PDA

View Full Version : An Indictment of the Sox Organization


chisoxt
06-19-2004, 11:00 PM
That's what this debacle of not being able to find a fifth starter has resulted in. If this is the "best" pitching that we have in our organization, then we are not just in trouble this year, but for years to come.

Moreover, not finding a fifth starter and competent bullpen help in the off-season is inexcusable. Granted, it's perhaps harder to find a starter but at the very least, the Sox brass should have signed some decent relief pitching, ther were plenty of guys available...Cliff Politte??? Give me a break.

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:12 PM
That's what this debacle of not being able to find a fifth starter has resulted in. If this is the "best" pitching that we have in our organization, then we are not just in trouble this year, but for years to come.

Moreover, not finding a fifth starter and competent bullpen help in the off-season is inexcusable. Granted, it's perhaps harder to find a starter but at the very least, the Sox brass should have signed some decent relief pitching, ther were plenty of guys available...Cliff Politte??? Give me a break.I was going to post basically this same thread tonight. The White Sox have been staggeringly, shocking ineffective in developing pitchers. Take a look at the homegrown, contributing talent on the roster the past few years. You can disagree, but I'm not counting Garland (Cubs), Cotts (A's), or Foulke and Howry (SF).

2004:
Buehrle

2003:
Buehrle

2002:
Buehrle
Wright (injured)
Biddle (now gone)

2001:
Buehrle
Biddle (now gone)
Baldwin (AAA with NY)
K. Wells (now gone)

That's beyond pathetic.

Lip Man 1
06-19-2004, 11:16 PM
Which is why I have asked the question in the past (I don't think it's really been answered...) that since the Sox can't seem to develop pitching and won't spend money signing top free agent pitching (they will trade for it however) how do you expect to win anything of substance? (besides "luck..")


Lip

TaylorStSox
06-19-2004, 11:20 PM
It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks.

As a result, we have some guys who are good pitchers, but none with absolutely lights out stuff.

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:22 PM
It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks.

As a result, we have some guys who are good pitchers, but none with absolutely lights out stuff.
Ace studs I could live without. A guy to come up and be the long man out of the bullpen would be nice. We can't even produce that.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:24 PM
I was going to post basically this same thread tonight. The White Sox have been staggeringly, shocking ineffective in developing pitchers. Take a look at the homegrown, contributing talent on the roster the past few years. You can disagree, but I'm not counting Garland (Cubs), Cotts (A's), or Foulke and Howry (SF).

2004:
Buehrle

2003:
Buehrle

2002:
Buehrle
Wright (injured)
Biddle (now gone)

2001:
Buehrle
Biddle (now gone)
Baldwin (AAA with NY)
K. Wells (now gone)

That's beyond pathetic.
A bit unfair to remove those guys. Garland spent most of his time with the Sox, the place where he's at now is due more to them than to the 2-3 years (IIRC) he spent with the Cubs. Cotts: 1.5 years spent with the A's, 1.5 with the Sox.

If you do that, then you need to add Kip Wells & Josh Fogg to the Sox side of the ledger, no? And Franklin Francisco and anyone else they've dealt away (Ginter? Guerrier?)

beckett21
06-19-2004, 11:26 PM
If you do that, then you need to add Kip Wells & Josh Fogg to the Sox side of the ledger, no? And Franklin Francisco and anyone else they've dealt away (Ginter? Guerrier?)
Not sure if that is helping your argument.....

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:26 PM
A bit unfair to remove those guys. Garland spent most of his time with the Sox, the place where he's at now is due more to them than to the 2-3 years (IIRC) he spent with the Cubs. Cotts: 1.5 years spent with the A's, 1.5 with the Sox.

If you do that, then you need to add Kip Wells & Josh Fogg to the Sox side of the ledger, no? And Franklin Francisco and anyone else they've dealt away (Ginter? Guerrier?)
Kip Wells is on the list. I'll reconsider and give you Garland. Cotts was virtually ML ready when he arrived. He piched in the majors his first year with the organization. No go on him. And heck, I'm talking about contributuing members of a staff. Ginter and Guerrier haven't done a thing yet.

jeremyb1
06-19-2004, 11:28 PM
That's what this debacle of not being able to find a fifth starter has resulted in.

If you ask me, it's an indictment of KW and Ozzie but not the organizations pitching. We've had five starts since Wright was demoted and we've yet to take a reasonable look at a single pitcher for the fifth spot.

Lip Man 1
06-19-2004, 11:28 PM
Taylor says: "It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks."

Agreed... so again what is the answer?

My opinion... the Sox have to start spending money on pitching and stop trying to cut corners. That's the only way to get the depth and at least in theory, guys who have a track record of getting major league hitters out. They've cut corners as an example the last four years and have always come up short.

Lip

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:29 PM
If you ask me, it's an indictment of KW and Ozzie but not the organizations pitching. We've had five starts since Wright was demoted and we've yet to take a reasonable look at a single pitcher for the fifth spot.
Would you at least agree there might be something wrong with the way we're developing our pitching? From the Jonestown Massacre of injuries of 2001 to present there has been no pitchers up through the sytem except for Buehrle. Not even a solid bullpen arm. Nothing.

beckett21
06-19-2004, 11:31 PM
We've had five starts since Wright was demoted and we've yet to take a reasonable look at a single pitcher for the fifth spot.
I have to agree. That has been my biggest point of contention since this whole Charlotte/Birmingham shuttle started.

jeremyb1
06-19-2004, 11:39 PM
I was going to post basically this same thread tonight. The White Sox have been staggeringly, shocking ineffective in developing pitchers. Take a look at the homegrown, contributing talent on the roster the past few years. You can disagree, but I'm not counting Garland (Cubs), Cotts (A's), or Foulke and Howry (SF).

