PDA

View Full Version : *Official* Broadway Hit 9-27 Postgame Thread


thomas35forever
09-27-2007, 10:41 PM
Welcome to the big leagues, Lance!:)

SoxSpeed22
09-27-2007, 10:42 PM
Lance made some quality pitches out there and picked up his first win.
Eat our dust, last place!

PicktoCLick72
09-27-2007, 10:43 PM
I know it's just the Royals but hopefully this is the start of a long successful career with the Sox for Braodway.

chisoxmike
09-27-2007, 10:44 PM
Nice to see David Riske give some of the runs he gave up last season back to us tonight.

Lip Man 1
09-27-2007, 10:45 PM
Kid was more impressive then Gavin Floyd. It's very early but maybe he's got something. Time will tell.

Lip

JB98
09-27-2007, 10:47 PM
Broadway pitched good. I still think he needs another year at Charlotte, but the way he has thrown the ball here in September should be a nice building block for him.

Brian26
09-27-2007, 10:47 PM
He's got a certain confidence on the mound. He looks like he belongs there. I mentioned this two weeks ago. I think he's going to be the real deal.

Tragg
09-27-2007, 10:48 PM
There's no way I want to finish behind the Royals, first pick in the draft be damned.

All right scouts, is Broadway as good as his stats say? He's been incredible. He's pitching in the majors like he did in college.

The bevy of young is why I still think the Sox can be good this year. We can use it by a)Trading some or b)Trading a veteran and using the young pitching or c)putting it in the bullpen, freeing us from mediocre veterans like MacDougal or bad veterans like Bukvich and Meyers or d)a combination of the above. Nothing like pitching depth.

Dread Farmer
09-27-2007, 10:48 PM
Future Hall of Famer!

JB98
09-27-2007, 10:51 PM
He's got a certain confidence on the mound. He looks like he belongs there. I mentioned this two weeks ago. I think he's going to be the real deal.

I think he can be Garland-like in the future, which wouldn't be bad at all. Middle-of-the-rotation starter. He needs to develop his sinker and work on commanding his fastball better. He actually has an impressive offspeed repetoire. I like both his deuce and his change.

drewcifer
09-27-2007, 10:52 PM
Very encouraging... Numerous jams from the T2nd onward and he gets out with really good numbers.

I know it's the Royals, but they've had respectable RISP hitting and left their share stranded. To get the shutout finish is extra sweet.

Nice, Lance. See 'ya in Tucson.

A. Cavatica
09-27-2007, 10:54 PM
is Broadway as good as his stats say? He's been incredible. He's pitching in the majors like he did in college.

I saw him pitch once for Charlotte. He sucked -- mediocre stuff with spotty location. He pitched poorly for several starts and I guess I caught him at the wrong time. It's fantastic that he pitched so well tonight; clearly he still has some upside.

drewcifer
09-27-2007, 10:56 PM
There's no way I want to finish behind the Royals, first pick in the draft be damned.

All right scouts, is Broadway as good as his stats say? He's been incredible. He's pitching in the majors like he did in college.

The bevy of young is why I still think the Sox can be good this year. We can use it by a)Trading some or b)Trading a veteran and using the young pitching or c)putting it in the bullpen, freeing us from mediocre veterans like MacDougal or bad veterans like Bukvich and Meyers or d)a combination of the above. Nothing like pitching depth.

There was some very good defensive moments tonight, if you didn't catch the game.

UserNameBlank
09-27-2007, 11:05 PM
I loved his enthusiasm on the mound! He had lots of movement on his pitches and he didn't seem to get flustered in pressure situations. IMO, this start alone has put him as a serious candidate for 5th starter next year if the Sox trade one of Contreras/Garland.

JB98
09-27-2007, 11:07 PM
There's no way I want to finish behind the Royals, first pick in the draft be damned.

All right scouts, is Broadway as good as his stats say? He's been incredible. He's pitching in the majors like he did in college.

The bevy of young is why I still think the Sox can be good this year. We can use it by a)Trading some or b)Trading a veteran and using the young pitching or c)putting it in the bullpen, freeing us from mediocre veterans like MacDougal or bad veterans like Bukvich and Meyers or d)a combination of the above. Nothing like pitching depth.

