PDA

View Full Version : Sisco Kid: Reliever or AAA starter?


caulfield12
12-16-2006, 11:42 PM
"Without talking with him, I'm not sure which direction to run with him," general manager Ken Williams said. "His growth as a starter was stunted a couple of years ago. I want to hear from him where he sees himself. What we've seen is that guys have a lot more success if you put them in a position where their heart is or where they have confidence.

"If he wants to pursue starting, we may have to take a step back and afford him the opportunity to grow at Triple A. It's intriguing on both ends to think of the possibilities."

from chicagosports.com


Interesting comments. Seems that with past experiences with Schoeneweis, Cotts, Foulke, Thornton, McCarthy and now Sisco, KW is learning some valuable lessons.

DickAllen72
12-16-2006, 11:48 PM
The Sox are probably better off letting him try to be a starter in AAA. He had a terrible season in the bullpen last year anyway.

Caulfield, since you're from Kansas City, can you tell us if Sisco really was that good in 2005? I've been reading Royals fans posting on other boards that Sisco really wasn't that good in 2005 and that his numbers that year were deceiving. Can you shed any light on Sisco for us? Thanks!

caulfield12
12-17-2006, 01:05 AM
The Sox are probably better off letting him try to be a starter in AAA. He had a terrible season in the bullpen last year anyway.

Caulfield, since you're from Kansas City, can you tell us if Sisco really was that good in 2005? I've been reading Royals fans posting on other boards that Sisco really wasn't that good in 2005 and that his numbers that year were deceiving. Can you shed any light on Sisco for us? Thanks!

Well, with Royals' fans, it's always what have you done for me lately.

Both Affeldt and Sisco turned out to be disappointments, and there were high hopes for both pitchers. I like Sisco, but he's certainly not as smooth and polished as Thornton.

Pitchers that throw across their body don't look pretty sometimes, but he has very good (not GREAT) stuff and I think he will be an asset. At times, he looked a little stiff and too "upright," (like Rauch), but I think they can work with him on his delivery and explosion coming off the mound.

I wouldn't say he was any luckier in 05 than he was unlucky in 06.

The way I look at is I would rather have Sisco as a starter/reliever THAN Cotts at this point, Gload was superfluous, we also got Aardsma and we can improve the bench by adding an outfielder that can actually play the outfield.

Not to mention we've ditched two 30 year olds for three early 20's pitchers.

KW is doing a great job of building a younger but equally (or perhaps better) talented team that is going to be able to compete in 07 but also 08, 09 and 10.

DaleJRFan
12-17-2006, 02:30 AM
I wasn't too excited about this trade, until I listened to the KW conference call. He seems to really see something in Sisco and claims that the mechanical issues that caused his 2006 struggles are being worked out in the Mexican winter league... and that Cooper agrees...

listen to it here... (mms://a1503.v108692.c10869.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/1503/10869/v0001/mlb.download.akamai.com/10869/2006/open/teams06/cha/audio/121606_whitesox_cc.wma?ct2=4526259771151359202128&ct3=10821639&ct4=-1&ct5=11_16_2006&media_type=wms&av_type=audio&event_pk=undefined&product=gen_audio)

Also noted in the conference call is that the Sox would announce another smaller "peripheral type" move before the end of the day. As he put it "The public won't think it's a big move but it'll help the ballclub."

God I hope its not Sandy Alomar...

jabrch
12-17-2006, 02:55 PM
Also noted in the conference call is that the Sox would announce another smaller "peripheral type" move before the end of the day. As he put it "The public won't think it's a big move but it'll help the ballclub."

God I hope its not Sandy Alomar...

Funny you say that...it was Sandy Alomar in an odd way. It was that signing Toby Hall means we have seen the end of Sandy Alomar!

I like the Sisco move. Pen or Starter - either way - Gload was likely to do very little for us.

champagne030
12-17-2006, 03:05 PM
Not to mention we've ditched two 30 year olds for three early 20's pitchers.

