PDA

View Full Version : Needed: Quality Starts


sox1970
08-22-2006, 12:10 PM
Everything was going fine until after Memorial Day:

Pre-May 30 (32-50 =64%)
Buehrle 7 for 10 in quality starts
Garcia 7-10
Contreras 7-8 (plus Haeger and McCarthy 0-2 in his spot)
Garland 4-10 (Bad but not awful)
Vazquez 7-10 (yes, believe it or not)

Post-May 30 (31-74 =42%)
Buehrle 6-15
Garcia 7-15
Contreras 7-16
Garland 9-14
Vazquez 2-14 (yes, that's correct 2 out of 14!!)

Record when the starter has a quality start: 55-8
Record when they don't: 18-43

They got by in June when they hit the crap out of the ball against bad NL teams. Then reality struck in July. The slump didn't start in July. The slump started on May 30.

Since Vazquez pitched a gem in Cleveland on Memorial Day, he's had 2 good starts. That's unacceptable. Certainly he's not the only one at fault, but this is right back to the days where the Sox didn't have a 5th starter to rely on. Personally, I think it's too late to get McCarthy in there as a starter. but if the Sox knew then what they know now, McCarthy would have been starting since the beginning of June.

Chicken Dinner
08-22-2006, 12:12 PM
Pretty sad for $42.25 million dollars worth of starting pitching.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 12:24 PM
Everything was going fine until after Memorial Day:

Pre-May 30 (32-48 =67%)
Buehrle 7 for 10 in quality starts
Garcia 7-10
Contreras 7-8 (plus Haeger and McCarthy 0-2 in his spot)
Garland 4-10 (Bad but not awful)
Vazquez 7-10 (yes, believe it or not)

Post-May 30 (31-74 =42%)
Buehrle 6-15
Garcia 7-15
Contreras 7-16
Garland 9-14
Vazquez 2-14 (yes, that's correct 2 out of 14!!)

Record when the starter has a quality start: 55-8
Record when they don't: 18-43

They got by in June when they hit the crap out of the ball against bad NL teams. Then reality struck in July. The slump didn't start in July. The slump started on May 30.

Since Vazquez pitched a gem in Cleveland on Memorial Day, he's had 2 good starts. That's unacceptable. Certainly he's not the only one at fault, but this is right back to the days where the Sox didn't have a 5th starter to rely on. Personally, I think it's too late to get McCarthy in there as a starter. but if the Sox knew then what they know now, McCarthy would have been starting since the beginning of June.By your own numbers, replacing Vazquez with McCarthy would have made a minimal difference. Turn that 2-14 to 50% and it adds only 6 more quality starts, bringing the overall total to 50%. That's better, it's nowhere near being good enough.

When only one of your 5 starters is over 50%, blaming any one guy is scapegoating, pure and simple.

sox1970
08-22-2006, 12:29 PM
By your own numbers, replacing Vazquez with McCarthy would have made a minimal difference. Turn that 2-14 to 50% and it adds only 6 more quality starts, bringing the overall total to 50%. That's better, it's nowhere near being good enough.

When only one of your 5 starters is over 50%, blaming any one guy is scapegoating, pure and simple.

One guy CAN make a difference. Did you see the Sox records when they get a quality start? If McCarthy was 7 out of 14 in the time, by trend, the Sox would have 4 more wins right now. 4 more wins means a 4.5 game lead in the wildcard, and 2.5 back in the division. I'm not saying Buehrle, Garcia, and Contreras have been great, but when you throw a guy out there every 5th day that's an automatic loss, you don't have a good chance of making the playoffs.

Chicken Dinner
08-22-2006, 12:33 PM
One guy CAN make a difference. Did you see the Sox records when they get a quality start? If McCarthy was 7 out of 14 in the time, by trend, the Sox would have 4 more wins right now. 4 more wins means a 4.5 game lead in the wildcard, and 2.5 back in the division. I'm not saying Buehrle, Garcia, and Contreras have been great, but when you throw a guy out there every 5th day that's an automatic loss, you don't have a good chance of making the playoffs.

And Ozzie leaving him in when he knew what was going to happen had nothing to do with it?

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 12:35 PM
One guy CAN make a difference. Did you see the Sox records when they get a quality start? If McCarthy was 7 out of 14 in the time, by trend, the Sox would have 4 more wins right now. 4 more wins means a 4.5 game lead in the wildcard, and 2.5 back in the division. I'm not saying Buehrle, Garcia, and Contreras have been great, but when you throw a guy out there every 5th day that's an automatic loss, you don't have a good chance of making the playoffs.Your projection rests on the assumption that McCarthy will pitch better than Buehrle, Garcia and Contreras.

