PDA

View Full Version : Do we have the best rotation?


zach074
12-22-2004, 03:49 PM
If we do sign El Duque do we have the best pitching rotation in the AL Central?
What are you guys opinions?

MRKARNO
12-22-2004, 03:49 PM
Yes.

fledgedrallycap
12-22-2004, 03:51 PM
1-5, no doubt.

Jurr
12-22-2004, 03:51 PM
Well, that depends on a few questions...is Lohse going to get better this year? Has Santana fired his biggest shot last season? Can Silva keep it going? If the Twins' staff keeps firing at the rate they fired last year, we probably don't.

SilverAndBlack
12-22-2004, 03:51 PM
no! 2 yankee rejects and 1 headcase in garland (with no testicles) prevent me from saying yes.

MUsoxfan
12-22-2004, 03:51 PM
Without El Duque we'd have the best rotation in the central. That's like being the tallest midget. With El Duque, we have a rotation that rivals the best in baseball. Unfortunately Garland will still wear a Sox jersey, but that's why he's #5

Jabroni
12-22-2004, 03:52 PM
Best rotation in the A.L. Central? Yes.

SilverAndBlack
12-22-2004, 03:53 PM
Without El Duque we'd have the best rotation in the central. That's like being the tallest midget. With El Duque, we have a rotation that rivals the best in baseball. Unfortunately Garland will still wear a Sox jersey, but that's why he's #5
put down the bong.

MRKARNO
12-22-2004, 03:54 PM
Well, that depends on a few questions...is Lohse going to get better this year? Has Santana fired his biggest shot last season? Can Silva keep it going? If the Twins' staff keeps firing at the rate they fired last year, we probably don't.
My answers:

1. Lohse has about as good of a chance of Garland to improvee

2. Santana will regress a little, not a lot

3. Silva can keep it going in a Mark Buehrle sort of way (dont be mistaken though, he's no Mark Buehrle), but again, not like he did last year.

bmac5001
12-22-2004, 03:54 PM
Twins have the best starter in the Central, we have the best 1-5 though. on paper of course...

fquaye149
12-22-2004, 03:57 PM
put down the bong.
1 headcase in garland (with no testicles) prevent me from saying yes.
put down the ridiculous put downs

MUsoxfan
12-22-2004, 03:58 PM
put down the bong.

RIVALS. Yankees and Boston will have a better rotation. Cubs have lost Clement and have other uncertainties. Astros lose Miller (and maybe Clemens) and Pettite may or may not be hurt. The Mets have questions. The Padres lost the Boomer. Who else is there. I'm not saying we have the best rotation. I know we don't....but it's likely a top 5 rotation

HomeFish
12-22-2004, 03:58 PM
Twins starters just get the job done -- ours don't.

soxfan43
12-22-2004, 03:58 PM
put down the bong.
if a combo of harris, crede and burke/davis sucking and el duque getting hurt, then picking up that bong might be the only way to sit through a game.

Soxzilla
12-22-2004, 04:02 PM
put down the ridiculous put downs
But that is a popular thing here at WSI.

See ... only the other teams players can improve ... ours unfortunately, cannot ... and if they do, it's a sign of the apocolypse.

People need to stop drinking the twinkie kool-aid. Lohse has been worse than Garland for 3 years now, they both have equally amount a chance to do *something*

Silva ... had one good half season? I believe the game him and Buehrle faced off, we won 15(or 11) - 0. See, I can base performances on small sample sizes too!

Mulhullond, he may be more consistant than Jose ... but he lacks to ability to go long innings, and he won't dominant as much as Jose will.

Santana ... beast of a man. I'm sure he will be just as exceptional as he was last year.

Radke, I think Garcia CAN outperform him. But regardless, they will stick about even.

I like the Sox rotation moreso right now.

zach074
12-22-2004, 04:03 PM
Please tell me who ever voted for the Royals is joking.

santo=dorf
12-22-2004, 04:06 PM
Who in the hell voted for the Royals? :?:

:bong:

Mickster
12-22-2004, 04:07 PM
Does it really matter? The sCrubs had the best rotation in baseball last year. Where did that get them? I'll tell you - the cover of SI's baseball preview issue and an early October tee time.

CecilCooper
12-22-2004, 04:07 PM
Until we dethrone the Twinkies, no. Paper tiger right now, especially with a mediocre headcase like Garland.

Who should be 5? El Duque because of injury potential, or Garland because of general mediocrity?

