PDA

View Full Version : 2004 white sox pitching, for all the naysayers


hi8is
08-21-2004, 02:55 AM
quality starts of 2004 by white sox pitchers.....

Freddy Garcia 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
Mark Buehrle 17 quality starts out of 27 total starts = 62% quality starts
Jon Garland 14 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 56 % quality starts (not to mention that he had 5 starts where he went 6+ and gave up 4... really close to a quality start)
Jose Contreras 11 quality starts out of 22 total starts = 50 % quality starts
Our fifth starters combine 9 quality starts out of 32 total starts = 28% quality starts

just for something to compare these numbers to....

quality starts of 2004 by oakland a's pitchers....

mark mulder 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
tim hudson 10 quality starts out of 18 total starts = 55 % quality starts
mark redman 13 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 52 % quality starts
b. zito 12 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 48 % quality starts
rich harden 11 out of 24 total starts = 45 % quality starts


GEEEE.... i wonder WHAT our problem is????? hummmmm garland???? maybe buehrle????? all you garland and buehrle nay-sayers ****in tell me.... what has our ****in problem been this year????

wanna know the main reason we arent in first by a long shot? dont point your finger at frank or maggs, or anyone else on this team but the LACK OF A 5th starter

mealfred13
08-21-2004, 02:58 AM
quality starts of 2004 by white sox pitchers.....

Freddy Garcia 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
Mark Buehrle 17 quality starts out of 27 total starts = 62% quality starts
Jon Garland 14 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 56 % quality starts (not to mention that he had 5 starts where he went 6+ and gave up 4... really close to a quality start)
Jose Contreras 11 quality starts out of 22 total starts = 50 % quality starts
Our fifth starters combine 9 quality starts out of 32 total starts = 28% quality starts

just for something to compare these numbers to....

quality starts of 2004 by oakland a's pitchers....

mark mulder 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
tim hudson 10 quality starts out of 18 total starts = 55 % quality starts
mark redman 13 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 52 % quality starts
b. zito 12 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 48 % quality starts
rich harden 11 out of 24 total starts = 45 % quality starts


GEEEE.... i wonder WHAT our problem is????? hummmmm garland???? maybe buehrle????? all you garland and buehrle nay-sayers ****in tell me.... what has our ****in problem been this year????

wanna know the main reason we arent in first by a long shot? dont point your finger at frank or maggs, or anyone else on this team but the LACK OF A 5th starter
Not to mention LACK OF THOMAS AND MAGGLIO. And LACK OF CONSISTENT HITTING.....there are so many angles to this argument, but there is no single reason. We need hitters not inconsistent power-hitters. The pitching is there, 5th starter or not. If we hit consistently this wouldn't be an issue.

hi8is
08-21-2004, 03:01 AM
i dont see how you can say the pitching is there when our "5th starter" has held us in the game 9 times out of 32

:kukoo:

SSN721
08-21-2004, 07:07 AM
I agree that pitching isnt the problem all the time, but you also fail to add in the bullpen to that argument. It is too early for me to research numbers but I would think Oakland is slightly better in that department, and they only lost CHavez for a month. They didnt have many other parts of their offense lost as the SOx have. I think that is the biggest reason.

BigEdWalsh
08-21-2004, 08:02 AM
quality starts of 2004 by white sox pitchers.....

Freddy Garcia 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
Mark Buehrle 17 quality starts out of 27 total starts = 62% quality starts
Jon Garland 14 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 56 % quality starts (not to mention that he had 5 starts where he went 6+ and gave up 4... really close to a quality start)
Jose Contreras 11 quality starts out of 22 total starts = 50 % quality starts
Our fifth starters combine 9 quality starts out of 32 total starts = 28% quality starts

just for something to compare these numbers to....

quality starts of 2004 by oakland a's pitchers....

mark mulder 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
tim hudson 10 quality starts out of 18 total starts = 55 % quality starts
mark redman 13 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 52 % quality starts
b. zito 12 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 48 % quality starts
rich harden 11 out of 24 total starts = 45 % quality starts


GEEEE.... i wonder WHAT our problem is????? hummmmm garland???? maybe buehrle????? all you garland and buehrle nay-sayers ****in tell me.... what has our ****in problem been this year????

wanna know the main reason we arent in first by a long shot? dont point your finger at frank or maggs, or anyone else on this team but the LACK OF A 5th starter
Why are you including Contreras' and Garcia's starts for all year? What they did with New York and Seattle is irrelevant. Also don't forget Loaiza's crappy starts. That said, I agree with you about the 5th starter. It was apparent early on with Wright. I said months ago, where would the Sox be if we had won just HALF of all those games that Wright, Munoz, etc. etc. had lost? Answer: 1st Place.
Still though, there have been numerous offensive shortcomings on this team too. The problems have been many.
I'm sick of the Sox being pretty good but never good enough. I hope for alot of changes this winter. As far as I'm concerned there are very few untouchables. I want to see wholesale changes and an entirely new direction.