I think we need a veteran or two in the bullpen. I'm a believer in the "best 11" theory. You take the best 11 pitchers in your organization, and that's your big-league pitching staff. If some young guys who project as starters end up being relievers for a year, then so be it.

However, you can't have all young guys in the bullpen. You need some veteran leadership, another guy who has been through the wars who can help Jenks. A Dustin Hermanson or Tom Gordon type. I don't want another year where practically everyone who comes out of the pen is 24 years old.

Of course, that doesn't mean I want Bukvich or Myers around. I hope KW gets us a consistent veteran for the pen.

UserNameBlank
09-27-2007, 11:11 PM
Very encouraging... Numerous jams from the T2nd onward and he gets out with really good numbers.

I know it's the Royals, but they've had respectable RISP hitting and left their share stranded. To get the shutout finish is extra sweet.

Nice, Lance. See 'ya in Tucson.
True.

The Royals I think would have to be one of the tougher teams for a starter in his MLB debut for a few reasons. First, they have a bunch of contact hitters, they have decent team speed, and some of the guys in their lineup have seen Lance a few times before in the minors. Plus their offense isn't going to be playing under pressure. Great effort from Lance tonight and I hope it continues.

UserNameBlank
09-27-2007, 11:15 PM
I think we need a veteran or two in the bullpen. I'm a believer in the "best 11" theory. You take the best 11 pitchers in your organization, and that's your big-league pitching staff. If some young guys who project as starters end up being relievers for a year, then so be it.

However, you can't have all young guys in the bullpen. You need some veteran leadership, another guy who has been through the wars who can help Jenks. A Dustin Hermanson or Tom Gordon type. I don't want another year where practically everyone who comes out of the pen is 24 years old.

Of course, that doesn't mean I want Bukvich or Myers around. I hope KW gets us a consistent veteran for the pen.
I think you need roles in the pen, so the "best 11" part doesn't really work for the bullpen. For example, Broadway is a better pitcher than Wassermann but you need a righty specialist, and Wassermann is better at that than Broadway is.

I agree with you on the veteran though, but not a Gordon type. The Hermanson-like acquistion we need badly though, because we need a veteran with experience in every bullpen role who bottom line gets outs without walking a ton of hitters. We've needed someone to do what Hermanson and Vizcaino did since 2005. I always support KW, but he keeps putting rookies in this role. He needs to realize that sticking a Triple A starter into a crucial bullpen spot isn't going to work anymore.

Hitmen77
09-27-2007, 11:21 PM
Here's some info about Broadway in the Tribune yesterday talking about his attempts to get better command of his two-seam fastball.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070926soxbits27sep27,1,7150558.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines

Encouraging win tonight. The more rookie starters we have that can pitch like this going into spring training, the better.

Question: Can the Sox actually sweep the Tigers this weekend and avoid their first 90-loss season since 1989? I know it's small consolation, but I'd like to see the Sox keep that streak going.

drewcifer
09-27-2007, 11:24 PM
True.

The Royals I think would have to be one of the tougher teams for a starter in his MLB debut for a few reasons. First, they have a bunch of contact hitters, they have decent team speed, and some of the guys in their lineup have seen Lance a few times before in the minors. Plus their offense isn't going to be playing under pressure. Great effort from Lance tonight and I hope it continues.

Yes yes and yes. Thanks for filling the holes and very solid post.

jabrch
09-27-2007, 11:26 PM
It is something like this that makes the entire "low ceiling" bull**** laughable.

Until we see enough of Lance to know one way or the other, there is no way to condemn drafting Broadway. I'm not having a bust made to send to Cooperstown, but the people who already made him into a bust were completely foolish.

Lance still has the potential to fit nicely in the middle of our rotation in the near future. Given the depth of talented pitching we have, I don't see the Sox as far off as some want us to believe.

upperdeckusc
09-27-2007, 11:42 PM
it'd be great if his time with the big league team (success out of the bullpen and this great start) will give him a lot of hope that he can be on our team next yr, and he just flat out busts his ass over the offseason. whether its getting in the best physical shape possible, pitching and working on location, etc. i'd love to unload contreras or garland, and have broadway as a 5th starter or out of the bullpen if he keeps up his good control that he had in college.
p.s.....his 2 seamer to gathright to strike him out in the 2nd to end the inning was dirrrrrrrrrty. dont bash me cuz im obviously not comparing the 2 players, but it was somewhat maddux-like. if he can perfect that pitch, he'll be breaking alot of bats and having batters put up alot of backward K's in the near future.

drewcifer
09-27-2007, 11:45 PM
It is something like this that makes the entire "low ceiling" bull**** laughable.