BRDSR
12-22-2004, 04:09 PM
no! 2 yankee rejects and 1 headcase in garland (with no testicles) prevent me from saying yes.
Yankees Rejects? Practically everyone in the league is on the same level as so-called Yankees rejects? It's not as though we're putting together a rotation of Tigers Rejects.

Soxzilla
12-22-2004, 04:18 PM
Does it really matter? The sCrubs had the best rotation in baseball last year. Where did that get them? I'll tell you - the cover of SI's baseball preview issue and an early October tee time.
As a fellow cubs hater, I must admit that isn't really fair. Wood and Prior did both stub their toes and miss quite a bit amount of time.

The correct answer would have been : What is their suckness?:tongue:

SilverAndBlack
12-22-2004, 04:18 PM
But that is a popular thing here at WSI.

See ... only the other teams players can improve ... ours unfortunately, cannot ... and if they do, it's a sign of the apocolypse.

People need to stop drinking the twinkie kool-aid. Lohse has been worse than Garland for 3 years now, they both have equally amount a chance to do *something*

Silva ... had one good half season? I believe the game him and Buehrle faced off, we won 15(or 11) - 0. See, I can base performances on small sample sizes too!

Mulhullond, he may be more consistant than Jose ... but he lacks to ability to go long innings, and he won't dominant as much as Jose will.

Santana ... beast of a man. I'm sure he will be just as exceptional as he was last year.

Radke, I think Garcia CAN outperform him. But regardless, they will stick about even.

I like the Sox rotation moreso right now.
until we actually BEAT the twins and win the division, we ARE NOT better than they are. this line of thinking over the last couple years has been crazy. "we are better than the twins. but they keep beating us and winning the division" 1 time is a fluke. year after year is dominance. they just keep plugging players in and winning. until we win they are better. PERIOD.

fquaye149
12-22-2004, 04:28 PM
we don't have to be BETTER than the twins to have a better rotation.

ja1022
12-22-2004, 04:36 PM
I can unequivocally, and without hesitation guarantee that the White Sox staff is somewhere in the top 5 in the AL Central, with or without El Duque.

SoxRulecubsdrool
12-22-2004, 04:37 PM
Who in the hell voted for the Royals? :?:

:bong:
Damn! I meant to vote for the Tigers!

batmanZoSo
12-22-2004, 04:58 PM
Well, that depends on a few questions...is Lohse going to get better this year? Has Santana fired his biggest shot last season? Can Silva keep it going? If the Twins' staff keeps firing at the rate they fired last year, we probably don't.
They have a pretty good playoff rotation, but they aren't very deep. They were throwing some absolute schlubs at us last year during the season. Namely Seth Greisinger.

Soxzilla
12-22-2004, 05:13 PM
until we actually BEAT the twins and win the division, we ARE NOT better than they are. this line of thinking over the last couple years has been crazy. "we are better than the twins. but they keep beating us and winning the division" 1 time is a fluke. year after year is dominance. they just keep plugging players in and winning. until we win they are better. PERIOD.
I don't believe I said we were better than the twins ... :rolleyes: . Hell, the season hasn't started. Nobody is better than anybody!

.... I guess that means we are in first!:bandance:

ma-gaga
12-22-2004, 05:17 PM
Two words:
Joe 'freaking' Mays!

muhwahahaha.

santo=dorf
12-22-2004, 05:44 PM
I see a couple of clowns have voted for the Indians.

Sabathia
Westbrook
Lee
Elarton
Tadano (Japanese gay porn star)
:?:
*****!
Don't even get me started with the Tigers' rotation. THEY ONLY PITCH WELL AGAINST US!!:angry: :angry: :angry:

chisoxmike
12-22-2004, 06:01 PM
It's time to make the AL Central our bitch!

Buehrle
Garcia
Hernandez
Contreras
Garland

If this team can't win the division, something is seriously wrong.
Then again, we couldn't win with a lineup of Thomas, Maggs, Lee, Konerko, so maybe we shouldn't expect too much. :?:

champagne030
12-22-2004, 07:14 PM
for what it's worth.....the twins were rated the best 1-3 last year. yeah, yeah, i'm not sold on the formula, but judy and the duke are not a big upgrade over lohse and whatever else they throw out there (just guessing that el duque isn't going to be throwing up 170+ innings).


http://proxy.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1951124

MeanFish
12-22-2004, 07:22 PM
I read that earlier today, and I've got to say, I love the formula. However, I think that it's only relevant in postseason play. All five spots should be taken into consideration when talking about who has the best regular season rotation, especially considering that about 30% of your team's starts come from the 4 and 5 spots. The formula's easy to modify though for that situation.