Flight #24
08-21-2004, 09:18 AM
i dont see how you can say the pitching is there when our "5th starter" has held us in the game 9 times out of 32

:kukoo:
Well - if your 1-4 starters are above average in terms of QS - you can live with a worse 5th. Also, I don't know that WS is a great measure for 5th starters, I think most teams would be happy with 6IP / 4ER or maybe even 5ER from the #5 guy. (And coincidentally, I think Garland's got a VERY high percentage of those, making him an excellent guy to have as a 5th starter next year.)

Now 2IP / 7ER? That's not something anyone's going to be happy with.

Dan H
08-21-2004, 09:46 AM
Lack of a fifth starter was a huge problem not only because the team couldn't get a quality but usually were hit with deluge of runs. But that wasn't the whole problem.

Loaiza, Garland and Schoenweis were all question marks when the season began. Garland has done well in spots but still has not proven he can be a big winner. Loaiza is gone with good reason. Schoenweis is on the DL and should have never come out of the bullpen in the first place. This was an iffy rotation from the get go.

It is time to stop dreaming of first place if the team had a good fifth starter or if Thomas and Ordonez were back in the lineup. Instead it is time to make changes on this team. During the last almost four seasons, the Sox are 16 games over .500. Injuries and the lack of a fifth starter are not the only reasons for that so-so record.

gosox41
08-21-2004, 10:27 AM
Well - if your 1-4 starters are above average in terms of QS - you can live with a worse 5th. Also, I don't know that WS is a great measure for 5th starters, I think most teams would be happy with 6IP / 4ER or maybe even 5ER from the #5 guy. (And coincidentally, I think Garland's got a VERY high percentage of those, making him an excellent guy to have as a 5th starter next year.)

Now 2IP / 7ER? That's not something anyone's going to be happy with.

So you're hjoping the fifth starter spot has a 6.00 ERA or higher? That's exactly what 4 ER in 6 IP gets you.




Bob

Lip Man 1
08-21-2004, 12:53 PM
From Phil Rogers / Saturday Tribune column:

"The Sox's fifth starters have gone 3-13 with a 10.23 earned-run average in 18 games this year. They are 6-24 with an 8.08 ERA in 45 starts over the last two years."

That is beyond laughable.

Lip

Soxzilla
08-21-2004, 01:04 PM
Where the hell is kip wells when you need him.

samram
08-21-2004, 01:10 PM
From Phil Rogers / Saturday Tribune column:

"The Sox's fifth starters have gone 3-13 with a 10.23 earned-run average in 18 games this year. They are 6-24 with an 8.08 ERA in 45 starts over the last two years."

That is beyond laughable.

Lip
Yeah, they may want to address that.:(: If that record is moved to 7-9, which is not unreasonable, the Sox would be 64-55, 2 games out right now, assuming the Twins had the same record. (Of course, they lost one game at the Dome when Cotts started, so maybe one game out.) Maybe Robert Person will make a great comeback effort next year and be the difference maker.

balke
08-21-2004, 02:54 PM
Person... hehe


OUr pitchers don't suck, our hitters don't suck. OUR TEAM SUCKS! We have to go into the 9th up by 3, or else we could lose, because our decent but by no means good bullpen is worn out all the time, and is bound to give up 3 runs if given 3 innings of work.

We have noone to trade to make that bullpen better because of contracts crappy minor league flops, and key injuries.

We have no 5th starter, and pitchers that really don't seem comfortable with a 4th man rotation, because either the way they pitch, or because they are headcases.

It's tough to win a game with hitting when the other team is scoring 10....

mealfred13
08-21-2004, 04:28 PM
i dont see how you can say the pitching is there when our "5th starter" has held us in the game 9 times out of 32

:kukoo:

UMMMM...IF you add up all the WS's quality starts you get 67. If you add up all the A's you get 62. They are in contention, we are not. Good enough for you?

benjamin
08-21-2004, 04:45 PM
UMMMM...IF you add up all the WS's quality starts you get 67. If you add up all the A's you get 62. They are in contention, we are not. Good enough for you?
Not all of those 67 have been for the White Sox... Garcia's totals include those with Seattle, Contreras includes those with New York, and missing from the list is Loaiza...

benjamin
08-21-2004, 04:50 PM
quality starts of 2004 by white sox pitchers.....