Edit: Oh yeah, and the Sox actually won 7 of those 14 games Vazquez started, so it's pretty unlikely that they'd have won 11 of them if McCarthy had started.

sox1970
08-22-2006, 12:40 PM
And Ozzie leaving him in when he knew what was going to happen had nothing to do with it?

Fine, blame Ozzie. I don't care. I'm just showing the correlation between quality starts and wins. If Ozzie pulls Javy before he finishes the 6th inning, the Sox don't have a great chance of winning anyway.

fquaye149
08-22-2006, 12:43 PM
Pretty sad for $42.25 million dollars worth of starting pitching.

I guarantee you that # is not what KW is paying them, considering NY is paying most of JC and JV's contracts.

9 mill--Freddy
6.5 mill--Burly
5 mill--Garland
~9 mill--Javy
~6 mill--JC

are my #'s completely off here? If I'm not too far off, we're paying more like 35 mill, which isn't bad for a rotation on a contending team.

Flight #24
08-22-2006, 12:47 PM
This brings me to an interesting thought - Any interest in David Wells? I know there's the history/jerk aspect, but he's a veteran with a history of picking it up in big games, he's got some of that attitude IMO this team has been missing, and he's pitched decently since coming off the DL for Boston.

And he's likely cleared waivers and may well be available for a mid-range prospect depending on how Boston's next couple of games go.

Just a thought, but you could pick him up, put Vazquez in the 'pen and probably get yourself an extra 2-3 wins, which could be exactly what's needed. Plus, there's the bonus of the kick in the ass to the rest of the starters.

Chicken Dinner
08-22-2006, 12:51 PM
I guarantee you that # is not what KW is paying them, considering NY is paying most of JC and JV's contracts.

9 mill--Freddy
6.5 mill--Burly
5 mill--Garland
~9 mill--Javy
~6 mill--JC

are my #'s completely off here? If I'm not too far off, we're paying more like 35 mill, which isn't bad for a rotation on a contending team.

No matter who pays it, you still have $42.25 million worth of underachieving starting pitching.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 12:53 PM
I guarantee you that # is not what KW is paying them, considering NY is paying most of JC and JV's contracts.

9 mill--Freddy
6.5 mill--Burly
5 mill--Garland
~9 mill--Javy
~6 mill--JC

are my #'s completely off here? If I'm not too far off, we're paying more like 35 mill, which isn't bad for a rotation on a contending team.Buehrle: $7.75M
Contreras: $9M - $2M paid by Yankees
Garcia: $9M
Garland: $7M
Vazquez: $11.5M - $1M paid by D-backs

Total: $44.25M - $3M paid by Yankees and D-backs = $41.25M

caulfield12
08-22-2006, 01:06 PM
And the Twins and Tigers are getting a lot better production for half that, or around a quarter of that, in the case of the Tigers.

It would be one thing if they were producing equivalent to career "norm" expectations coming into this season, but Garcia/Buehrle/Vazquez are all worse and Garland and Contreras are going in opposite directions, although the overall effect is one pitcher going as well down the stretch as he's capable. The Tigers' broadcast showed that one year ago, his cumulative ERA for the season was 4.05 and he's pretty close to that, but I think we all agree that the late 2005 and early 2006 Contreras is a different species of pitcher on a roll than the one we currently possess.

fquaye149
08-22-2006, 01:08 PM
Buehrle: $7.75M
Contreras: $9M - $2M paid by Yankees
Garcia: $9M
Garland: $7M
Vazquez: $11.5M - $1M paid by D-backs

Total: $44.25M - $3M paid by Yankees and D-backs = $41.25M

I'm almost positive the Yankees are paying part of Vazquez's 11.5 M

Or are they paying part of an even higher salary that the Dbacks are in turn supplanting?

fquaye149
08-22-2006, 01:11 PM
And the Twins and Tigers are getting a lot better production for half that, or around a quarter of that, in the case of the Tigers.



So what's your point? The Twins have a much better player development system (than anyone in baseball, really)

and the Tigers have been fortunate with their big name pitching prospects (we have been quite the opposite--none of our big name prospects have panned out with the exception of McCarthy--that includes with us and with other teams).

Sorry...I don't see how that's relevant: if you can't develop talent or if your talent gets career-ending hurt, you have to go trade for talent or sign talent.

If you trade for talent or sign talent you're going to have to pay.