KW is doing a great job of building a younger and potentially better team that may be able to compete in 07 but also 08, 09 and 10.

Fixed it for ya. We've acquired a few guys with a lot of upside, but they also currently suck. See the Kid, Sisco and Floyd, Gavin.

nodiggity59
12-17-2006, 04:13 PM
Fixed it for ya. We've acquired a few guys with a lot of upside, but they also currently suck. See the Kid, Sisco and Floyd, Gavin.

I can't wait till Rhodes blows chunks a la Politte 06 and you start crying for KW to acquire another mediocre reliever over 30 with a track record!

:rolleyes:

champagne030
12-17-2006, 04:52 PM
I can't wait till Rhodes blows chunks a la Politte 06 and you start crying for KW to acquire another mediocre reliever over 30 with a track record!

:rolleyes:

Better than waiting for Floyd to blow chunks and then trading Broadway to fill a hole in the 'pen. I'd rather blow $3M than trade a top prospect.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

caulfield12
12-17-2006, 05:03 PM
Better than waiting for Floyd to blow chunks and then trading Broadway to fill a hole in the 'pen. I'd rather blow $3M than trade a top prospect.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:


Except KW has a great record of identifying the prospects who wouldn't be of much assistance to the big league ballclub...

I don't see giving away Broadway for a middle reliever happening any time soon.

Chisox003
12-17-2006, 05:25 PM
Better than waiting for Floyd to blow chunks and then trading Broadway to fill a hole in the 'pen. I'd rather blow $3M than trade a top prospect.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Champagne, every time I check WSI you're whining about something else. If you're so smart why aren't you the GM of a World Champion baseball team?

Seriously, think before you spew the **** you do.

champagne030
12-17-2006, 05:30 PM
Except KW has a great record of identifying the prospects who wouldn't be of much assistance to the big league ballclub...

I don't see giving away Broadway for a middle reliever happening any time soon.

I didn't see Lumsden going away to fill a hole last season either. Our 4-6 is a complete roll of the dice. I'd rather have a couple of guys who have done it rather than throwing darts at a board. Let all those guys with nice arms, potential and a lot of upside fight for the last spot in the 'pen instead of counting on them to fill half of it.

ShoelessJoeS
12-17-2006, 06:04 PM
If KW can get a couple more decent arms for the bullpen, I'd like to see Sisco in AAA with Floyd, Gio, and Haeger.

champagne030
12-17-2006, 06:30 PM
Champagne, every time I check WSI you're whining about something else. If you're so smart why aren't you the GM of a World Champion baseball team?

Seriously, think before you spew the **** you do.

I forgot, KW was the GM when we won the 2005 World Series. He has a free pass forever.

I don't see the "whining". I was all for trading Garcia. I think KW could've held out for better than Gio and a Lotto ticket. Whatever, maybe we can turn him around, but don't count on Floyd as a major piece of the bullpen. Same with Sisco. I think it's a good trade, but don't count on him as a major piece of our bullpen.

It's great to have guys with a ton of upside, but you need some people who you can fall back on if the upside doesn't come through and they continue to suck.

I'm not saying to sign Pierre as insurance for $40M, I'm saying sign Riske and Rhodes for $5-7M combined (with one of those guys being over 2 years) and let all the potential battle it out for the last spot in the 'pen.

ilsox7
12-17-2006, 06:35 PM
I forgot, KW was the GM when we won the 2005 World Series. He has a free pass forever.

I don't see the "whining". I was all for trading Garcia. I think KW could've held out for better than Gio and a Lotto ticket. Whatever, maybe we can turn him around, but don't count on Floyd as a major piece of the bullpen. Same with Sisco. I think it's a good trade, but don't count on him as a major piece of our bullpen.

It's great to have guys with a ton of upside, but you need some people who you can fall back on if the upside doesn't come through and they continue to suck.