Freddy Garcia 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
Mark Buehrle 17 quality starts out of 27 total starts = 62% quality starts
Jon Garland 14 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 56 % quality starts (not to mention that he had 5 starts where he went 6+ and gave up 4... really close to a quality start)
Jose Contreras 11 quality starts out of 22 total starts = 50 % quality starts
Our fifth starters combine 9 quality starts out of 32 total starts = 28% quality starts

just for something to compare these numbers to....

quality starts of 2004 by oakland a's pitchers....

mark mulder 16 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 64% quality starts
tim hudson 10 quality starts out of 18 total starts = 55 % quality starts
mark redman 13 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 52 % quality starts
b. zito 12 quality starts out of 25 total starts = 48 % quality starts
rich harden 11 out of 24 total starts = 45 % quality starts


GEEEE.... i wonder WHAT our problem is????? hummmmm garland???? maybe buehrle????? all you garland and buehrle nay-sayers ****in tell me.... what has our ****in problem been this year????

wanna know the main reason we arent in first by a long shot? dont point your finger at frank or maggs, or anyone else on this team but the LACK OF A 5th starterUMMMM...IF you add up all the WS's quality starts you get 67. If you add up all the A's you get 62. They are in contention, we are not. Good enough for you?The comparison of the Sox and A's staff is misleading due to the fact that the A's have not added or subtracted via trade to their starting rotation.

The White Sox are actually tied for 18th in baseball with 55 quality starts.

The Cardinals lead the majors with with 73.

The A's lead the AL with 65.

No surprises there.

mealfred13
08-21-2004, 04:58 PM
But what do the Twins and Indians have in that department....that's what really counts.

Edit: My calculation of 67 QS based on our current staff of pitchers' performances this year at least bodes well for next season. With more quality starts (assuming these guys pitch as good as they did this year) we are projected to have more QS than Oakland. Not a bad start for rebuilding a team, i say.

DumpJerry
08-22-2004, 09:48 AM
Friends, the problems this season are deeper than the lack of a competent 5th starter and missing Frank and Maggs. Our overall hitting, which was somewhat consistent before the All Star Break, has fallen apart. One day we get a dozen hits, next day against the same team, 3 hits. Some could argue that the loss of Frank and Maggs contributed to this because it allowed pitchers to pitch around batters they couldn't before. I don't agree with that. Frank and Maggs batted next to each other. the 5-9 batters could be pitched around without worry about Frank or Maggs coming on-deck. We need more consistent hitting.

Second, with the exception of Shingo, our bullpen sucks. First we used Koch as a closer. No comment needed there. Our long relief was always an adventure this season, it is more inconsistent than our hitting. Can anyone seriously say that we have a long relief or setup guy in the pen they feel confident about day in and day out? I can't.

Third, fielding. I have not looked up the stats, but I'm not looking at the number of errors we commit (it may not be too high). The problem has been that we make untimely errors. How many times did Valentin make an error he "had" to make up with a homer the next inning? We seemed to make errors that really cost us some games.

Now for the good news:
Ozzie. He is an excellent manager, in my opinion. He keeps the guys loose in a tense situation so that they can perform without worry.

The front three starters. Buerhle, Garcia and Contreras are as fearsome of a threesome as there is in the AL.

Longball hitters. Frank will be back. So far Konerko will be, too. If PK is traded, it will be for quality. C. Lee can be in the category if he work on his technique a bit. I have a gut feeling about Big Ben next season.

Smallball hitters. Rowand is our man in this dept. C. Lee can be, too. He needs to decide what he wants to do. I believe during his 28 game hitting streak, he had only one homer. This may be his dept, even though he is a big guy. Burke falls in this dept., too.

First base, many posters on here mention C. Lee as our first base guy if PK is traded. Burke also plays first. This means we can move him there and trade for a second catcher to play with Ben or keep S. Alomar on for one more year.

Sandy Alomar. He will be with team as either a player or coach next season. He provides leadership that has not been seen since Fisk. Given his family history with the team (dad played for us in the 60's), he feels right at home here.

The Royals. They will be able to prevent us from being in last place next season.:smile:

The Cubs. This is their last year of being contenders. Clement may be gone (to us??), Sosa is fading fast already and their bullpen is still suspect. The Cards are possessed, the other teams in the NL will make the wild card race next year a high stakes game where 95+ victories will be required.

Them's my thoughts.