This isn't really that ground breaking nor is it that relevant, except maybe to say the Sox should try to develop their players as well as the Twins...which is like saying that Anthony Thomas should have tried to run the ball as well as Walter Payton.

Chicken Dinner
08-22-2006, 01:11 PM
I'm almost positive the Yankees are paying part of Vazquez's 11.5 M

Or are they paying part of an even higher salary that the Dbacks are in turn supplanting?

Yanks pay 9 million to AZ and AZ pays 5 of the 24 remaining.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 01:11 PM
This brings me to an interesting thought - Any interest in David Wells? I know there's the history/jerk aspect, but he's a veteran with a history of picking it up in big games, he's got some of that attitude IMO this team has been missing, and he's pitched decently since coming off the DL for Boston.

And he's likely cleared waivers and may well be available for a mid-range prospect depending on how Boston's next couple of games go.

Just a thought, but you could pick him up, put Vazquez in the 'pen and probably get yourself an extra 2-3 wins, which could be exactly what's needed. Plus, there's the bonus of the kick in the ass to the rest of the starters.That's an interesting idea. But would Theo dare to make such an obvious white flag move? They have a West Coast trip coming up with LAA, SEA and OAK. They're 4 back in the WC now, but with home series in September with both the Sox and the Twins, I think they'd have to lay a major egg on this road trip before Theo would do it.

There is something to be said for the kick-in-the-ass factor, though.

miker
08-22-2006, 01:12 PM
And the Twins and Tigers are getting a lot better production for half that, or around a quarter of that, in the case of the Tigers.
I'm quite sure that doing a "Florida Marlins" and dumping everyone for a staff that makes the minimum would not resolve the current problem.

As for David Wells, are we that desperate?

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 01:14 PM
Yanks pay 3 million a year.But they're paying it to the D-backs. The Snakes are paying the White Sox $1M in 2006 and $3M in 2007 of Vazquez' salary.

Flight #24
08-22-2006, 01:15 PM
That's an interesting idea. But would Theo dare to make such an obvious white flag move? They have a West Coast trip coming up with LAA, SEA and OAK. They're 4 back in the WC now, but with home series in September with both the Sox and the Twins, I think they'd have to lay a major egg on this road trip before Theo would do it.

There is something to be said for the kick-in-the-ass factor, though.

If they follow up the 5-game stinker v. NYY by losing the WC series (entirely possible), I wouldn't be surprised if they accept that they're out of it. 6-8 games out of the WC is tough to make up in a month, especially when you have to pass 2 teams. And topping that all is that what chance they would have would depend pretty much on sweeping both MIN & CHI, which would belie their craptacular performance the past month or so.

And miker, yes - when we can't buy a QS, I think we are exactly that desperate. This situation is one where every single QS the team can get is crucial - because the Twins ain't going away, and if they're still within a game or 2 of the WC in mid-Sep, they get a pretty strong reinforcement in Liriano.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 01:17 PM
If they follow up the 5-game stinker v. NYY by losing the WC series (entirely possible), I wouldn't be surprised if they accept that they're out of it. 6-8 games out of the WC is tough to make up in a month, especially when you have to pass 2 teams. And topping that all is that what chance they would have would depend pretty much on sweeping both MIN & CHI, which would belie their craptacular performance the past month or so.Logically, you're right. But would Theo have the stones to brave the torching he would get in the Boston media and from the fans?

miker
08-22-2006, 01:20 PM
And miker, yes - when we can't buy a QS, I think we are exactly that desperate. This situation is one where every single QS the team can get is crucial - because the Twins ain't going away, and if they're still within a game or 2 of the WC in mid-Sep, they get a pretty strong reinforcement in Liriano.
While I was being somewhat rhetorical, the facts do all lead to the same conclusion. You are right. We need some good pitching...and fast!

Chicken Dinner
08-22-2006, 01:29 PM
I have a sad feeling that our pitching is as good as it's going to get this year. That means the offense is going to have to carry the team and that's not happening right now.

itsnotrequired
08-22-2006, 01:30 PM
But they're paying it to the D-backs. The Snakes are paying the White Sox $1M in 2006 and $3M in 2007 of Vazquez' salary.

I crunched the numbers a while back and I think the D-Backs will end up paying Vazquez only $3.5 million for his 2005 performance.

whitesoxfan1986
08-22-2006, 01:46 PM
After last night not one of our starters has an ERA under 4.00. That is pathetic. I'm pretty sure every 26 out of the 30 teams has at least one starter with an ERA under 4. (exeptions: Us, KC, Boston, Pittsburgh?) I'll check and get back. EDIT 23 of 30 teams have at least one starter with an ERA under 4. Boston has Schilling. I was wrong about that one.

russ99
08-22-2006, 01:47 PM
I wonder if this may have anything to do with it??

