PDA

View Full Version : Is Garland Still the 5th Starter?


SoxFan48
04-21-2005, 06:38 PM
Tied for 2nd in innings pitched
3rd in ERA among starters with a 2.57
2nd among starters with a 1.00 WHIP
2nd a mong starters in Opponents on base percentage with .266
1st in Pitches per Inning pitched with 12.79

Sounds like a 2nd or 3rd starter at the worst. Jose Contreras--welcome to the 5th SP slot.

jabrch
04-21-2005, 06:40 PM
After the first trip through the rotation, it no longer matters up until the playoffs. The great thing is Ozzie shouldn't have to talk about "skipping the 5th stater" at all this year. So with that in mind, JG can be #5 or whatever number we say he is - but he will be out there every 5th game.

Now if the playoffs started today, who would fall out of the rotation...that's an interesting question...

Huisj
04-21-2005, 06:43 PM
Tied for 2nd in innings pitched

3rd in ERA among starters with a 2.57
2nd among starters with a 1.00 WHIP
2nd a mong starters in Opponents on base percentage with .266
1st in Pitches per Inning pitched with 12.79

Sounds like a 2nd or 3rd starter at the worst. Jose Contreras--welcome to the 5th SP slot.

At this point who cares about 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5? Just keep running them out there on a nice consistent schedule with no excess tinkering and let 'em perform.

This is the first year in a while that the Sox haven't shuffled their rotation around on game-to-game basis early in the year because of days off, and it may be helping guys out to always know exactly when they'll pitch. . . well, that and we finally have 5 starters who can actually pitch.

JohnBasedowYoda
04-21-2005, 07:19 PM
yes keep him where he's at. i don't wanna risk goofin him up in the head or anything. Its like that date everyone's had...she looks good on the porch or in the bar. But in the bright sunday morning light she doesn't look so good. The 5th hole is Garland's porch man. Let him chill on it.

Hokiesox
04-21-2005, 07:30 PM
After the first trip through the rotation, it no longer matters up until the playoffs. The great thing is Ozzie shouldn't have to talk about "skipping the 5th stater" at all this year. So with that in mind, JG can be #5 or whatever number we say he is - but he will be out there every 5th game.

Now if the playoffs started today, who would fall out of the rotation...that's an interesting question...

I'd put JG in the pen, and bring him in for long relief, or even as a closer.

OG4LIFE
04-21-2005, 07:40 PM
no way, contreras to the bench. garland is no where near as erratic as jose is. buehrle, garcia and duque would all be locks, and i have always felt better about garland over contreras.

BridgePortNative
04-21-2005, 07:42 PM
I'd put JG in the pen, and bring him in for long relief, or even as a closer.

If it were me, I would put Jose in the Pen

delben91
04-21-2005, 08:47 PM
Now if the playoffs started today, who would fall out of the rotation...that's an interesting question...

It is, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. :wink:

As for being the number 5, like several posters said, just run him out there every 5 days and let him do his thing. That's good enough for me.

Daver
04-21-2005, 08:59 PM
Rotation numbers mean nothing.

You send your best pitcher to the hill on opening day, the rest follow in descending order. A good manager makes his adjustments based on performance and where the off days are, I expect Ozzie to make exactly the wrong desisions.

seanpmurphy
04-21-2005, 09:07 PM
The Sox have been doing fine the way they are. If it's not broken, don't try and fix it. Also to introduce a new topic, why is it that Mark Buehrle is a better pitcher than Kerry Wood, but Wood is some kind of media demi-god? Especially the way their seasons have started off this year.

They got Wood. But so far we got WINS.

Rocklive99
04-21-2005, 09:08 PM
I would keep him the same as he is now, you don't mess with something that works. I don't want an extra day or one less day of rest affecting him

Whitesox029
04-21-2005, 09:24 PM
I'd put JG in the pen, and bring him in for long relief, or even as a closer.
I don't like this idea at all...you don't mess with this stuff...it's not as if the pen isn't getting it done as they are (despite the rather high ERA). I have no complaints about the bullpen this year. Garland finally seems to be living up to what was expected from him as a rookie, and there's no reason to mess it up now.

Lip Man 1
04-21-2005, 09:31 PM
For what it's worth Ozzie and Cooper have stated that unless there is an injury, the pitchers will continue all year without anyone being skipped due to off days or rainouts.

Lip

SoxFan48
04-21-2005, 10:00 PM
For what it's worth Ozzie and Cooper have stated that unless there is an injury, the pitchers will continue all year without anyone being skipped due to off days or rainouts.

Lip

Will this continue to hold true of Contrearas continues to walk more batters than he Ks? I hope not.

Ol' No. 2
04-21-2005, 10:01 PM
Will this continue to hold true of Contrearas continues to walk more batters than he Ks? I hope not.As long as he's winning, or giving the team a chance to win, who cares?

batmanZoSo
04-21-2005, 10:03 PM
As long as he's winning, or giving the team a chance to win, who cares?