I'm not saying to sign Pierre as insurance for $40M, I'm saying sign Riske and Rhodes for $5-7M combined (with one of those guys being over 2 years) and let all the potential battle it out for the last spot in the 'pen.



Given Rhodes' numbers over the last few years, I don't know how you can possibly say you would be able to count on him. He's a huge risk and is 37 years old.

Riske has the numbers over the last few years. And I was a fan of getting him last year. But I was completely umimpressed with him out of the bullpen in the 2nd half.

I just do not see either of those guys as compelling enough to warrant several million dollars and multi-year committments.

champagne030
12-17-2006, 06:45 PM
Given Rhodes' numbers over the last few years, I don't know how you can possibly say you would be able to count on him. He's a huge risk and is 37 years old.

Riske has the numbers over the last few years. And I was a fan of getting him last year. But I was completely umimpressed with him out of the bullpen in the 2nd half.

I just do not see either of those guys as compelling enough to warrant several million dollars and multi-year committments.

I would agree that it's not worth several million dollars and multi-year agreements. It looks like Rhodes would only require a 1 year deal and Riske 2 years, at tops.

No, neither are lights out, but a much better chance of pitching decent than Floyd or Sisco. Yeah, it's not my money, but having Riske and Rhodes as first options for a $5M gamble is better than Floyd/Sisco. What happens if Floyd and Sisco continue to suck? I don't want to trade Broadway to fill a spot. We traded a potential starter in '08 or '09 for Macdougal. I like Macdougal and liked extending him (injury history and all), but we cannot continue to plug holes with our future.

MRM
12-17-2006, 06:49 PM
I didn't see Lumsden going away to fill a hole last season either. Our 4-6 is a complete roll of the dice. I'd rather have a couple of guys who have done it rather than throwing darts at a board.

"Darts" Like Jenks and Thornton whose previous teams gave up on them? Like MacDougal who was coming off a pretty serious injury? Those three alone are fully capable of being closers for many teams. KW has done an excellent job of grabbing BP talent off the scrap heap for peanuts, don't ya think?

Considering the track record, I'll take Kenny and the scouting staff in conjunction with Cooper making those decisions any day.

ilsox7
12-17-2006, 06:50 PM
I would agree that it's not worth several million dollars and multi-year agreements. It looks like Rhodes would only require a 1 year deal and Riske 2 years, at tops.

No, neither are lights out, but a much better chance of pitching decent than Floyd or Sisco. Yeah, it's not my money, but having Riske and Rhodes as first options for a $5M gamble is better than Floyd/Sisco. What happens if Floyd and Sisco continue to suck? I don't want to trade Broadway to fill a spot. We traded a potential starter in '08 or '09 for Macdougal. I like Macdougal and liked extending him (injury history and all), but we cannot continue to plug holes with our future.

I can maybe see Riske being worth a 1 year deal, but Rhodes just seems to be as big of a risk as the young guys right now. The other encouraging thing is that when KW did trade for Riske last year, it did not cost much. So it may not take a hot prospect to get a serviceable guy if none of the young guys pan out next year.

MRM
12-17-2006, 06:58 PM
don't count on Floyd as a major piece of the bullpen. Same with Sisco.

I certainly hope neither one of them sees a day in the bullpen. Floyd almost certainly won't. I hope Sisco chooses to go back to starting as well. Those trades weren't about the bullpen, they were about re-stocking the rotation down the road. If they work out, the Sox are set, rotation wise for quite some time. If not, well, they didn't cost much.

I have no problem whatsoever with Jenks, Aardsma, Thornton, MacDougal, Haegar, player to be determined at a later date, as the bullpen for '07. You act like the sky is falling if the Sox don't go out and overpay for a mediocre middle reliever who might have had a decent season 3 years ago.

MRM
12-17-2006, 07:02 PM
No, neither are lights out, but a much better chance of pitching decent than Floyd or Sisco.