Fredsox
12-22-2004, 07:35 PM
As a fellow cubs hater, I must admit that isn't really fair. Wood and Prior did both stub their toes and miss quite a bit amount of time.

Actually it probably is fair because the teams that stay healthy enough to win is part of the game.

Aside from the question of who's got the top rotation in the division, who has the top pitching staff in the league and how do we compare with them? Whole thing, top to bottom, 1-12. I think we clearly have some of the most depth in the league, some will argue correctly that we have no dominant force on the staff (starter or closer).

Does this pitching staff lead the league in ERA? If not, how close? Can we get under 4.20 as a team or better? We had a 4.91 team ERA last year, good enough for 10th out of 14 teams. Here's the top 4 in the AL last year:

Anaheim 4.28
Boston 4.18
Oakland 4.17
Minnesota 4.03

Nick@Nite
12-22-2004, 08:33 PM
Actually it probably is fair because the teams that stay healthy enough to win is part of the game.Right said Fred. :yup:

owensmouth
12-22-2004, 10:53 PM
What is everybody so excited about? This is the same group that we had last year, with one addition, someone neither the Yankees or the Red Sox thought enough of to sign. This same group collapsed last year. The Twins, Red Sox and on occassion the Indians and the Tigers beat the hell out of them.

We have two decent number twos and three number fives.

Sure, Contreras looked good in his last outing against the Royals, but do you remember his less than sterling efforts? He has less control over his pitches than an eighth grade knuckleballer.

Garland? Mr multi two run homer is a gutless whiner.

Yeah, we got five starters. but only two pitchers.

Jabroni
12-22-2004, 11:03 PM
What is everybody so excited about? This is the same group that we had last year, with one addition, someone neither the Yankees or the Red Sox thought enough of to sign. This same group collapsed last year. The Twins, Red Sox and on occassion the Indians and the Tigers beat the hell out of them.

We have two decent number twos and three number fives.

Sure, Contreras looked good in his last outing against the Royals, but do you remember his less than sterling efforts? He has less control over his pitches than an eighth grade knuckleballer.

Garland? Mr multi two run homer is a gutless whiner.

Yeah, we got five starters. but only two pitchers.Ummm, last season our opening day rotation was:

Mark Buehrle
Esteban Loaiza
Jon Garland
Scott Schoeneweis
Danny Wright

This season, our opening day rotation will be:

Mark Buehrle
Freddy Garcia
Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez
Jose Contreras
Jon Garland

Yeah, no difference there. :rolleyes:

mjmcend
12-22-2004, 11:03 PM
I can unequivocally, and without hesitation guarantee that the White Sox staff is somewhere in the top 5 in the AL Central, with or without El Duque.
Thanks for the stellar commentary ESPN.

DaveIsHere
12-22-2004, 11:04 PM
:whiner: Wah :whiner: Wah :whiner: wah


So if the Yankees and the other Sox do not want them tha means they are no good:angry: Buzz off and look at this team, they are ready to blow your Sox off, maybe you should become a Flubbie troll..........have faith and all of you need to quit complaining, we make some decent moves and you all start Bitchin, oh Yeah Merry Christmas..........BTW don't take the Christ out of Christmas!!!!! :D:

gosox3072
12-22-2004, 11:08 PM
77% to the White Sox
Someone tell me this isnt totally biased!:D:

Hokiesox
12-23-2004, 12:03 AM
I go with the Twins, by virtue of the fact that our rotation/team has always been better than them on paper for the last 5 years. Alas, we have yet to beat them on the field.

ilsox7
12-23-2004, 12:07 AM
I go with the Twins, by virtue of the fact that our rotation/team has always been better than them on paper for the last 5 years. Alas, we have yet to beat them on the field.
It must be the high-quality paper we use!

The names on that paper haven't won us jack.

elrod
12-23-2004, 12:18 AM
Contreras is our #5, not Garland. Contreras is great against crappy teams but not against anyone else, so he should get the #5. He'll get bounced more than anybody else. El Duque is a 2 or 3 if healthy, and on occasion an ace. Buehrle and Garcia are both solid 2s - they'll rarely pitch ace-like but they're consistently strong. Garland is a perfect #4. He eats up innings and gives you a chance to win, though if the other pitcher is doing well then forget it.