2004:
Buehrle

2003:
Buehrle

2002:
Buehrle
Wright (injured)
Biddle (now gone)

2001:
Buehrle
Biddle (now gone)
Baldwin (AAA with NY)
K. Wells (now gone)

That's beyond pathetic.

I don't see how you can count pitchers we've traded but not pitchers we've traded for. That seems unconsistent and geared towards biased results against the organization. You're looking at trading successful home grown talent as a negative but not acquiring young talent and developing it successfully as a positive. In Garlands case he'd yet to pitch above Low A when we acquired him so we were responsible for 90% of his development.

There are a couple factors into play here. First of all, young pitching takes a while to develop especially if you call guys up before they've completely proven themselves at the minor league level. Garland was called up at 20 after only a strong half a season at AAA with weak peripherals and look what's happened to him. It took him parts of two seasons to be a decent starter and he just now seems as though he could be turning a corner.

The second issue here is that many seem to have unreasonable expectations for developing young pitching. People hear about so many young pitching prospects that they expect many good young pitchers. The reality is that even when you have strong pitchers at the AA or AAA level the overwhelming majority of pitching will not pan out. Young pitchers sustain injuries (Rauch, Malone, Wright), are traded (Wells, Myette, Ring, Ginter), and often just fail to develop (West, Purvis, Ulacia). It's easy to assume this doesn't happen in other organizations because it seems unreasonable but that's largely a result of fans ussually only following one team's minor league system closely.

Most teams don't sport rotations bolstered with young, home grown talent. I once posted a list with the home grown pitchers in each team's rotation. Most teams have not developed aces. The Sox have developed one in Buehrle and a strong three that's still quite young in Garland so we're actually above average over the last few years. Once you get past the obvious teams that often have strong young rotations largely as a result of picking in the top five spots in the draft (A's: Mulder, Zito; Cubs: Prior, Wood) you won't find teams that surpass our ability to develop young pitching by a considerable margin. My only advice is to temper your expectations.

TaylorStSox
06-19-2004, 11:40 PM
Taylor says: "It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks."

Agreed... so again what is the answer?

My opinion... the Sox have to start spending money on pitching and stop trying to cut corners. That's the only way to get the depth and at least in theory, guys who have a track record of getting major league hitters out. They've cut corners as an example the last four years and have always come up short.

Lip
The answer is to be creative. KW's done well within his means. He basically stole Colon and Wells. Unfortunately, they didn't perform like they're capable, or have in the past.

Unfortunately, there weren't any aces available this year. Pettite would have never come to Chicago. Colon took more money. Ponson wasn't worth going after. Even if we'd have had the money to spend on an ace we still wouldn't have one. There weren't any out there.

Two of our top 3 starters are from our farm. MB is a damn fine number 2. Garland is a good 4, sometimes 3.

We're still only one starter away everyone. This teams good. There's no question.

illiniwhitesox
06-19-2004, 11:44 PM
If we are going to continue to surface arms out of the minors, just to get shelled by a mediocre battery, I would rather see us stick with Cotts as a 5th starter.

Don't let him pitch too many innings and set it up as a goal to have him ready as a reliable starter, capable of pitching 7 innings, towards the end of the year.

The flavor of the week has to end. No offense to KW, but we have been hearing about the WS acquiring a 5th starter for a solid 6 weeks now. Guess what? There are a lot of teams out there that need a 5th starter as well.
Every week that passes, the price goes up.

I see Cotts being like Schoenweiss. Everyone knows he has solid stuff - he just needs coaching and experience. He clearly will be a starter at some point in his career. We have nothing better down in the minors.

We can't keep phoning in every 5th start!

DrCrawdad
06-19-2004, 11:45 PM
What about Chad Bradford and Scott Eyre? They were both former Sox pitchers who've had a measure of success.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:45 PM
Kip Wells is on the list. I'll reconsider and give you Garland. Cotts was virtually ML ready when he arrived. He piched in the majors his first year with the organization. No go on him. And heck, I'm talking about contributuing members of a staff. Ginter and Guerrier haven't done a thing yet.
Yes, but adding those gives you from '01 to '04, 3 solid to very good ML pitchers. Without any hard data to back it up, I'd guess that's actually above average for an ML team, to average just under 1 good starter/yr developed from within the org.

Unless you're the A's (4 pitchers, but 3 in one burst and then a while before the 4th), or Cubs (3 - Clement doesn't count and Prior was a fluke in that he's a once in a LONG while guy, didn't really need any development, and should have been a Twin), I don't know that any teams have done better. Even the Marlins have gotten very good results out of guys from other orgs - Penny, Pavano, Willis (by your system, he's a Cub).

jeremyb1
06-19-2004, 11:45 PM
Would you at least agree there might be something wrong with the way we're developing our pitching? From the Jonestown Massacre of injuries of 2001 to present there has been no pitchers up through the sytem except for Buehrle. Not even a solid bullpen arm. Nothing.