Even if another move isn't made Floyd and Sisco are NOT the only options. Haegar is certainly in the mix and would be great in the middle of all the fireballers. Tracy is a definate option for rounding out the pen as well. Why overpay for mediocrity when you have that or better on hand already?

champagne030
12-17-2006, 08:27 PM
Even if another move isn't made Floyd and Sisco are NOT the only options. Haegar is certainly in the mix and would be great in the middle of all the fireballers. Tracy is a definate option for rounding out the pen as well. Why overpay for mediocrity when you have that or better on hand already?

The problem is that you don't have "that or better" on hand at this point. Sure, if everyone ****s roses then were good....if not I don't want to see Tracey pitching in the 7th inning of a 4-4 game.

nccwsfan
12-17-2006, 09:02 PM
I forgot, KW was the GM when we won the 2005 World Series. He has a free pass forever.

I don't see the "whining". I was all for trading Garcia. I think KW could've held out for better than Gio and a Lotto ticket. Whatever, maybe we can turn him around, but don't count on Floyd as a major piece of the bullpen. Same with Sisco. I think it's a good trade, but don't count on him as a major piece of our bullpen.

It's great to have guys with a ton of upside, but you need some people who you can fall back on if the upside doesn't come through and they continue to suck.

I'm not saying to sign Pierre as insurance for $40M, I'm saying sign Riske and Rhodes for $5-7M combined (with one of those guys being over 2 years) and let all the potential battle it out for the last spot in the 'pen.



There's nothing wrong with this line of thinking....to a point. If the CWS can go out there and find a veteran or two to complement the current bullpen it couldn't hurt. I'm not big on Rhodes and Riske is OK, but I think they could find better veteran options out there. Getting a vet or two, if feasible, makes sense.

I like the way that KW is setting this up, however, and my hunch is that more of these guys will succeed than fail. We don't have a crystal ball that says they'll thrive or continue to struggle, but given the option I'm happier with the team bringing in a lot of young arms to see what they can do. The reward is greater than the risk.

Corlose 15
12-17-2006, 09:31 PM
http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/player.jsp?player_id=434878

If you click on the Sisco at RCDP link it plays a 6 min interview with him before last season. In it he says that he'd prefer to be a reliever because he likes playing everyday as opposed to being on the bench for four days in a row.


As for Aardsma his era was 1.72 in September last year and his BAA was .214 (Thats for the whole season). There is definitely a lot of promise there and I don't think its as big of a question mark as you might think.

goon
12-18-2006, 01:41 AM
I forgot, KW was the GM when we won the 2005 World Series. He has a free pass forever.

I don't see the "whining". I was all for trading Garcia. I think KW could've held out for better than Gio and a Lotto ticket. Whatever, maybe we can turn him around, but don't count on Floyd as a major piece of the bullpen. Same with Sisco. I think it's a good trade, but don't count on him as a major piece of our bullpen.

It's great to have guys with a ton of upside, but you need some people who you can fall back on if the upside doesn't come through and they continue to suck.

I'm not saying to sign Pierre as insurance for $40M, I'm saying sign Riske and Rhodes for $5-7M combined (with one of those guys being over 2 years) and let all the potential battle it out for the last spot in the 'pen.




i don't think you have said one positive thing in the past two weeks. if you don't see the whining, maybe you should go back and look at your post history over that time. it's getting obnoxious.

like nccwsfan, i agree with you that it would be great for the sox to find a veteran to add to the BP. Yet, if you're going to come up with a lame arguement for rhodes or riske, unfortuantely, we'd probably be better off going with what we got. if they do go the route of getting another vet, don't just assume it has to be a FA, maybe another trade could make something happen.

Madvora
12-18-2006, 08:38 AM
I think it's a little wierd for KW to go out and get a guy that they don't know what they're going to do with. Wouldn't he already have a plan in mind?

ondafarm
12-18-2006, 10:16 AM
The problem I have with sending Floyd and Sisco down to AAA is that from what I've seen of them, they really just need to work on getting major league hitters out. That means bullpen time is a lot more useful to their development than AAA. Also Cooper will see them everyday if they stay in the majors. I expect them both in the pen at USCF this year.