SouthSideHitman
12-23-2004, 12:43 AM
Our rotation has the potential to be the best however we need to see consistency from Garland and Contreras and long-term health from El Duque before we go making bold predictions. The Twins had the best team ERA in the league last year despite not really having many big names outside of Santana. As always the Sox go in with hope and it is much better than the hope of catching lightning twice with Esteban and getting Danny and Schoenweis to act like real starters, which is good, but is also by no means a division title. Let's give the Twins some respect and then beat 'em, because saying that they suck and then acting suprised when those nobodies manage to win day in and out sure as hell isn't working.

longshot7
12-23-2004, 01:12 AM
This rotation has too many question marks to definitively say whether or not it will be good. I am excited about a full year of Buehrle & Garcia, but the rest of the rotation (no matter what order you put them in) are all big IFs. IF Contreras & Garland can live up to their potential, IF El Duque stays healthy, IF Contreras shows that he isn't a head case, IF, IF, IF....

Don't mistake this for pessimism. There were as many ?'s (if not more) about the 2000 rotation and they did quite well. And the 2003 rotation seemed like gangbusters... but did nothing. Only time will tell.

At least there's 5 starters this year... no Wrights, Grillis, or Schoenweises. That's reason for good cheer. As for one of the best in baseball, let's wait til July to make such claims. We got a long way to go.

That said - Happy Xmas (or whatever else you got)!!

Jabroni
12-23-2004, 01:16 AM
This rotation has too many question marks to definitively say whether or not it will be good. I am excited about a full year of Buehrle & Garcia, but the rest of the rotation (no matter what order you put them in) are all big IFs. IF Contreras & Garland can live up to their potential, IF El Duque stays healthy, IF Contreras shows that he isn't a head case, IF, IF, IF....

Don't mistake this for pessimism. There were as many ?'s (if not more) about the 2000 rotation and they did quite well. And the 2003 rotation seemed like gangbusters... but did nothing. Only time will tell.

At least there's 5 starters this year... no Wrights, Grillis, or Schoenweises. That's reason for good cheer. As for one of the best in baseball, let's wait til July to make such claims. We got a long way to go.

That said - Happy Xmas (or whatever else you got)!!Good points. Yes, our 2003 rotation seemed great but only 1 though 4. We still had the "dreaded 5th starter" blues. Now we will get to see what happens with a solid 1 though 5 rotation.

danjames
12-23-2004, 01:41 AM
Regarding all of the talk of how our ERA will stack up with the rest of the American League this year, I think it's important to note that we do play half of our games in Coors Field East. This is going to skew ERA numbers big time (as evidenced by Beuhrle's home/road splits, for instance.)

Not a be all end all suggestion, just something to keep in mind as the season progresses.

pudge
12-23-2004, 02:33 AM
Regarding all of the talk of how our ERA will stack up with the rest of the American League this year, I think it's important to note that we do play half of our games in Coors Field East. This is going to skew ERA numbers big time (as evidenced by Beuhrle's home/road splits, for instance.)

Not a be all end all suggestion, just something to keep in mind as the season progresses.
Well said. Remember folks, the Twins have the defending Cy Young, that counts for about 3 of our pitchers. Radke has proven he's a winner in Minnesota, whereas Garcia, Contreras nor Duque have proven jack squat in Cellular. I don't care who the Twins throw out there for 4 and 5, they have a better rotation, period. Now if the Sox want to prove me wrong, go right ahead and do it on the field....

owensmouth
12-23-2004, 03:09 AM
Ummm, last season our opening day rotation was:

Mark Buehrle
Esteban Loaiza
Jon Garland
Scott Schoeneweis
Danny Wright

This season, our opening day rotation will be:

Mark Buehrle
Freddy Garcia
Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez
Jose Contreras
Jon Garland

Yeah, no difference there. :rolleyes:
The final two months of last season the starting rotation consisted of:

Mark Buehrle
Freddie Garcia
Jose Contreras
Jon Garland
Whoever Bubbled Up From the Underground

The first four that I listed look remarkably similar to the second group that you listed.

Contreras, in September, got seven starts. He won only one game.

If we are going to dominate with starting pitching, who will be the dominant pitchers?

We don't need out top two to win 15 games, we need them to win 20. But can they?

Don't worry about power. Even without Magglio and Carlos, we return a team that hit 166 home runs, and that doesn't include whatever the newcomers did.