Until we see enough of Lance to know one way or the other, there is no way to condemn drafting Broadway. I'm not having a bust made to send to Cooperstown, but the people who already made him into a bust were completely foolish.

Lance still has the potential to fit nicely in the middle of our rotation in the near future. Given the depth of talented pitching we have, I don't see the Sox as far off as some want us to believe.

If he can pitch like he did tonight, CONSISTENTLY, I see lots of upside.

He was featuring lots of off-speed action...a lot. Eye level changing constantly. That was very polished. The question is if he can assimilate it, and make it routine. Because he got into plenty of trouble on plenty of occasions without getting rattled.

Tonight it worked out; let's hope it's the start of a routine (Garland/Buehrle).

voodoochile
09-27-2007, 11:47 PM
It is something like this that makes the entire "low ceiling" bull**** laughable.

Until we see enough of Lance to know one way or the other, there is no way to condemn drafting Broadway. I'm not having a bust made to send to Cooperstown, but the people who already made him into a bust were completely foolish.

Lance still has the potential to fit nicely in the middle of our rotation in the near future. Given the depth of talented pitching we have, I don't see the Sox as far off as some want us to believe.

:KW
"I hate to say I told you so, but.... I told you so... Is it hot in here or is it just me in these shades?"

GlassSox
09-27-2007, 11:59 PM
Just got home from the game and this was a fun one to watch. Had a good meal in the Stadium Club and Row AA tickets. All in all a fun evening with the wife and good friends.

I think Lance looked good and has real potential. The team looked good tonight. It was good to see Thornton and Jenks close it out.

Here's to next year :gulp:

salty99
09-27-2007, 11:59 PM
Great game to be at as the crowd was really into it! Awesome job by Lance and the offense!!!

:supernana:

Lorenzo Barcelo
09-28-2007, 12:04 AM
Broadway had the offspeed going for him. Did anyone hear the Chevy Pride Crew member when the fan won the trip to Waikiki FLORIDA?

Tragg
09-28-2007, 12:04 AM
I think we need a veteran or two in the bullpen. I'm a believer in the "best 11" theory. You take the best 11 pitchers in your organization, and that's your big-league pitching staff. If some young guys who project as starters end up being relievers for a year, then so be it.


I agree with you re vets. But there's a big difference between a good vet and a career middle reliever that we loaded up with this year. I had this argument with someone else a few months ago, but Hermanson and Polite were not career middle relievers...both had started a lot of games. They were simply better pitchers than the career middle reliever. An average starter - which is what Hermanson and Polite were - is much better than most career middle relievers.

The Dude
09-28-2007, 12:06 AM
There's no way I want to finish behind the Royals, first pick in the draft be damned.

All right scouts, is Broadway as good as his stats say? He's been incredible. He's pitching in the majors like he did in college.

The bevy of young is why I still think the Sox can be good this year. We can use it by a)Trading some or b)Trading a veteran and using the young pitching or c)putting it in the bullpen, freeing us from mediocre veterans like MacDougal or bad veterans like Bukvich and Meyers or d)a combination of the above. Nothing like pitching depth.

Keep smoking!:rolleyes: If he was mediocre, his era would be 4 or 5 and NOT 6.43!:angry:

UserNameBlank
09-28-2007, 12:23 AM
It is something like this that makes the entire "low ceiling" bull**** laughable.

Until we see enough of Lance to know one way or the other, there is no way to condemn drafting Broadway. I'm not having a bust made to send to Cooperstown, but the people who already made him into a bust were completely foolish.