White Sox Randy
12-18-2006, 12:24 PM
I agree. I would rather have Sisco and Floyd with the Sox although I would have preferred one more vet in the pen.

I really like Sisco a lot as a reliever. I was really impressed with him in 2005. I think that he could be a dominant reliever for a long time. I love the pickup.

Floyd needs to get straightened out in the pen this year and hopefully join the rotation next year.

I don't see the point in sending Floyd back to AAA unless necessary.

PennStater98r
12-18-2006, 06:16 PM
Am I remembering this right - didn't he start against the Sox in '06 and shut us down pretty hardcore?

MRM
12-18-2006, 06:20 PM
The problem I have with sending Floyd and Sisco down to AAA is that from what I've seen of them, they really just need to work on getting major league hitters out. That means bullpen time is a lot more useful to their development than AAA. Also Cooper will see them everyday if they stay in the majors. I expect them both in the pen at USCF this year.

I certainly hope not. Floyd is a starter, always has been, always will be. The worst thing you can do to a struggling starter is throw him into the pen. The approach in the bullpen is *completely* different than it is when you are a starter. That is why McCarthy struggled so much last year. He didn't forget how to get major league hitters out.

Ol' No. 2
12-18-2006, 06:23 PM
The problem I have with sending Floyd and Sisco down to AAA is that from what I've seen of them, they really just need to work on getting major league hitters out. That means bullpen time is a lot more useful to their development than AAA. Also Cooper will see them everyday if they stay in the majors. I expect them both in the pen at USCF this year.Probably. But my guess is that all available arms will battle it out in spring training for whatever spots there are. Win a spot or go down to AAA.

MRM
12-18-2006, 06:28 PM
Am I remembering this right - didn't he start against the Sox in '06 and shut us down pretty hardcore?

No. He has never started a game in the Majors. And actually the Sox lit him up a couple of times last year.

ilsox7
12-18-2006, 08:29 PM
I certainly hope not. Floyd is a starter, always has been, always will be. The worst thing you can do to a struggling starter is throw him into the pen. The approach in the bullpen is *completely* different than it is when you are a starter. That is why McCarthy struggled so much last year. He didn't forget how to get major league hitters out.

It depends on the guy. Many starters spent time in the bullpen before starting full time and did just fine.

rdivaldi
12-18-2006, 09:12 PM
The worst thing you can do to a struggling starter is throw him into the pen.

Yeah, it killed that Gagne kid...

Seriously though, there are at least a couple of success stories of putting starters in the bullpen early in their careers. I think McCarthy will in the end be thankful for having spent 2006 in the bullpen. I'm sure it didn't hurt Santana or Liriano either.

ondafarm
12-19-2006, 10:15 AM
I certainly hope not. Floyd is a starter, always has been, always will be. The worst thing you can do to a struggling starter is throw him into the pen. The approach in the bullpen is *completely* different than it is when you are a starter. That is why McCarthy struggled so much last year. He didn't forget how to get major league hitters out.

Floyd doesn't need more training as a starter at this point. He needs to focus on getting major league hitters out. I'm not predicting he'll be a great relief pitcher but in a certain sense, pitching is pitching and he needs more major league pitching under his belt.

MRM
12-20-2006, 02:36 PM
Yeah, it killed that Gagne kid...

Seriously though, there are at least a couple of success stories of putting starters in the bullpen early in their careers. I think McCarthy will in the end be thankful for having spent 2006 in the bullpen. I'm sure it didn't hurt Santana or Liriano either.

Sure but those were all kids who had shown flashes as starters. Ditto McCarthey and Beuhrle. In the case of a struggling starter it's a bad idea to start changing his routine by throwing him into a middle relief role.