I don't have too many complaints, no. As I argue in my post above I just can't name that many teams that are making us look bad by comparison. Young pitchers are notoriously difficult to project a lot of which has to do with health concerns. I'm convinced that if Rauch hadn't injured his shoulder in '01 he'd already be an All-Star and our homegrown trio of Rauch, Buehrle, and Garland would be referred to as one of the best young staffs in the game. One injury to one pitcher can make a huge difference. Any way you cut it something like 85% of pitching prospects are never going to be above average major league starters and when you consider that most teams have a few guys every year that get hyped up that's going to lead to a ton of dissapointment.

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:46 PM
I don't see how you can count pitchers we've traded but not pitchers we've traded for. That seems unconsistent and geared towards biased results against the organization. You're looking at trading successful home grown talent as a negative but not acquiring young talent and developing it successfully as a positive. In Garlands case he'd yet to pitch above Low A when we acquired him so we were responsible for 90% of his development.

There are a couple factors into play here. First of all, young pitching takes a while to develop especially if you call guys up before they've completely proven themselves at the minor league level. Garland was called up at 20 after only a strong half a season at AAA with weak peripherals and look what's happened to him. It took him parts of two seasons to be a decent starter and he just now seems as though he could be turning a corner.

The second issue here is that many seem to have unreasonable expectations for developing young pitching. People hear about so many young pitching prospects that they expect many good young pitchers. The reality is that even when you have strong pitchers at the AA or AAA level the overwhelming majority of pitching will not pan out. Young pitchers sustain injuries (Rauch, Malone, Wright), are traded (Wells, Myette, Ring, Ginter), and often just fail to develop (West, Purvis, Ulacia). It's easy to assume this doesn't happen in other organizations because it seems unreasonable but that's largely a result of fans ussually only following one team's minor league system closely.

Most teams don't sport rotations bolstered with young, home grown talent. I once posted a list with the home grown pitchers in each team's rotation. Most teams have not developed aces. The Sox have developed one in Buehrle and a strong three that's still quite young in Garland so we're actually above average over the last few years. Once you get past the obvious teams that often have strong young rotations largely as a result of picking in the top five spots in the draft (A's: Mulder, Zito; Cubs: Prior, Wood) you won't find teams that surpass our ability to develop young pitching by a considerable margin. My only advice is to temper your expectations.
Point of information: Since 2001, what pitchers have the Sox developed at the low minor league level, then traded or gave away who became contributing major league pitchers?

Kip Wells
Josh Fogg
Rocky Biddle

Anyone else? I'm sure there is, but I can't think of any of the top of my head.

I'm not counting players the Sox have acquired because my point is I think there's an inherent flaw in the way we're developing pitchers. Players at the AA level or higher when acquired have had much of the developoing already done for the Sox by another organization.

TornLabrum
06-19-2004, 11:46 PM
If we are going to continue to surface arms out of the minors, just to get shelled by a mediocre battery, I would rather see us stick with Cotts as a 5th starter.

Don't let him pitch too many innings and set it up as a goal to have him ready as a reliable starter, capable of pitching 7 innings, towards the end of the year.

The flavor of the week has to end. No offense to KW, but we have been hearing about the WS acquiring a 5th starter for a solid 6 weeks now. Guess what? There are a lot of teams out there that need a 5th starter as well.
Every week that passes, the price goes up.

I see Cotts being like Schoenweiss. Everyone knows he has solid stuff - he just needs coaching and experience. He clearly will be a starter at some point in his career. We have nothing better down in the minors.

We can't keep phoning in every 5th start!
The story is that Williams is looking for more than a fifth starter. The problem is getting anyone to part with a #1-3 guy like he wants before late July.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:46 PM
What about Chad Bradford and Scott Eyre? They were both former Sox pitchers who've had a measure of success.
Isn't Eyre out of baseball? And as for Bradford.....he's had some good years, but right now he's on my S**T list for blowing that game v. the Flubs. (Not to mention I had just added him to my fantasy team in hope of some cheap saves!)

jeremyb1
06-19-2004, 11:48 PM
I would rather see us stick with Cotts as a 5th starter.

I would rather just stick with someone, anyone. If you have enough confidence in a guy to call him up you should have enough confidence to stick with him for four or five starts at a minimum.

JRIG
06-19-2004, 11:49 PM
Isn't Eyre out of baseball? And as for Bradford.....he's had some good years, but right now he's on my S**T list for blowing that game v. the Flubs. (Not to mention I had just added him to my fantasy team in hope of some cheap saves!)
Both of those players were also dumped before the 2001 season.

DrCrawdad
06-19-2004, 11:50 PM
I would rather just stick with someone, anyone. If you have enough confidence in a guy to call him up you should have enough confidence to stick with him for four or five starts at a minimum.

I agree. Nothing like having one (or in Diaz' case two) start to prove you're the guy.

MRKARNO
06-19-2004, 11:51 PM
We're still only one starter away everyone. This teams good. There's no question.
We need 2 bullpen guys too, but bullpen help isnt hard to get.