Lance still has the potential to fit nicely in the middle of our rotation in the near future. Given the depth of talented pitching we have, I don't see the Sox as far off as some want us to believe.
The highest ceiling I've seen anyone give Broadway is a no.3. The lowest was a no.5. Just because he has a lower ceiling doesn't mean he sucks and isn't going to have a good career. For example, Garland is a no.3 and Jamie Moyer is a no.5. Both have had long careers and have helped their major league clubs. If Broadway turns out to be as good as either of those guys I will be happy, and so will he because he'll make a ton of money with the way pitchers get paid these days.

The only time a lower ceiling seems to be viewed as a negative is when it is in reference to the draft. Many fans don't like seeing lower-ceiling players taken in the first round like Lance was. Just as an example, in the 2005 draft class (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/2005draft/firstround.html) Lance was taken ahead of Jacoby Ellsbury and Matt Garza in the first round, both higher-ceiling players who have had more of a Major League impact than Lance has had. I'd take either of those guys over Lance, but again, that doesn't mean Lance sucks or anything like that.

drewcifer
09-28-2007, 12:42 AM
The highest ceiling I've seen anyone give Broadway is a no.3. The lowest was a no.5. Just because he has a lower ceiling doesn't mean he sucks and isn't going to have a good career. For example, Garland is a no.3 and Jamie Moyer is a no.5. Both have had long careers and have helped their major league clubs. If Broadway turns out to be as good as either of those guys I will be happy, and so will he because he'll make a ton of money with the way pitchers get paid these days.

The only time a lower ceiling seems to be viewed as a negative is when it is in reference to the draft. Many fans don't like seeing lower-ceiling players taken in the first round like Lance was. Just as an example, in the 2005 draft class (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/2005draft/firstround.html) Lance was taken ahead of Jacoby Ellsbury and Matt Garza in the first round, both higher-ceiling players who have had more of a Major League impact than Lance has had. I'd take either of those guys over Lance, but again, that doesn't mean Lance sucks or anything like that.

*** are you talking about? The guy you quoted (and pretty much everyone since) likes Broadway.

:jackass:

The lowest was a no.5. Just because he has a lower ceiling doesn't mean he sucks and isn't going to have a good career.

:dunno:

UserNameBlank
09-28-2007, 12:49 AM
*** are you talking about? The guy you quoted (and pretty much everyone since) likes Broadway.

:jackass:
???

Did you read the post?

I'm actually agreeing with him mostly but talking about a common assumption about low-ceiling players. Sometimes people make the assumption that if someone says so-and-so has a low ceiling that person is automatically saying something negative about a player. A lower ceiling isn't negative; it's just an honest assessment.

drewcifer
09-28-2007, 12:55 AM
???

Did you read the post?

I'm actually agreeing with him mostly but talking about a common assumption about low-ceiling players. Sometimes people make the assumption that if someone says so-and-so has a low ceiling that person is automatically saying something negative about a player. A lower ceiling isn't negative; it's just an honest assessment.

I sure did. I think anyone hanging around (going to games/watching them at this point) and talking about Lance tonight has been hoping to see him...****.. I don't know....blossom.

Who cares about "low ceiling - high ceiling" labels. He's due to show. He did.

That's what this thread is about; not his history, or even that of other "comparables".

Know what I mean?

I probably misunderstood you; my fault, bud. :redface:

UserNameBlank
09-28-2007, 01:05 AM
I sure did. I think anyone hanging around (going to games/watching them at this point) and talking about Lance tonight has been hoping to see him...****.. I don't know....blossom.

Who cares about "low ceiling - high ceiling" labels. He's due to show. He did.

That's what this thread is about; not his history, or even that of other "comparables".

Know what I mean?

I probably misunderstood you; my fault, bud. :redface:
Umm...

I want Lance to do well just as much as anyone else. My comment was in response to the OP's comment about the low ceiling comments about Lance being bull****. The comments about Lance previously aren't bull**** though, because Lance does look like he's going to top out as a #3/#4 starter and that is right in line with the "low ceiling" comments.

The thing I'm saying though is that calling someone a #3/#4 starter is not in any way negative, like some people think. Just read the minor league forums when some BP guy or something says so-and-so has a ceiling of a #4 starter. People will get all pissed like "this guy doesn't know ****." But really, a solid #4 starter is very valuable to an organization, especially if he can log 200+ innings each year. There are very, very few true aces in the majors a not many #2's. Saying a guy looks like a solid #3/#4/#5 is saying something positive. It is saying that so-and-so looks like he can have a good career.