Can Hernandez pitch more than 140 innings? He hasn't recently. He is the #3 pitcher according to KW.

Will Garland ever do anything other than wander around in his own personal fog?

Will six months off improve these four enough to give the Sox a real chance to win?

I hate to say it, but it's very doubtful.

OurBitchinMinny
12-23-2004, 03:13 AM
1-5 yes. 1-2 advantage goes to the twinkies. Cleveland is pretty solid 1-3 at least. Detroit and KC? No

Jabroni
12-23-2004, 03:19 AM
1-5 yes. 1-2 advantage goes to the twinkies. Cleveland is pretty solid 1-3 at least. Detroit and KC? NoI can agree on Santana but Radke isn't better than either Buehrle OR Garcia. There is a huge dropoff from Santana to Radke. Radke would be the #3 pitcher in our rotation.

cbrownson13
12-23-2004, 03:23 AM
People keep expecting Garland to be an ace. Why? He fits his spot in the rotation perfectly. He is a number 4 starter who puts up number 4 starter numbers.

He comes cheap and fills the role. Look at someone like Kris Benson. This guy gets huge money and is expected to be a number 2-3 starter and has numbers almost exactly to those of Garland.

I don't know why we can't be happy with what we have with him. If we expect him to be a solid number 4 starter and not have unrealistic expectations for him to be an ace, we will and should be happy to have him.

owensmouth
12-23-2004, 04:19 AM
People keep expecting Garland to be an ace. Why? He fits his spot in the rotation perfectly. He is a number 4 starter who puts up number 4 starter numbers.

He comes cheap and fills the role. Look at someone like Kris Benson. This guy gets huge money and is expected to be a number 2-3 starter and has numbers almost exactly to those of Garland.

I don't know why we can't be happy with what we have with him. If we expect him to be a solid number 4 starter and not have unrealistic expectations for him to be an ace, we will and should be happy to have him.
We keep expecting more because he has the tools to be oh so much more.

How many times has Jon pitched great for four or more innings, thrown an inning where he gives up multiple home runs, and then gone back out and thrown a couple more shutout innings?

That bad inning isn't because he got physically tired. He has the physical ability to eliminate that inning, and become a dominant top of the line pitcher. It's totally up to Garland to make that improvement.

Fire Kenny
12-23-2004, 06:18 AM
As long as the Twins have Santana and Radke they won't be topped by most teams. White Sox Have 2 good not great pitchers, one often injured old man that might be decent, a 1st round bust, and a wild cuban that can dominate if his head is on straight.

mikesouthside
12-23-2004, 08:07 AM
put down the bong.
Man, that was funny. :gulp:

tstrike2000
12-23-2004, 10:10 AM
Best rotation in the A.L. Central? Yes.
Yes, best in our division. Questions always loom. El Duque has not pitched over 146 innings the past 4 years, will he magically do it now? Will Contreras be able to control his walks and ERA? Will Buehrle start out 2-10 like last year? Will Garland ever stop being consistingly inconsistant? We just hope the best from questions like those.

veeter
12-23-2004, 10:18 AM
Put it this way, it's going to be fun watching to find out!!!

mdep524
12-23-2004, 10:58 AM
Yes, best in our division. Questions always loom. El Duque has not pitched over 146 innings the past 4 years, will he magically do it now? Will Contreras be able to control his walks and ERA? Will Buehrle start out 2-10 like last year? Will Garland ever stop being consistingly inconsistant? We just hope the best from questions like those.
The biggest question in there in Contreras, who could just as easily turn into a Danny Wright as he could a 15-game winner. I have confidence that Garland can be a consistent #4/5 pitcher, and Hernandez can do a good job picking up starts at the back of the rotation, but the glaring hole at the number 3 spot is going to kill this team.

eshunn2001
12-23-2004, 11:02 AM
Actually, Didn't the Twinkies have thse best staff in the AL last year? So NO ours is not better than theirs. But ours has Improved greatly since last year. Basically we are building a team to win the AL central, Not a World Series. We Are taking the Twins model and running with it, Only problem with this is the Twins have done Nothing in the playoffs. 3 Straight 1st round exits.