Methinks Courtney Duncan, Jose Santiago, Kelly Wunsch and Jeff Bajaneru could all do a better job than Jackson, Politte or Cotts. One of them might be worse, but three of the four have significant ML experience and the other is our top bullpen prospect. I would at least promote Santiago at the very least. I think on Sunday afternoon we might be able to expect expect Politte or Jackson to get sent down.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:52 PM
I would rather just stick with someone, anyone. If you have enough confidence in a guy to call him up you should have enough confidence to stick with him for four or five starts at a minimum.
Exactly. Diaz should have been kept around for another start. It's too bad Rauch had his head up his posterior after his outing because he would have been the guy here. Not to say that he'd necessarily do any better, but if you have ANY belief that a guy can get it done, I think you need to give him 3-5 starts without looking over his shoulder before you yank him. One problem is that through the vagaries of young pitching, Sox bad moves, and sheer bad luck, this 5th starter thing has taken on something of a life of it's own, making it more difficult for management to stick through the inevitable struggles of rookie pitchers.

OEO Magglio
06-19-2004, 11:53 PM
Taylor says: "It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks."

Agreed... so again what is the answer?

My opinion... the Sox have to start spending money on pitching and stop trying to cut corners. That's the only way to get the depth and at least in theory, guys who have a track record of getting major league hitters out. They've cut corners as an example the last four years and have always come up short.

LipLip, you won't have any argument here that it would be great for them to start picking up free agent starters and start spending some money on pitching. Unfortunately this leaves it for kenny to some how get creative and maybe have to throw in an extra prospect or a better prospect to get the other team who he's trading with to pick up the money. Right now the higher systems of the minor leagues lack pitching depth. I think cotts has a chance to be a very good pitcher. Unfortunately honel and wing both went down this year with injuries. I don't think rauch has a chance to succeed here anymore, diaz might be a descent starter one day but nothing special and I really think arnie will be a solid pitcher one day also just not now. This is why this years draft was to stock pile pitching depth i.e. lumsden, gonzalez, whistler,etc. Hopefully this years draft will help with adding some descent arms down on the farm.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:53 PM
Point of information: Since 2001, what pitchers have the Sox developed at the low minor league level, then traded or gave away who became contributing major league pitchers?

Kip Wells
Josh Fogg
Rocky Biddle

Anyone else? I'm sure there is, but I can't think of any of the top of my head.

I'm not counting players the Sox have acquired because my point is I think there's an inherent flaw in the way we're developing pitchers. Players at the AA level or higher when acquired have had much of the developoing already done for the Sox by another organization.
I think once problem there is that anyone in the low minors in 2001 is highly unlikely to be ML ready 3 years later, unless you had some top-10 pick type studs there. The rest all tend to need a lot more seasoning.

But someone with more knowledge of player development can feel free to correct me on that if I'm mistaken.

MRKARNO
06-19-2004, 11:54 PM
Isn't Eyre out of baseball?
Eyre has actually had a good deal of success in the San Francisco bullpen. 3.32 ERA last year and a 3.44 ERA so far this year. Since he left the White Sox, he's had 2/3 of a bad year and he's been pretty solid otherwise.

jeremyb1
06-19-2004, 11:55 PM
Point of information: Since 2001, what pitchers have the Sox developed at the low minor league level, then traded or gave away who became contributing major league pitchers?

Kip Wells
Josh Fogg
Rocky Biddle

Anyone else? I'm sure there is, but I can't think of any of the top of my head.

I'm not counting players the Sox have acquired because my point is I think there's an inherent flaw in the way we're developing pitchers. Players at the AA level or higher when acquired have had much of the developoing already done for the Sox by another organization.

Hahaha. Well I might debate calling Biddle a contributing pitcher after his ERA reached the sevens tonight. The problem with looking for guys that we traded since '01 that have become contributing pitchers is in part that there's not enough time yet to see how they turn out. For someone we traded in '01 that was in the high minors or majors such as Wells it's enough time but if we traded someone in the low minors in '01 or in the high minors in the last year or two, it may not have been enough time for them to develop with another club yet.

As far as other guys that have had some success in other organizations, Ginter has been stellar for the Mets in 5 or 6 starts this season, Guerrier is now the Twin's 5 after being booted from the Marlins, Francisco is in a setup role on the Rangers, Myette has pitched with Cleveland and Texas but struggled quite a bit. As far as guys we might hear from before real long, Ring has a 2.9 ERA in AAA. This isn't a ton of guys but by trading a lot of guys we remove a lot of the guys that might be looked to in the organization. As I said in another post, one pitcher can make a huge difference. If Ginter is our five and pitches anything like he has for the Mets this thread doesn't exist.

Flight #24
06-19-2004, 11:56 PM
Unfortunately this leaves it for kenny to some how get creative and maybe have to throw in an extra prospect or a better prospect to get the other team who he's trading with to pick up the money.
Hopefully between saving some $$ on Koch, and JR supposedly agreeing to up payroll "as much as necessary" to make this a WS team, we can take on the salaries and thereby give up less in prospects. The problem is that those type of deals don't generally occur this early in the season. At this point, teams are really trying to maximize the talent they get in return. The ability to ake on $$$ matters more near the deadline, and that' when you can get some steals (i.e. Cubs v. Pirates last few years). Hopefully the Sox can do that this year.

