had a 15-13 WL and 3.87 ERA is total stathead mindlessness. Were you even watching the games!?!

Stating numerical FACTS is mindlessness?

batmanZoSo
05-21-2004, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by JRIG


That said he was nowhere near the money Anaheim shelled out for him and I'm happy we didn't tie ourselves down with another huge contract.

People, just refer to this /\ and no more messages to me about " he ate up a lot of innings down the stretch" and "shouldn't that have been in teal?"

A near .500 pitcher with an era pushing 4 is not worth 12 million or whatever he's making. How could anyone disagree with that?

I already stated that we'd be better with him right now, but not WS contenders, which is the goal. And he'd be tying up a ton of payroll for relatively* mediocre numbers. Now he's doing less and making more. And with a great, great lineup behind him.

bigdommer
05-21-2004, 08:07 PM
Bartolo was a horse...no doubt about it. He took the ball, and he went out and shoved it every fifth day. I would just get frustrated with his apparent carelessness. He would look great, throwing 97 with movement (at LA, at Wrigley (marte blew it)) and other times he would fall apart frustrate everybody (the Cub game, eventually won by Jimenez, and the Tiger game right after the break when he pooped himself).

The Sox got him to the be the ace of the staff and lead us to the playoffs, and he proved to be not as good as Burly from the year before and Esteban the year of. So, why give a guy ace money and ace years if constantly tried not to be the ace?

If I had one game to win it all, I would probably pick Bartolo over Shoney. But, over the case of the year, and considering salaries, no doubt in my mind that I'll take Shoney.

elrod
05-21-2004, 10:55 PM
If the thread is supposed to gauge the how much it hurt to lose Colon, then the premise of this thread is inaccurate. Whether or not we kept Colon has nothing to do with Schoenwise. He was going to be part of the rotation anyway this year. Therefore, who is really replacing Colon this year? Yep, that's right - the fifth starter. The title of this thread would more aptly be "Colon vs Wright, Diaz, and Cotts". Now tell me how much it didn't hurt our rotation to lose Colon.

No, Schoeneweis really did replace Colon in the rotation. Schoeneweis was not a starter last year. Danny Wright and Colon were both starters on our rotation then. This year Danny Wright and Schoeneweis were starters and Colon was gone. Whether Schoeneweis "would have been" a starter this year even if we signed Colon is irrelevant because it's unknown. So Schoeneweis effectively replaced Colon in the rotation.

Tragg
05-21-2004, 10:58 PM
It's not an either/or situation anyway. We had both at one time. We didn't want to pay Colon what the Angels gave him (and given our budget, a wise choice). Williams got Scho for nothing (although a few full-mooners complain about losing Glover like they do about losing Jiminez and his 222 batting average)

ode to veeck
05-22-2004, 01:43 PM
Actually, I was not disputing whether or not we should have matched the Halos offer (we shouldn't have, especially the length of the contract), nor was I bemoaning Colon being gone (wouda coulda shoulda old story there).

Rather, I was disputing statements in the thread about his value to us last year, i.e., comments about him not winning "big games" "when it counted" for us last year, when in fact he was the stud of the staff from mid august onwards (6-2 W-L, 2.4 ERA, including a CG 2-1 loss to Boston, deep innings, etc).

When it counted, he played a major role carrying us into a tight pennant race and woulda been very tough in the playoffs had we made it. To think otherwise is just plain blind.

SEALgep
05-22-2004, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
Actually, I was not disputing whether or not we should have matched the Halos offer (we shouldn't have, especially the length of the contract), nor was I bemoaning Colon being gone (wouda coulda shoulda old story there).

Rather, I was disputing statements in the thread about his value to us last year, i.e., comments about him not winning "big games" "when it counted" for us last year, when in fact he was the stud of the staff from mid august onwards (6-2 W-L, 2.4 ERA, including a CG 2-1 loss to Boston, deep innings, etc).

When it counted, he played a major role carrying us into a tight pennant race and woulda been very tough in the playoffs had we made it. To think otherwise is just plain blind. I think we all wanted Colon back, but KW suggested that if we had signed Colon, we would have had to trade Maggs. I just assume to have it the way it turned out.