In 2002 even though the Angels played plenty of small ball, The reason they won was They were knocking the cover of the ball. They had a very mediocre pitching staff. The Red Sox Knocked the cover off the ball The Yankees same thing. The Braves are Built around pitching and have been for 13 years. Twins Pitching and speed, And same thing with Oakland. This way has not really been to Sucessful in the playoffs, But hopefully it gets us there.

rdivaldi
12-23-2004, 11:03 AM
White Sox Have 2 good not great pitchers.
:?: By what logic are Garcia and Buerhle, "good not great"?

OurBitchinMinny
12-23-2004, 11:03 AM
I can agree on Santana but Radke isn't better than either Buehrle OR Garcia. There is a huge dropoff from Santana to Radke. Radke would be the #3 pitcher in our rotation.
I think Garcia may be as good or better than radke, but not buerhle. Buerhle was spectacular at times last year and brutal at others. He mouthed off that one time against the twins and then got shelled. He needs to just pitch. He has the potential to be a #1, but until he gets more consistent, garcia has to be considered the #1. And I know the bias here will get me ripped for saying this, but try and look at it unbiased. Buerhle had some atrocious outings last year (vs twins in september, vs phillies just off the top of my head). We have a superior rotation to the twins 1-5, but 1-2 as of now id have to say advantage goes to then. But on paper doesnt matter. Weve been the best team in this division on paper since 2000 and we have one division title to show for it

oldcomiskey
12-23-2004, 03:07 PM
RIVALS. Yankees and Boston will have a better rotation. Cubs have lost Clement and have other uncertainties. Astros lose Miller (and maybe Clemens) and Pettite may or may not be hurt. The Mets have questions. The Padres lost the Boomer. Who else is there. I'm not saying we have the best rotation. I know we don't....but it's likely a top 5 rotation how do you figure Boston has a better rotation especially if they lose Lowe

santo=dorf
12-23-2004, 03:17 PM
how do you figure Boston has a better rotation especially if they lose LoweSchilling
Wells
Clement
Miller
Wakefield
Arroyo
Kim
Halama

I wouldn't be surprised if the Blow Sox bought Odalis Perez next just for the hell of it.

WhiteSoxAaron
12-24-2004, 11:14 PM
i think with yankees not getting johnson i think we have one of the top five in the leauge sox need either peirzinski and polonco or cora or even cairo

jordan23ventura
12-25-2004, 03:25 AM
Schilling
Wells
Clement
Miller
Wakefield
Arroyo
Kim
Halama

I wouldn't be surprised if the Blow Sox bought Odalis Perez next just for the hell of it.
Wow! Look at all those fifth starters! KW's mouth must be watering right now...

jordan23ventura
12-25-2004, 03:34 AM
Here's our rotation:

Buerhle
Garcia
Hernandez
Garland
Contreras

Buehrle and Garcia I think are both solid No. 2's. We still don't have an ace. Judy is barely squeezing into that No. 4 dress, and Contreras is a great No. 5 because if he breaks out and gets his head straight has the chance to become another No. 2 or No. 3. El Duque has a chance to be solid at the bottom of the rotation, but he doesn't throw enough innings to be a No. 3.

So, we have 2 No. 2 starters, a borderline No. 4, and two No. 5's. While this may top what exists in the AL Central, it is certainly not among the best.

DrCrawdad
12-25-2004, 07:54 AM
I heard people, many Cubbie fans, mocking the signing of El Duque. One thing they've said is that he racked up wins against lousy teams last season. Well if our #5 pitcher(s) piled up an 8-2 record last season, even if it was from lousy teams, then the Sox may have won the division.

I like the Sox rotation going into the season. Would I have liked to see the Sox sign Clement? Sure, but I still think that the Sox rotation is better going into the season than last year.

broker3d
12-25-2004, 08:13 AM
when all is said and done, Vazquez will be on this team and Garland will be gone.

munchman33
12-25-2004, 09:00 AM
Here's our rotation:

Buerhle
Garcia
Hernandez
Garland
Contreras

Buehrle and Garcia I think are both solid No. 2's. We still don't have an ace. Judy is barely squeezing into that No. 4 dress, and Contreras is a great No. 5 because if he breaks out and gets his head straight has the chance to become another No. 2 or No. 3. El Duque has a chance to be solid at the bottom of the rotation, but he doesn't throw enough innings to be a No. 3.

So, we have 2 No. 2 starters, a borderline No. 4, and two No. 5's. While this may top what exists in the AL Central, it is certainly not among the best.
Mark Buehrle is a number one. Just because he's not Randy or Pedro doesn't make him not one of the top twenty, if not top ten, starters in the league.