PDA

View Full Version : A New Rotation


BridgePortNative
07-02-2005, 08:35 PM
I think ozzie should switch to a Six Man Rotaion once Hernandez is healthy. I think McCarthy is here to stay and this will give the oft-injured El Duque an extra day of rest. This would prevent this staff to br broken or worn out come playoff time ie: 2000.

Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Garland
Hernandez
McCarthy

Your thoughts?

whitesoxfan
07-02-2005, 08:35 PM
no to a 6 man rotation.

The Racehorse
07-02-2005, 08:36 PM
I think ozzie should switch to a Six Man Rotaion once Hernandez is healthy. I think McCarthy is here to stay and this will give the oft-injured El Duque an extra day of rest. This would prevent this staff to br broken or worn out come playoff time ie: 2000.

Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Garland
Hernandez
McCarthy

Your thoughts?

5's company, 6 is a crowd.

ShoelessJoeS
07-02-2005, 08:36 PM
I think ozzie should switch to a Six Man Rotaion once Hernandez is healthy. I think McCarthy is here to stay and this will give the oft-injured El Duque an extra day of rest. This would prevent this staff to br broken or worn out come playoff time ie: 2000.

Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Garland
Hernandez
McCarthy

Your thoughts?
buehrle doesnt like pitching on 5 days rest let alone 6 days, not a bad idea to get the other staters rest though

SOXSINCE'70
07-02-2005, 08:40 PM
:hawk

"No".

BridgePortNative
07-02-2005, 08:42 PM
Well, I tried....:dunno:

The Racehorse
07-02-2005, 08:44 PM
Well, I tried....:dunno:

No problem. :cool:

:)

chaerulez
07-02-2005, 08:51 PM
The difference with 2000's staff with the one we have now is 2000 was a bit of luck involved pitching wise. Many pitchers had career years:

Parque's only season with an ERA of under 5 and a winning W-L record.

Sirotka's only season with a winning W-L and best ERA in terms of a full season, also he never played in the majors again, he was probably pitching in a lot of pain towards the end of the year due to his shoulder injury.

Baldwin's ERA was 4.65 which is average at best... Baldwin was never that good of a pitcher, just benefited from good run support. I wouldn't have minded having him around as a #5 guy, just not as a #3.

Eldred/Garland/Wells... two of these guys had ERA's over 6 and the other was coming off a major injury

Aside from Hernandez there isn't a starter with a history of injures. We know what we are going to get from the big three now, solid outings a great majority of the time. With the staff in 2000, you couldn't really say that except with Sirotka. It's no secret that the club's sucess was based on the great offense that year. That's why we got swept by Seattle, as the offense was not there (altough the pitching was very good, but do remember the Sox did have a pretty good bullpen that year).

White Sox Josh
07-02-2005, 09:00 PM
The difference with 2000's staff with the one we have now is 2000 was a bit of luck involved pitching wise. Many pitchers had career years:

Parque's only season with an ERA of under 5 and a winning W-L record.

Sirotka's only season with a winning W-L and best ERA in terms of a full season, also he never played in the majors again, he was probably pitching in a lot of pain towards the end of the year due to his shoulder injury.

Baldwin's ERA was 4.65 which is average at best... Baldwin was never that good of a pitcher, just benefited from good run support. I wouldn't have minded having him around as a #5 guy, just not as a #3.

Eldred/Garland/Wells... two of these guys had ERA's over 6 and the other was coming off a major injury

Aside from Hernandez there isn't a starter with a history of injures. We know what we are going to get from the big three now, solid outings a great majority of the time. With the staff in 2000, you couldn't really say that except with Sirotka. It's no secret that the club's sucess was based on the great offense that year. That's why we got swept by Seattle, as the offense was not there (altough the pitching was very good, but do remember the Sox did have a pretty good bullpen that year).actually Parque had a really good 1st half of the 99 season and totally tanked in the 2nd half. Baldwin was always a 2nd Half pitcher however he was injured during the second half. Sirotka was actually a pretty good pitcher and competed with Pedro for the ERA tittle for a lot of the season in 99.

CallMeNuts
07-02-2005, 11:32 PM
Well, I tried....:dunno:

If BMac is worthy, it would make sense to "Piggy-back" him with El Duque. Give El Duque the first 4 or 5 innings and BMac the next 4 or 5. Neither guy seems to be able to give 7 good innings. "Piggy-backing" these two could save the other bullpen arms. Who goes to the minors in this situation? Wait and see. Answer depends on who is hot and who is healthy.

TDog
07-02-2005, 11:49 PM
The difference with 2000's staff with the one we have now is 2000 was a bit of luck involved pitching wise. Many pitchers had career years:...

The "career year" observation is simplistic. The Sox won with their hitting in April, but their pitching was pretty good for a while too. Sirotka, Baldwin, Parque and especially Eldred were awesome at times (although Parque was a wimp). It wasn't a matter of these guys having the best seasons of their careers. They pretty much all developed problems. Eldred came back as a relief pitcher, but for those guys 2000 was the beginning of the end.

kevingrt
07-02-2005, 11:49 PM
There is no point in a 5-man rotation. You'd be hurting Buehrle, Garcia, and Garland more then helpiong Contreras, El Duque, and McCarthy. If you really like B-Mac piggy-back him with El Duque, and maybe have him do some relief sometime. But putting Buehrle and company on five days rest would not be the wisest of decesions.

doublem23
07-03-2005, 12:01 AM
Well, I tried....:dunno:

No, when El Duque is back Brandon needs to be on the first bus back to Charlotte. He's had 2 good outings and 2 bad ones in his career thus far, no need to rush him into a play-off race unless it's absoletuly necessary.

Lip Man 1
07-03-2005, 12:07 AM
For what it's worth Phil Rogers suggested the exact same thing on Chicago Tribune Live Friday.

His reasoning was that as long as the Sox have a secure divisional lead, why use up and burn out your top starters. He said they need to be rested and ready for October when it really counts. This way he said they still get work but aren't overused and will be fresher.

Lip

batmanZoSo
07-03-2005, 12:17 AM
For what it's worth Phil Rogers suggested the exact same thing on Chicago Tribune Live Friday.

His reasoning was that as long as the Sox have a secure divisional lead, why use up and burn out your top starters. He said they need to be rested and ready for October when it really counts. This way he said they still get work but aren't overused and will be fresher.

Lip

Yeah, it kind of makes sense, but I don't like it for one reason--it gives the team a sense that they've wrapped up the division. And that could cause yet another sleepwalk-into-the-playoffs scenario. Plus it inhibits our chances of home field throughout. Anaheim is right on our tails. I know I wouldn't want to start the playoffs with two games in California.

chisoxmike
07-03-2005, 12:21 AM
For what it's worth Phil Rogers suggested the exact same thing on Chicago Tribune Live Friday.

His reasoning was that as long as the Sox have a secure divisional lead, why use up and burn out your top starters. He said they need to be rested and ready for October when it really counts. This way he said they still get work but aren't overused and will be fresher.

Lip

Yeah, I mean it makes sense, but I don't know if its a good idea to get guys out of a rhythm. I'd say see what happens when El Duque comes back. They may just swich around El Duque and McCarthy.

nitetrain8601
07-03-2005, 04:14 PM
I personally would do it as soon as we wrapped up the division or if we are like 2 games away from wrapping it up and it's the beginning of the last month of the season. It's not that bad of an idea. Just at this moment in time, it wouldn't be a good idea.