JRIG
06-20-2004, 12:00 AM
Hahaha. Well I might debate calling Biddle a contributing pitcher after his ERA reached the sevens tonight. The problem with looking for guys that we traded since '01 that have become contributing pitchers is in part that there's not enough time yet to see how they turn out. For someone we traded in '01 that was in the high minors or majors such as Wells it's enough time but if we traded someone in the low minors in '01 or in the high minors in the last year or two, it may not have been enough time for them to develop with another club yet.

As far as other guys that have had some success in other organizations, Ginter has been stellar for the Mets in 5 or 6 starts this season, Guerrier is now the Twin's 5 after being booted from the Marlins, Francisco is in a setup role on the Rangers, Myette has pitched with Cleveland and Texas but struggled quite a bit. As far as guys we might hear from before real long, Ring has a 2.9 ERA in AAA. This isn't a ton of guys but by trading a lot of guys we remove a lot of the guys that might be looked to in the organization. As I said in another post, one pitcher can make a huge difference. If Ginter is our five and pitches anything like he has for the Mets this thread doesn't exist.
This would be tough to prove anything without getting better information from other organizations on pitchers they have developed. I guess my point (if I have one) is that it seems very suspicious/troubling to me that for the past three seasons (02/03/04), the Sox have not had one pitcher major-league ready arm. No one brought up during that time span has contributed a thing.

And I know Rauch and Malone have been injured. And I don't mean this as a reaction to the 5th starter troubles. I'm concerned.

TaylorStSox
06-20-2004, 12:06 AM
We need 2 bullpen guys too, but bullpen help isnt hard to get.

Methinks Courtney Duncan, Jose Santiago, Kelly Wunsch and Jeff Bajaneru could all do a better job than Jackson, Politte or Cotts. One of them might be worse, but three of the four have significant ML experience and the other is our top bullpen prospect. I would at least promote Santiago at the very least. I think on Sunday afternoon we might be able to expect expect Politte or Jackson to get sent down.
I think we need one. We have out the 8th and 9th filled. We need a power righty for the 7/8th when needed.

Cotts should have never been in the pen. He should have been starting on this team or AAA since the beginning of the season. You don't take a guy that's had tons of success as a starter his whole life and then send him to the pen. He's in no man's land right now. He needs consistant work. He's got good stuff. He should be getting the ball every 5 days to work on his 3rd pitch. I still think he should be the 5th starter. Unfortunately, the organization let him down. Now, he doesn't have the stamina to step into the roll. At this point, he's your situation lefty and a damn good one.

Politte is your situational righty and mop up guy. He's got a million dollar arm and no confidence to pitch inside.

Adkins is your long reliever.

jeremyb1
06-20-2004, 12:17 AM
This would be tough to prove anything without getting better information from other organizations on pitchers they have developed. I guess my point (if I have one) is that it seems very suspicious/troubling to me that for the past three seasons (02/03/04), the Sox have not had one pitcher major-league ready arm. No one brought up during that time span has contributed a thing.

I forgot to address this in the other post but I agree with you that if we trade for a guy that's pitched in the high minors we shouldn't take all that much credit. However, most of the guys that we dealt for such as Cotts and Garland had yet to pitch in AA.

If you want I could just try to do a quick run through off the top of my head of some other teams that haven't developed strong starters recently. I have to take issue with you about relivers because while he hasn't been tremendous, Cotts is currently in the major league pen, Majewski and Bajearneau have been dominant yet haven't been promoted, Munoz and Meaux were side tracked as he they were converted into starters, and Francisco, Ginter, and Ring are succeeding in other organizations.

Milwaukee (Sheets, top five pick)
Detroit (Bonderman acquired from Oakland yet to impress at MLB, no one else better than Maroth)
KC (Affeldt a dissapointment)
Texas (have struggled horribly with developing pitching)
Blue Jays (only Halladay recently)
D Rays (no strong starters to speak of, Brazelton a top 5 pick has yet to pan out)
Montreal (Day was acquired from Cleveland, Armas has been injured)
Atlanta (despite reputation for producing pitchers, traded Perez, and haven't developed any other pitchers outside Ramirez in recent memory as Moss was a huge fluke)
Cardinals (no strong starter since Morris 5 or 6 years back)
Pirates (Perez, Wells acquired in trades, Benson was a ways back)
Arizona (Webb is stellar but have developed little else)

Finally even a team with a reputation of developing home grown pitching in the Marlins acquired Willis, Burnett, and Penny in trades and drafted Beckett 2nd overall. Personally I think they get decent credit for Penny, Burnett, Willis but they didn't draft them.

I'm sure I left out some teams and maybe forgot to list some strong players for a few teams I did list but hopefully that supports the general idea that most teams are getting one strong starter ever 2-3 years at best. That's the norm.

Rudy Law
06-20-2004, 12:21 AM
What I want to know is what happened to the 36 million they offered to Colon.......It sure would look real good right now if the Sox had taken some of that money and gone after someone like Freddy Garcia this winter when they had the chance and he wasn't the most coveted pitcher on the trade market....But just like the money they aren't going to give to Maggs Reinsdorf is going to pocket it and we are going to lose probably one of the best player in Sox history.......Williams needs to make a trade right now before the 5th spot is due to pitch again....Anything is better than this.......I can't believe I am going to say this but....Hell give me Kip Wells.....I say give Seattle Borchard.....because if the same guys who scouted and signed these pitchers we are running up there scouted him then we have NOTHING to lose....