2005 Innings Pitched:

Buehrle - 237.66 IP + 23.33 IP Playoffs = 261.00 IP Total - 2006: 163.00 IP
Garcia - 228.00 IP + 21.00 IP Playoffs = 249.00 IP Total - 2006: 160.33 IP
Contreras - 204.66 IP + 32.00 IP Playoffs = 236.66 IP Total - 2006: 164.66 IP
Garland - 221.00 IP + 16.00 IP Playoffs = 237.00 IP Total - 2006: 156.00 IP
Vazquez - 215.66 IP - 2006: 151.00 IP

Edit - added this years IP too.

miker
08-22-2006, 01:54 PM
I wonder if this may have anything to do with it??

2005 Innings Pitched:

Buehrle - 237.66 IP + 23.33 IP Playoffs = 261.00 IP Total - 2006: 163.00 IP
Garcia - 228.00 IP + 21.00 IP Playoffs = 249.00 IP Total - 2006: 160.33 IP
Contreras - 204.66 IP + 32.00 IP Playoffs = 236.66 IP Total - 2006: 164.66 IP
Garland - 221.00 IP + 16.00 IP Playoffs = 237.00 IP Total - 2006: 156.00 IP
Vazquez - 215.66 IP - 2006: 151.00 IP

Edit - added this years IP too.
What about the "World Championship of Baseball" innings too! They are starting to add up.

fquaye149
08-22-2006, 01:56 PM
But they're paying it to the D-backs. The Snakes are paying the White Sox $1M in 2006 and $3M in 2007 of Vazquez' salary.
So what you're saying is Vazquez is making 15.5 this year? (our 11.5 + dbacks' 1 + yankees' 3)

ugh...i'm bad with MY OWN money...much less a mlb team's finances :(

itsnotrequired
08-22-2006, 02:08 PM
So what you're saying is Vazquez is making 15.5 this year? (our 11.5 + dbacks' 1 + yankees' 3)

ugh...i'm bad with MY OWN money...much less a mlb team's finances :(

Vazquez is owed $11.5 million this season. Of that total, Arizona is paying a portion of it so the Sox are not paying the full $11.5 million. Vazquez is owed $24 million for 06-07 and Arizona is paying $5 million of that total. It is unclear if they are splitting it evenly between the two seasons or $2 million this year and $3 million next year or what. If we assume it is an even split between the two seasons, then the Sox are paying Vazquez $9 million this season and Arizona is paying his remaining $2.5 million to give him the full $11.5 million.

When he signed with Arizona, New York would be paying $3 million/yr of his contract ($9 million total). This money was not included when he was traded to the Sox; Arizona kept it. He was only on the team for a year so Arizona is ahead $6 million. They sent $5 million to the Sox so the D-Backs made $1 million on the deal.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 02:10 PM
So what you're saying is Vazquez is making 15.5 this year? (our 11.5 + dbacks' 1 + yankees' 3)

ugh...i'm bad with MY OWN money...much less a mlb team's finances :(No. He gets $11.5M.

caulfield12
08-22-2006, 02:10 PM
So what's your point? The Twins have a much better player development system (than anyone in baseball, really)

and the Tigers have been fortunate with their big name pitching prospects (we have been quite the opposite--none of our big name prospects have panned out with the exception of McCarthy--that includes with us and with other teams).

Sorry...I don't see how that's relevant: if you can't develop talent or if your talent gets career-ending hurt, you have to go trade for talent or sign talent.

If you trade for talent or sign talent you're going to have to pay.

This isn't really that ground breaking nor is it that relevant, except maybe to say the Sox should try to develop their players as well as the Twins...which is like saying that Anthony Thomas should have tried to run the ball as well as Walter Payton.

It has nothing to do with the minor leagues. The word I would use is procurement.

It's all about scouting talent from other organizations. The Twins have two aces and a lockdown closer thanks to this...we have Contreras, Thornton and Jenks for the same reasons, and McCarthy, a potential ace.

Santana, Liriano, Lohse, Silva, Reyes, Guerrier, Nathan, Bonser (even Eric Milton) all came from outside the organization. Baker and Adam Johnson are/were huge disappointments.

Radke is the only quality starting pitcher they've developed in 15 years, on their own.