Well of course, but how likely is that?

samram
04-21-2005, 10:06 PM
As long as he's winning, or giving the team a chance to win, who cares?

I don't. I don't give a damn about anything other than team wins, and he's given the team a chance to win every game he's pitched. Furthermore, as durable as Buehrle has been, I wouldn't mind seeing him get an extra day here and there with a day off, especially if he has to make four or five starts in October.

Ol' No. 2
04-21-2005, 10:07 PM
Well of course, but how likely is that?How likely was it that Jon Garland would be where he is today? Who the hell knows? But as long as he keeps giving the team a chance to win, I don't care how many batters he walks. And if he doesn't, I don't care how FEW he walks.

batmanZoSo
04-21-2005, 10:19 PM
How likely was it that Jon Garland would be where he is today? Who the hell knows? But as long as he keeps giving the team a chance to win, I don't care how many batters he walks. And if he doesn't, I don't care how FEW he walks.

Well if anyone can do it, it's probably Contreras because he has great stuff, but walking a bunch of hitters and not getting strikeouts is simply a recipe for disaster. The point is, I'd want Contreras out of the third spot if he started to not give us a chance to win...and all those walks will probably be the reason for that.

Ol' No. 2
04-21-2005, 10:24 PM
Well if anyone can do it, it's probably Contreras because he has great stuff, but walking a bunch of hitters and not getting strikeouts is simply a recipe for disaster. The point is, I'd want Contreras out of the third spot if he started to not give us a chance to win...and all those walks will probably be the reason for that.Who would you NOT want out of the rotation if he wasn't giving your team a chance to win?

batmanZoSo
04-21-2005, 10:30 PM
Who would you NOT want out of the rotation if he wasn't giving your team a chance to win?

I said out of the third spot. This thread after all is about the order of the rotation and I came in when Lip mentioned that Ozzie plans to keep the rotation as is barring an injury. And I disagree with that. Maybe it's obvious, but if Contreras falls of the map, I would certainly expect Ozzie to go back on his words and put him at the end.

SoxFan48
04-21-2005, 10:32 PM
As long as he's winning, or giving the team a chance to win, who cares?

A pitcher who walks more than he K's will not give his team a chance to win long term.

Norberto7
04-21-2005, 10:45 PM
When Contreras was with New York, did he pitch much in the postseason? I can only imagine he had opportunities with that team. Does anyone remember how he did in that situation?

MeanFish
04-21-2005, 11:16 PM
A pitcher who walks more than he K's will not give his team a chance to win long term.

You're making a false assumption that Contreras is a consistent pitcher which, as we know, he isn't. He has problems some days, but other days he is just lights out. Who cares what position in the rotation he's in? If he can give us a chance to win two thirds of the time, that's all we need from him.

He's been getting ahead in most counts even when he's been walking guys, it's only a matter of time before he can get that final strike in there confidently and consistently. When that happens, his walk counts wlil go down and his K counts will go up.

Of course, all of this propellerhead stuff doesn't matter much if Contreras keeps giving us a shot to win.

JRIG
04-22-2005, 08:20 AM
You're making a false assumption that Contreras is a consistent pitcher which, as we know, he isn't. He has problems some days, but other days he is just lights out. Who cares what position in the rotation he's in? If he can give us a chance to win two thirds of the time, that's all we need from him.

He's been getting ahead in most counts even when he's been walking guys, it's only a matter of time before he can get that final strike in there confidently and consistently. When that happens, his walk counts wlil go down and his K counts will go up.

Of course, all of this propellerhead stuff doesn't matter much if Contreras keeps giving us a shot to win.

Many of Contreras' problems have come from "disaster starts," i.e. giving up more runs than innings pitched. He was dangerously close to doing so against Minny, but pitched out of it. As long as he avoids implosions, he should be a positive contributor. Maybe not at as much as his salary should indicate, but that's neither here nor there at this point.

elrod
04-22-2005, 08:28 AM
The Sox have been doing fine the way they are. If it's not broken, don't try and fix it. Also to introduce a new topic, why is it that Mark Buehrle is a better pitcher than Kerry Wood, but Wood is some kind of media demi-god? Especially the way their seasons have started off this year.

They got Wood. But so far we got WINS.

Actually, I've notice the Chicago media start to take note of this. I seem to see lots of articles and commentary asking, "Is Wood overrated?" Buehrle is starting to get his due too. Baseball Tonight rated him one of the three most under-appreciated players in the AL, along with Jacque Jones and Francisco Cordero.

samram
04-22-2005, 08:34 AM
Actually, I've notice the Chicago media start to take note of this. I seem to see lots of articles and commentary asking, "Is Wood overrated?" Buehrle is starting to get his due too. Baseball Tonight rated him one of the three most under-appreciated players in the AL, along with Jacque Jones and Francisco Cordero.