JRIG
06-20-2004, 12:23 AM
I forgot to address this in the other post but I agree with you that if we trade for a guy that's pitched in the high minors we shouldn't take all that much credit. However, most of the guys that we dealt for such as Cotts and Garland had yet to pitch in AA.

If you want I could just try to do a quick run through off the top of my head of some other teams that haven't developed strong starters recently. I have to take issue with you about relivers because while he hasn't been tremendous, Cotts is currently in the major league pen, Majewski and Bajearneau have been dominant yet haven't been promoted, Munoz and Meaux were side tracked as he they were converted into starters, and Francisco, Ginter, and Ring are succeeding in other organizations.

Milwaukee (Sheets, top five pick)
Detroit (Bonderman acquired from Oakland yet to impress at MLB, no one else better than Maroth)
KC (Affeldt a dissapointment)
Texas (have struggled horribly with developing pitching)
Blue Jays (only Halladay recently)
D Rays (no strong starters to speak of, Brazelton a top 5 pick has yet to pan out)
Montreal (Day was acquired from Cleveland, Armas has been injured)
Atlanta (despite reputation for producing pitchers, traded Perez, and haven't developed any other pitchers outside Ramirez in recent memory as Moss was a huge fluke)
Cardinals (no strong starter since Morris 5 or 6 years back)
Pirates (Perez, Wells acquired in trades, Benson was a ways back)
Arizona (Webb is stellar but have developed little else)

Finally even a team with a reputation of developing home grown pitching in the Marlins acquired Willis, Burnett, and Penny in trades and drafted Beckett 2nd overall. Personally I think they get decent credit for Penny, Burnett, Willis but they didn't draft them.

I'm sure I left out some teams and maybe forgot to list some strong players for a few teams I did list but hopefully that supports the general idea that most teams are getting one strong starter ever 2-3 years at best. That's the norm.
I don't mean to pick apart every part of your post, but Kelvim Escober was developed by the Jays and had success before leaving via FA. Not an ace, but a solid pitcher.

TaylorStSox
06-20-2004, 12:23 AM
What I want to know is what happened to the 36 million they offered to Colon.......It sure would look real good right now if the Sox had taken some of that money and gone after someone like Freddy Garcia this winter when they had the chance and he wasn't the most coveted pitcher on the trade market....But just like the money they aren't going to give to Maggs Reinsdorf is going to pocket it and we are going to lose probably one of the best player in Sox history.......Williams needs to make a trade right now before the 5th spot is due to pitch again....Anything is better than this.......I can't believe I am going to say this but....Hell give me Kip Wells.....I say give Seattle Borchard.....because if the same guys who scouted and signed these pitchers we are running up there scouted him then we have NOTHING to lose....
Offseason trades of that nature aren't going to happen. Seattle began the year thinking they'd be in contention. They didn't predict they'd suck so much. So essentially, you'd have to give up way more for Garcia in the offseason than right now.

TornLabrum
06-20-2004, 12:28 AM
What I want to know is what happened to the 36 million they offered to Colon.......
$14 million of it went to Ordonez, who probably would have been traded if Colon had taken the Sox offer.

Lip Man 1
06-20-2004, 12:37 AM
Eyre had some kind of emotional or psychological illness when he was a bust for the Sox. Seriously. I think it was akin to 'stage fright.' Apparently the Jays or Giants discovered it and he's on some medication now for it.

I don't know how common this is so I don't know if you can hold the Sox 'crack' medical staff accountable for this bobo.

Lip

doublem23
06-20-2004, 12:44 AM
It has alot to do with draft position as well. We never pick in the top 10. True ace studs rarely go below the first 10-15 picks.

As a result, we have some guys who are good pitchers, but none with absolutely lights out stuff.
Mark Buehrle... 38th round?

DrCrawdad
06-20-2004, 12:45 AM
Eyre had some kind of emotional or psychological illness when he was a bust for the Sox. Seriously. I think it was akin to 'stage fright.' Apparently the Jays or Giants discovered it and he's on some medication now for it.

I don't know how common this is so I don't know if you can hold the Sox 'crack' medical staff accountable for this bobo.

Lip

IIRC Eyre was later diagonosed with Attention Deficit Disorder.

TaylorStSox
06-20-2004, 01:11 AM
Mark Buehrle... 38th round?
So you name one of the few oddities in the history of baseball. I'll give you that. However, we're talking about true aces. MB, while being a great pitcer, doesn't have "ace stuff."