MRM
12-20-2006, 02:44 PM
Floyd doesn't need more training as a starter at this point. He needs to focus on getting major league hitters out. I'm not predicting he'll be a great relief pitcher but in a certain sense, pitching is pitching and he needs more major league pitching under his belt.

I strongly disagree with the "pitching is pitching" theory. There is a huge difference between starting every 5 days and coming out of the pen on a moments notice. Physically being able to just get guys out and mentally being able to do it in a described role are very different. Some guys can handle it, many more can't. I just don't like screwing with the phsyce of a struggling starter that way.

Would you take MacDougal, Thornton, or Jenks and throw them into the rotation if there was an open slot? I sure wouldn't, but the "pitching is pitching" theory implies they'd be just as successful in that role.

caulfield12
12-20-2006, 07:14 PM
I strongly disagree with the "pitching is pitching" theory. There is a huge difference between starting every 5 days and coming out of the pen on a moments notice. Physically being able to just get guys out and mentally being able to do it in a described role are very different. Some guys can handle it, many more can't. I just don't like screwing with the phsyce of a struggling starter that way.

Would you take MacDougal, Thornton, or Jenks and throw them into the rotation if there was an open slot? I sure wouldn't, but the "pitching is pitching" theory implies they'd be just as successful in that role.

I wouldn't put any pitcher without 3 pitches in the rotation unless his name was Liriano and he had that type of slider and fastball combination.

ondafarm
12-22-2006, 01:43 PM
Would you take MacDougal, Thornton, or Jenks and throw them into the rotation if there was an open slot? I sure wouldn't, but the "pitching is pitching" theory implies they'd be just as successful in that role.

Thornton has asked several times about becoming a starting pitcher. With that free and easy motion and blazing fastball, he could probably develop into a very valuable starting pitcher. Could the Sox use a hard-throwing lefty starter?

The only real difference is how much you stretch the guy out. As in how many pitches does he throw. Certain pitches are flat out large muscle pitches (fastballs, circle changes, etc), other pitches are more stressful on the small muscles (curves, sliders, etc.) Large muscle recovery is actually much faster than small muscle recovery, so hard throwing fastball guys can recover quicker than guys who depend on their curve. Jenks has difficulty throwing his power deuce on back to back days. Starting pitchers typically can go to the pen alot easier than bullpen guys can move to the rotation becuase of this factor.

Thornton would need to work on his breaking stuff to move to the rotation and right now Coop seems to think it wouldn't work. He'd only do it during ST becuase it would take that amount of time.

Ol' No. 2
12-22-2006, 01:47 PM
Thornton has asked several times about becoming a starting pitcher. With that free and easy motion and blazing fastball, he could probably develop into a very valuable starting pitcher. Could the Sox use a hard-throwing lefty starter?

The only real difference is how much you stretch the guy out. As in how many pitches does he throw. Certain pitches are flat out large muscle pitches (fastballs, circle changes, etc), other pitches are more stressful on the small muscles (curves, sliders, etc.) Large muscle recovery is actually much faster than small muscle recovery, so hard throwing fastball guys can recover quicker than guys who depend on their curve. Jenks has difficulty throwing his power deuce on back to back days. Starting pitchers typically can go to the pen alot easier than bullpen guys can move to the rotation becuase of this factor.

Thornton would need to work on his breaking stuff to move to the rotation and right now Coop seems to think it wouldn't work. He'd only do it during ST becuase it would take that amount of time.There is one other pretty fundamental difference between starters and relievers. You can be a pretty successful reliever with just two good pitches, and some have been successful for a while with just one (Billy Koch). But a starter needs at least three and even then he's probably going to have to develop a fourth if he wants to be successful long-term.

ondafarm
12-22-2006, 06:13 PM
There is one other pretty fundamental difference between starters and relievers. You can be a pretty successful reliever with just two good pitches, and some have been successful for a while with just one (Billy Koch). But a starter needs at least three and even then he's probably going to have to develop a fourth if he wants to be successful long-term.

I thought that was sort of subsumed by my discussion of kinethesiology(sp).