Actually, that was Torii Hunter, although Jones could probably be put in that gruop as well.

elrod
04-22-2005, 08:34 AM
When Contreras was with New York, did he pitch much in the postseason? I can only imagine he had opportunities with that team. Does anyone remember how he did in that situation?

Not well. 5.73 ERA and some terrible blowups in 2003.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlbhist/players/gamelog?statsId=7043&year=2003

elrod
04-22-2005, 08:35 AM
Actually, that was Torii Hunter, although Jones could probably be put in that gruop as well.

No, the segment in question rated Jones the under-rated player because Hunter is finally getting his props. Jones is overshadowed by his own center fielder but provides great defense, power and speed.

ondafarm
04-22-2005, 08:42 AM
I'd put JG in the pen, and bring him in for long relief, or even as a closer.

Now that should be in teal !!!! :angry:

gosox41
04-22-2005, 08:50 AM
Tied for 2nd in innings pitched
3rd in ERA among starters with a 2.57
2nd among starters with a 1.00 WHIP
2nd a mong starters in Opponents on base percentage with .266
1st in Pitches per Inning pitched with 12.79

Sounds like a 2nd or 3rd starter at the worst. Jose Contreras--welcome to the 5th SP slot.

If I were to rank the starters I would still have JC ranked as the #5. Garland would be #4. If El Duque breaks down then JG moves up to #3. He hasn't been that impressive and I think people try to lean on the positives. But overall, he hasn't been that good.



Bob

Flight #24
04-22-2005, 10:11 AM
If I were to rank the starters I would still have JC ranked as the #5. Garland would be #4. If El Duque breaks down then JG moves up to #3. He hasn't been that impressive and I think people try to lean on the positives. But overall, he hasn't been that good.



Bob

Garland hasn't been that impressive? :?:

1.00 WHIP, 2.05 GBFB, 2.00 K/BB, 2.57ERA, 3-3 in QS isn't impressive?

I can understand saying that it's early, small sample size, etc. But to say that JG hasn't been impressive so far makes me say Huh?

Jerko
04-22-2005, 10:25 AM
Maybe Garland is doing better because in HIS head, he's the "no-pressure" #5 starter. For that reason alone I would keep him as such.

JRIG
04-22-2005, 10:30 AM
Garland hasn't been that impressive? :?:

1.00 WHIP, 2.05 GBFB, 2.00 K/BB, 2.57ERA, 3-3 in QS isn't impressive?

I can understand saying that it's early, small sample size, etc. But to say that JG hasn't been impressive so far makes me say Huh?

I think he meant Contreras. I don't think there's any way to argue Garland hasn't been outstanding so far.

Flight #24
04-22-2005, 10:32 AM
I think he meant Contreras. I don't think there's any way to argue Garland hasn't been outstanding so far.

In that case I would agree. Not to go all "grammar police", but the way that post was written, it apepared he was referring to Jon.

ChiSox7
04-22-2005, 10:39 AM
Our starting rotation takes up a little under 20 percent of the Top 21 ERA leaders in the AL. All five starters are in the Top 21 in ERA, with 3 in the Top 13. Pretty impressive

gosox41
04-22-2005, 12:21 PM
Garland hasn't been that impressive? :?:

1.00 WHIP, 2.05 GBFB, 2.00 K/BB, 2.57ERA, 3-3 in QS isn't impressive?

I can understand saying that it's early, small sample size, etc. But to say that JG hasn't been impressive so far makes me say Huh?

I should clarify. I meant JC.



Bob

santo=dorf
04-22-2005, 12:54 PM
Maybe Garland is doing better because in HIS head, he's the "no-pressure" #5 starter. For that reason alone I would keep him as such.

Exactly.

Ozzie has already messed around with the rotation by pitching Contreras third because of his success against the Indians.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-22-2005, 12:55 PM
It's April 22. Our "fifth starter" will be the guy next September who has the fewest games started and fewest innings pitched of any of Buehrle, Garcia, Contreras, Hernandez, and Garland.

Some of you just need to go take a cold shower. It's a long season.

Frater Perdurabo
04-22-2005, 01:05 PM
It's April 22. Our "fifth starter" will be the guy next September who has the fewest games started and fewest innings pitched of any of Buehrle, Garcia, Contreras, Hernandez, and Garland.

Some of you just need to go take a cold shower. It's a long season.

Agreed. Precisely. Exactly. (Except the Sox regular season ends on Sunday, Oct. 2)
:cool:

And besides, who really cares who has what title? Barring injury, if they just keep going through the rotation, each starter will get an equal number of starts, plus or minus one (162 is not evenly divisible by 5). With the way all of them are pitching right now, who would want to mess with success?

If and when the Sox make the playoffs is the time to discuss how to arrange the rotation for maximum success in the ALDS.