2 reasons why that post was moot.

daveeym
06-20-2004, 03:16 AM
Ok spent too much time on other threads and didn't want to read throught all of this one so maybe it was mentioned but i think the biggest problem is that we've been competing every year, look at how the tigers pitchers got lit up last year but after having a full year in the bigs have been competitive this year. I think the problem is less how they are being developed in the minors and more that they don't get to struggle and develop once in the bigs because we've had teams that should win and our competing year in year out. You can't afford to let these guys learn on the job, you're not getting the studs because of draft position that'll step right in, yet we're getting killed in this fifth starter spot and trading these guys for veterans. Until we step up and pay for some proven guys that'll be sticking around for a few years it's gonna be cyclical. Rent a pitcher for some prospects instead of developing the prospects and trying to spot fill with prospects instead of running with them.

soxtalker
06-20-2004, 08:40 AM
I've often thought that there was something wrong in the way that the organization (a) makes draft decisions and (b) develops the pitchers in the minor leagues. Having said that, the comments about us not drafting high for a very long time certainly would seem to be a factor. Here's a question on the drafting decisions. I've been fairly critical of KW in the past, but I have been impressed at how he has been able to find good players in other systems that have been otherwise overlooked. I would think that would bode well for our future drafts under him. However, he was in charge of the minor league system, IIRC, during the Schueler administration (or at least had a major role). Now, one of the other things I like about KW is that he seems to learn from past mistakes, so that isn't a complete indictment. But did Schueler exert a very heavy hand during the drafts?

bluestar
06-20-2004, 09:37 AM
Offseason trades of that nature aren't going to happen. Seattle began the year thinking they'd be in contention. They didn't predict they'd suck so much. So essentially, you'd have to give up way more for Garcia in the offseason than right now.
I'm not positive about this, but the rumor during the offseason was that Seattle was more than willing to move Garcia. They had more or less given up on him and wanted to trade him. They considered his value WAY down.

Lip Man 1
06-20-2004, 12:54 PM
Daveemy:

Those are interesting comments perhaps DAVER can weigh in with his thoughts. I know he's keen on the Sox minor league system. I have the same questions...are Sox scouts doing something fundamentally wrong when looking at pitchers? Does the Sox organization rely to much on radar gun speeds as opposed to the other things that make pitchers good or not? Are Sox minor league pitching coaches (like Rich Dotson at Great Falls) not imparting what needs to be taught? (although sooner or later the players themselves have to be held accountable.

Pitching wins championships...until the Sox can figure this out about their minor leaguers or start spending money on signing pitching they are always going to be short and it's going to cost them every year.

Lip

gosox41
06-20-2004, 04:25 PM
That's what this debacle of not being able to find a fifth starter has resulted in. If this is the "best" pitching that we have in our organization, then we are not just in trouble this year, but for years to come.

Moreover, not finding a fifth starter and competent bullpen help in the off-season is inexcusable. Granted, it's perhaps harder to find a starter but at the very least, the Sox brass should have signed some decent relief pitching, ther were plenty of guys available...Cliff Politte??? Give me a break.
When I say stuff like this people swear at me and call me names. But it's true.

And to the fact that I don't agree with the Sox 'developmental' process where a rookie gets 1-2 starts up here gets knocked around and gets sent back down. Talk about wasting options on a player as well as hurting confidence.

Is it that the Sox have no one in their system that's worthy of being a true 5th starter or that the Sox organizaiton is just doing a really lousy job of developing guys like Diaz, Rauch and Munoz.


Bob

Lip Man 1
06-20-2004, 04:37 PM
Bob:

It's a pardox that the Sox find themselves in.

They can't afford to give the kids a number of starts (although they did with Danny Wright) because they are never far enough ahead in the race to keep taking chances.

They are never far enough ahead in the race because as Pale Hose George has pointed out, they never make a number of impact moves in the off season that could put them in a better position to take those risks.

If the Sox ever had a complete team or something close to it like in 1993 - 94, and could give themselves some breathing room, I think they'd be willing to give those pitchers more chances. But the fact is you can't blow the post season, 'hoping' some Double A kid from Podunk, Arkansas will finally figure things out.

And this points my point...the largest divisional lead the Sox have had since the start of the 2001 season has been two games! Last September and earlier this year.

That's all...two games! That's incredible especially given the A.L. "Comedy" Central division.

Lip

A. Cavatica
06-20-2004, 09:49 PM
I don't think the system is as bad as our fifth starter problems indicate. I think the fifth starter role right now must carry some crushing psychological baggage. Diaz, Cotts, & Rauch all have the talent to be decent starters, and Munoz to be a topnotch reliever...they will eventually succeed, but an expansion team would be very lucky indeed to find those four guys on its staff.

MRKARNO
06-20-2004, 09:53 PM
That's all...two games! That's incredible especially given the A.L. "Comedy" Central division.

Lip
2 and a half games to be precise

jeremyb1
06-20-2004, 10:05 PM
I don't mean to pick apart every part of your post, but Kelvim Escober was developed by the Jays and had success before leaving via FA. Not an ace, but a solid pitcher.

That's true. Like I said that's off the top of my head so I'm sure there were some errors. However, if you want to consider pitchers in terms of '01 on, it's important to note that Escobar debuted in '97.

jfo go go sox
06-20-2004, 10:25 PM
What ever happened to Sean Lowe???? --

The guy was great as fill in starter, long reliever etc. Why do we get rid of good solid pitching such as Lowe " Oh, the front office did not like him" -- or Foulke " Manual's problems in the bullpen, right?" Then get pitchers like Koch? Am I asking too much to find an answer?

:mad:

MRKARNO
06-20-2004, 10:29 PM
What ever happened to Sean Lowe???? --

The guy was great as fill in starter, long reliever etc. Why do we get rid of good solid pitching such as Lowe " Oh, the front office did not like him" -- or Foulke " Manual's problems in the bullpen, right?" Then get pitchers like Koch? Am I asking too much to find an answer?