JUribe1989
09-28-2007, 02:40 AM
This is the way things go: our guys that are deemed no good because they didn't perform to their potential in AAA get to the Bigs and light it up.

Broadway is the future of this team, book it.

JUribe1989
09-28-2007, 02:42 AM
I forgot White Sox Interactive was the intellectual capital of the baseball message board genre.

Grzegorz
09-28-2007, 05:38 AM
He's got a certain confidence on the mound. He looks like he belongs there. I mentioned this two weeks ago. I think he's going to be the real deal.

He was confident, but he'll need many more starts before I'll label him a legitimate starter.

Railsplitter
09-28-2007, 07:42 AM
A good start:bandance:

itsnotrequired
09-28-2007, 07:48 AM
Last night's game was fun.

Sig update time...

SBSoxFan
09-28-2007, 09:49 AM
Hey, how 'bout that flip by Paulie? That was like a no-look in basketball.

Dread Farmer
09-28-2007, 10:36 AM
:bandance:We will blow past the Royals on Broadways shoulders.:bandance:


Come on guys restore Sox pride and return to dominate Chicago sports next year!!!:wired::wired::gulp:

Chicago is a SOX town. Forget the Bears and Baby Bears!

spawn
09-28-2007, 10:38 AM
Hey, how 'bout that flip by Paulie? That was like a no-look in basketball.
Just saw that on the White Sox homepage. That was a hell of a play!

JermaineDye05
09-28-2007, 12:35 PM
Lance looked good, although I think he needs to work on his emotions. This being his first start I was surprised to see him pumping his fist when he got a strike out to end the inning. Him being a rookie I don't think it's such a good idea to do that in front of big league hitters, granted it was the Royals but I still don't think he should do that.

spiffie
09-28-2007, 12:48 PM
I agree with you re vets. But there's a big difference between a good vet and a career middle reliever that we loaded up with this year. I had this argument with someone else a few months ago, but Hermanson and Polite were not career middle relievers...both had started a lot of games. They were simply better pitchers than the career middle reliever. An average starter - which is what Hermanson and Polite were - is much better than most career middle relievers.
Dang it you keep saying Cliff had started a lot of games. Cliff has a total of 16 career starts and 14 saves out of 330 appearances. That is the very definition of a career middle reliever.

Sockinchisox
09-28-2007, 01:01 PM
Just pointing this out, even though the knock on Broadway has always been he doesn't have great stuff, he seems to have taken the initiative to realize that and learn 2 or 3 new pitches so he has enough pitches in his arsenal to make his fastball worth using when he uses enough off speed stuff ala Buehrle. I mean yesterday was the first time he's ever used a cutter and he just learned that pitch.

JB98
09-28-2007, 02:43 PM
Umm...

I want Lance to do well just as much as anyone else. My comment was in response to the OP's comment about the low ceiling comments about Lance being bull****. The comments about Lance previously aren't bull**** though, because Lance does look like he's going to top out as a #3/#4 starter and that is right in line with the "low ceiling" comments.

The thing I'm saying though is that calling someone a #3/#4 starter is not in any way negative, like some people think. Just read the minor league forums when some BP guy or something says so-and-so has a ceiling of a #4 starter. People will get all pissed like "this guy doesn't know ****." But really, a solid #4 starter is very valuable to an organization, especially if he can log 200+ innings each year. There are very, very few true aces in the majors a not many #2's. Saying a guy looks like a solid #3/#4/#5 is saying something positive. It is saying that so-and-so looks like he can have a good career.

I've often said that Broadway could eventually develop into a Garland type. I don't see him ever winning a Cy Young or anything, but I think he can be a guy who plugs nicely into the middle of our rotation for several years.

If that happens, I'll be pleased. Certainly, some of our other No. 1 picks didn't do as much.

jabrch
09-28-2007, 03:53 PM
I've often said that Broadway could eventually develop into a Garland type.