Ol' No. 2
08-22-2006, 02:20 PM
I wonder if this may have anything to do with it??

2005 Innings Pitched:

Buehrle - 237.66 IP + 23.33 IP Playoffs = 261.00 IP Total - 2006: 163.00 IP
Garcia - 228.00 IP + 21.00 IP Playoffs = 249.00 IP Total - 2006: 160.33 IP
Contreras - 204.66 IP + 32.00 IP Playoffs = 236.66 IP Total - 2006: 164.66 IP
Garland - 221.00 IP + 16.00 IP Playoffs = 237.00 IP Total - 2006: 156.00 IP
Vazquez - 215.66 IP - 2006: 151.00 IP

Edit - added this years IP too.Lots of people blame it on the number of innings pitched last year, but I'm not sure I'm buying it. The Atlanta Braves pitchers seemed to manage pitching in the post-season year after year and they didn't die. These guys are not really power pitchers who would be most affected by throwing lots of innings. They have done this year after year, so it's not a huge sudden increase. And as for the WBC, they would have been pitching spring training games instead, and I doubt they pitched significantly more innings.

You can't really rule it out, but I don't find it very convincing, either.

itsnotrequired
08-22-2006, 02:38 PM
Lots of people blame it on the number of innings pitched last year, but I'm not sure I'm buying it. The Atlanta Braves pitchers seemed to manage pitching in the post-season year after year and they didn't die. These guys are not really power pitchers who would be most affected by throwing lots of innings. They have done this year after year, so it's not a huge sudden increase. And as for the WBC, they would have been pitching spring training games instead, and I doubt they pitched significantly more innings.

You can't really rule it out, but I don't find it very convincing, either.

I think it is more or less a case of bad luck. If one guy was struggling, it really wouldn't be a big deal. Even two and the Sox would probably be fine. But what are the chances that three starters are arguably having the worst seasons of their careers all at the same time? I'm talking about Buehrle, Garcia and Vazquez. Garland and Jose are okay but even they aren't having the best seasons (granted, their careers are a little shorter). Garland has been decent but his ERA is a full run higher than last year (his career best). Jose's ERA is also up about a half run.

It could be pitching too many innings but I think it is more a case of just bad timing.

caulfield12
08-22-2006, 02:47 PM
Bad luck would be if two starters went down with injuries. Ours have been healthy. They just haven't made good pitches, in good locations, with pitchers' counts. And they haven't pitched over defensive lapses (either errors or plays that weren't made by Mackowiak or Pods, for example).

Unless you count it bad luck that both Garcia and Buehrle SEEM to be lacking "stuff" they had last year.

fquaye149
08-22-2006, 02:49 PM
It has nothing to do with the minor leagues. The word I would use is procurement.

It's all about scouting talent from other organizations. The Twins have two aces and a lockdown closer thanks to this...we have Contreras and Jenks for the same reasons, and McCarthy, a potential ace.

Santana, Liriano, Lohse, Silva, Reyes, Guerrier, Nathan, Bonser (even Eric Milton) all came from outside the organization. Baker and Adam Johnson are/were huge disappointments.

Radke is the only quality starting pitcher they've developed in 15 years, on their own.

Yes--but look how they were brought along, Santana specifically. That speaks to their minor league system.

White Sox haven't been good at getting production out of their homegrown pitching products nor prospects they traded for (until recently). Luckily it looks like things are changing with people like Thornton, Jenks, Cotts, and McCarthy.

But what seperates the Twins' success from the White Sox's pitching-wise may lay beyond scouting--and most likely stems from different approaches to player development.

my5thbench
08-22-2006, 02:51 PM
Jon Garland then pray for 4 days of rain doesn't seem to be working

caulfield12
08-22-2006, 02:55 PM
Jon Garland then pray for 4 days of rain doesn't seem to be working

Maybe the Metrodome roof will cave in....not many chances of a rainout there.

caulfield12
08-22-2006, 02:56 PM
Yes--but look how they were brought along, Santana specifically. That speaks to their minor league system.

White Sox haven't been good at getting production out of their homegrown pitching products nor prospects they traded for (until recently). Luckily it looks like things are changing with people like Thornton, Jenks, Cotts, and McCarthy.

But what seperates the Twins' success from the White Sox's pitching-wise may lay beyond scouting--and most likely stems from different approaches to player development.

What would be interesting is if there was one KEY guy (besides Ryan) in the front office responsible for this pitching identification and development.

And why he hasn't been snagged by another organization...