:mad:
Lowe had a 5.79 ERA with Colorado and Pitt in 2002 and a 6.25 ERA with KC last year. He has been absolutely terrible since we let him go. I dont even think he is still in baseball or if he's just hurt this year.

Dan H
06-21-2004, 08:01 AM
I agree with the premise of this thread. If you cannot find one guy that at least give six or seven decent innings every fifth day, you are in trouble and it doesn't bode well for the future. The Sox don't want to go into the free agency market so they have to build from within. The team has had seven years since the White Flag Trade to do something. All they have to show is one division title with a three and out. And what if Garland can't finally get over the hump and Schoenweis shows he's getter off in the bullpen? The short term future won't look so good, either.

jabrch
06-21-2004, 09:11 AM
We can bitch all we want about not signing top FA pitchers to the contracts that they want, but lets look at it for a second. Had we matched the Anaheim offer to Colon, and signed him, the 13mm he would have gotten would have all but secured a Magglio to LA deal. Colon has been a terrible bust - and there is no reason to believe the same wouldn't have happened here. Worse yet, it would be 4 years of big money that looks like a poor spend. With the job that KW and Coop have done finding and developing veteran pitchers into effective starters lately, I think that's a better option than paying the big bucks to marginal #2 starters like Colon for long time frames.

The question is a good one - how do we take the next step? I hope the answer is that KW/JR have kept a decent amount of money in the budget for an acquistion at the deadline and that we are able to pull of a deal to get the right calibre of guy.

gosox41
06-21-2004, 10:14 AM
Bob:

It's a pardox that the Sox find themselves in.

They can't afford to give the kids a number of starts (although they did with Danny Wright) because they are never far enough ahead in the race to keep taking chances.

They are never far enough ahead in the race because as Pale Hose George has pointed out, they never make a number of impact moves in the off season that could put them in a better position to take those risks.

If the Sox ever had a complete team or something close to it like in 1993 - 94, and could give themselves some breathing room, I think they'd be willing to give those pitchers more chances. But the fact is you can't blow the post season, 'hoping' some Double A kid from Podunk, Arkansas will finally figure things out.

And this points my point...the largest divisional lead the Sox have had since the start of the 2001 season has been two games! Last September and earlier this year.

That's all...two games! That's incredible especially given the A.L. "Comedy" Central division.

Lip
Lip,

I definitely see your point and agree with you about getting ahead of the game and getting 5 decent starters before the season. KW has not filled a lot of the same holes that have existed in his 3 1/2 years here.

But I have no problem on having a rookie in the rotation. I'd prefer they start off in the bullpen in stead of relying on guys like Politte, but a lot of teams don't have that luxury.

The problem I have is the way the Sox have handled this merry go round of starters. It is not a good idea for KW and Ozzie to just bring use a pitcher for a sport start or 2 then send him right down. If you have faith in one of them, then let him make a bunch of starts in a row. The fact is Diaz, Munoz and Rauch have all been dominating at times in the minors. Munoz is probably the least ready being that this is his first year as a starting pitcher and he is only 22.

I've been advocating Rauch in the 5 man rotation since the team broke camp.

But KW has kept screwing with the the 5th starter spot and turned it into a complete joke. Can this situation have been handled any worse by any other organization. Bring in a young guy let him get knocked around, then send them right back down.

To make it even more perplexing, he is using up 'options' on calling up players. The only reason I bring this up is that when Magglio went on the DL I was in the camp of bringing up another OFer (Borchard or Reed). But I was assured by some (not you but others who think I bash KW too much) that it was not a good idea to waste options on these guys because it was only going to be for 4-7 weeks. Well didn't the Sox just use options on 3 pitchers?

I don't blame KW for not making a trade yet as they are difficult to make. But I am going to blame him for this joke of a 5th starters spot.


Bob

gosox41
06-21-2004, 10:20 AM
Interesting stat:


The Sox 5th starter spot has an 11.97 ERA this season, and of course zero wins.

Is there a team in MLB getting worse production out of their 5th starter spot? Is there a team in baseball getting even close to this type of production (a 7 or 8 ERA???)

But it's clearly the fault of Cotts, Wright, Munoz, Rauch, andDiaz. THey should have come up ehere and dominated right away. If they don't they certainly don't deserve a second (or third) start.

For the record, that should be in teal but I can't find the teal color. It is a little early for me right now.


Bob

Mod edit: Sorry, I just can't stand looking at that green.

TornLabrum
06-21-2004, 11:09 AM
We can bitch all we want about not signing top FA pitchers to the contracts that they want, but lets look at it for a second. Had we matched the Anaheim offer to Colon, and signed him, the 13mm he would have gotten would have all but secured a Magglio to LA deal. Colon has been a terrible bust - and there is no reason to believe the same wouldn't have happened here. Worse yet, it would be 4 years of big money that looks like a poor spend. With the job that KW and Coop have done finding and developing veteran pitchers into effective starters lately, I think that's a better option than paying the big bucks to marginal #2 starters like Colon for long time frames.

The question is a good one - how do we take the next step? I hope the answer is that KW/JR have kept a decent amount of money in the budget for an acquistion at the deadline and that we are able to pull of a deal to get the right calibre of guy.
Hindsight is always 20/20.