PDA

View Full Version : 2006 Pitching stats


Iwritecode
09-19-2006, 03:27 PM
Sure nobody expected the pitching staff to repeat the career years they had last year. But I can't imaging anyone expected them to completely fall off the face of the planet either. This isn't exactly something you can blame KW or Ozzie for...

Politte - WHIP BAA ERA (career high in ERA and was on pace for highs in runs and homeruns)
2006 - 2.07 .353 8.70
career - 1.37 .251 4.33

Buehrle (career high in earned runs, homeruns and ERA)
2006 - 1.42 .302 4.79
career - 1.26 .267 3.79

Cotts (Really only his third year in the league so this may be his real talent level)
2006 - 1.57 .281 4.64
career - 1.42 .240 4.37

Garcia (already gave up career high in runs and homeruns)
2006 - 1.33 .275 4.82
career - 1.29 .253 4.03

Riske
2006 - 1.28 .239 3.61
career - 1.26 .229 3.55


Just think, if these guys could've pitched to their career averages, they might be drinking champange already.

mjmcend
09-19-2006, 04:04 PM
Sure nobody expected the pitching staff to repeat the career years they had last year. But I can't imaging anyone expected them to completely fall off the face of the planet either. This isn't exactly something you can blame KW or Ozzie for...

Politte - WHIP BAA ERA (career high in ERA and was on pace for highs in runs and homeruns)
2006 - 2.07 .353 8.70
career - 1.37 .251 4.33

Buehrle (career high in earned runs, homeruns and ERA)
2006 - 1.42 .302 4.79
career - 1.26 .267 3.79

Cotts (Really only his third year in the league so this may be his real talent level)
2006 - 1.57 .281 4.64
career - 1.42 .240 4.37

Garcia (already gave up career high in runs and homeruns)
2006 - 1.33 .275 4.82
career - 1.29 .253 4.03

Riske
2006 - 1.28 .239 3.61
career - 1.26 .229 3.55


Just think, if these guys could've pitched to their career averages, they might be drinking champange already.

Riske was right there at his career averages. Garcia was hurt by his giving up the long ball. His flyball tendinces made this some what predictable. Politte was hurt.

Buehrle is the enigma. It will be very interesting to see how he responds next year. He has pitched a ton of innings in the last 5 years (3rd most in the majors, I believe). Maybe it was fatigue. Hopefully he will be back stronger than ever next year.

Gavin
09-19-2006, 04:10 PM
I can blame Ozzie for the twelveteen times he left Vazquez in too long and watched scrub players knock him around in the fifth/sixth/seventh innings.

nebraskasox
09-19-2006, 04:28 PM
To me the most telling stat is the team ERA 4.54, tied with the Texas Rangers for 9th in the AL. Only Boston, Tampa, Baltimore and KC have higher team ERAs. Brutal.

But we lead the league in HRs.

Sounds like a lot of recent Sox teams.

mjmcend
09-19-2006, 04:48 PM
Sounds like a lot of recent Sox teams.

The difference this year is that we went into the year with 5 major leauge caliber pitchers instead of 3.

itsnotrequired
09-19-2006, 04:53 PM
The difference this year is that we went into the year with 5 major leauge caliber pitchers instead of 3.

Bingo. Scott Schoenweis? Dan Wright? Todd Ritchie? Gary Glover? These guys are not starting pitchers...

hold2dibber
09-19-2006, 05:41 PM
The difference this year is that we went into the year with 5 major leauge caliber pitchers instead of 3.

Or so we thought. Every starting pitcher pitched below expectations this year (except maybe Garland), as did Cotts, Politte, McCarthy. Jenks and Thornton are the only guys who performed as well as or better than expected. That's the story of the season to me. You can say what you want about Podsednik or Uribe or Mackowiak or BA, but if the Sox were even just a quarter of a run better (i.e., 4.30-ish ERA instead of 4.54), I think they'd be leading the division. The pitching has been sub-par all year. As we all know, and as last year proved yet again, pitching wins championships. This pitching staff simply has not been championship caliber. Not even close.

we be jake
09-19-2006, 05:49 PM
I can blame Ozzie for the twelveteen times he left Vazquez in too long and watched scrub players knock him around in the fifth/sixth/seventh innings.

I said it then and I'll say it now - I can't believe the number of people here who were happy when we picked up VAZ. Didn't anyone look at his numbers?

mjmcend
09-19-2006, 05:56 PM
Or so we thought. Every starting pitcher pitched below expectations this year (except maybe Garland), as did Cotts, Politte, McCarthy. Jenks and Thornton are the only guys who performed as well as or better than expected. That's the story of the season to me. You can say what you want about Podsednik or Uribe or Mackowiak or BA, but if the Sox were even just a quarter of a run better (i.e., 4.30-ish ERA instead of 4.54), I think they'd be leading the division. The pitching has been sub-par all year. As we all know, and as last year proved yet again, pitching wins championships. This pitching staff simply has not been championship caliber. Not even close.

I agree that they have not been championship caliber. However, I was responding to the poster that said it was like 2000-2004 all over again. All 5 pitchers are good enough to pitch in the majors.

Chisox003
09-19-2006, 06:00 PM
I said it then and I'll say it now - I can't believe the number of people here who were happy when we picked up VAZ. Didn't anyone look at his numbers?
He has a 2.57 ERA in September.

This after a 3.50 ERA in August.

Post All Star ERA is at 4.18. He'll be back next year, bank on it.

caulfield12
09-19-2006, 06:13 PM
Bingo. Scott Schoenweis? Dan Wright? Todd Ritchie? Gary Glover? These guys are not starting pitchers...

I resent that.

Signed,

Jon Rauch
Mike Porzio
Josh Stewart
Arnie Munoz
Felix Diaz
Jon Adkins
Charles Haeger
Sean Lowe
Rick White

hold2dibber
09-19-2006, 06:22 PM
I resent that.

Signed,

Jon Rauch
Mike Porzio
Josh Stewart
Arnie Munoz
Felix Diaz
Jon Adkins
Charles Haeger
Sean Lowe
Rick White

Aggghh!!!! My eyes!!!!!!! Make it stop, make it stop!!!!

hold2dibber
09-19-2006, 06:24 PM
I agree that they have not been championship caliber. However, I was responding to the poster that said it was like 2000-2004 all over again. All 5 pitchers are good enough to pitch in the majors.

I know - I understood your post. My point was just how disappointing those guys have been. We thought we had 5 solid MLB starters, but it turned out we were no better off (or not much better off) than we were during those 2000 - 2004 seasons.

caulfield12
09-19-2006, 06:43 PM
I know - I understood your post. My point was just how disappointing those guys have been. We thought we had 5 solid MLB starters, but it turned out we were no better off (or not much better off) than we were during those 2000 - 2004 seasons.


This team is very similar to the 2000 version...that team was single digits over .500 in the 2nd half and limped into the playoffs with pitching "wounded" galore. And that division lacked anyone of the caliber of Minnesota or Detroit to threaten us at all...which showed when we played Seattle.

But there's a big difference to me between 20 games over .500 (still very unusual for the Sox) and our usual 5-10 games either side of that mark.