That's a good comparison...throw strikes, keep the ball down, go 200+ innings, keep your team in games, and you can be a #2 in this league. I think the "low ceiling" stuff is complete crap because of the way it is used. People use it to bash draft picks by calling them "safe" and "low ceiling". That's assinine.

thedudeabides
09-28-2007, 04:44 PM
That's a good comparison...throw strikes, keep the ball down, go 200+ innings, keep your team in games, and you can be a #2 in this league. I think the "low ceiling" stuff is complete crap because of the way it is used. People use it to bash draft picks by calling them "safe" and "low ceiling". That's assinine.

Exactly, and that label is assigned because he's right handed doesn't throw in the mid 90's. We've seen how well that has worked out with some of our other young pitchers.

Sockinchisox
09-28-2007, 05:47 PM
Exactly, and that label is assigned because he's right handed doesn't throw in the mid 90's. We've seen how well that has worked out with some of our other young pitchers.

If anything, Broadway would be the right handed version of Buehrle. They both throw high 80s sometimes touching 90 and use their breaking stuff to keep hitters off balance which makes their fastball better. Garland throws 89-93 and relies on his sinker, every other pitch he has besides his curve is average and he rarely uses his curve.

And are people forgetting Jon has a mysterious knot in his shoulder? What if that turns into something down the road?

JB98
09-28-2007, 07:02 PM
If anything, Broadway would be the right handed version of Buehrle. They both throw high 80s sometimes touching 90 and use their breaking stuff to keep hitters off balance which makes their fastball better. Garland throws 89-93 and relies on his sinker, every other pitch he has besides his curve is average and he rarely uses his curve.

And are people forgetting Jon has a mysterious knot in his shoulder? What if that turns into something down the road?

Every pitcher in the league deals with aches and pains. Garland has never been on the DL his whole career. As long as he continues to take the ball, I'm not concerned about that.

UserNameBlank
09-28-2007, 08:07 PM
That's a good comparison...throw strikes, keep the ball down, go 200+ innings, keep your team in games, and you can be a #2 in this league. I think the "low ceiling" stuff is complete crap because of the way it is used. People use it to bash draft picks by calling them "safe" and "low ceiling". That's assinine.
People who bash low-ceiling players outside of the context of where they were taken in the draft do not know what they are talking about. Players, especially pitchers, with Broadway-like ceilings aren't a bad thing at all. They are necessary for the success of the 28 other teams that can not afford to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox. And they can also win championships. Jeff Weaver and Jeff Suppan did pretty well in the postseason last year, and those guys IMO are barely #5's.

Garland is not a true #2. #2 starters are one step down from a true ace. IMO, these guys are relatively proven #2's in the AL: Wang (although you can justify calling him an ace IMO), Pettite, Matsuzaka, Beckett, Kazmir, Bedard, maybe Vazquez if he has turned the corner, Buehrle, Sabathia, Carmona assuming 2006 was a fluke, Jared Weaver, and John Lackey. The only true aces I see in the AL are Halladay when he's healthy, again maybe Wang, Verlander, Santana, and Danny Haren.

Calling Broadway a future #3 is already a whole lot to hope for, because IMO that puts him company with guys like Garland, Westbrook, Bonderman, and Gil Meche in the Central. That would be quite an accomplishment. But a #2? What, outside of one Major League start, makes you think he should have that kind of ceiling? Broadway has never posted GO/AO numbers that would indicate a #2, has never posted K/BB numbers that would indicate a #2, he has never posted a K/9 that would indicate a #2 outside of half a year in W-S, and as far as I know has never posted a BAA that would indicate a #2.

#2 pitchers are very, very special in their own right. Saying Lance doesn't have the ceiling of a #2 pitcher is again, not a negative. Sure, you are right, he CAN be a #2, but in the same way Danny Richar CAN play SS and put up Miguel Tejada-like numbers. It's possible, but very, very unlikely. The only pitchers the Sox have in their minor league organization above Rookie ball with a ceiling of a #2 or higher are Jack Egbert, Fautino De Los Santos, and if you are optimisitc Gio Gonzalez.

Exactly, and that label is assigned because he's right handed doesn't throw in the mid 90's. We've seen how well that has worked out with some of our other young pitchers.
If you look at the pitchers in baseball who are aces and #2's they generally all have some filthy stuff. That is just the way it is. Every once in a while a Buerhle comes around, but it is much, much more likely for a guy with nasty stuff to turn into a top-flight pitcher than it is for a guy with Buehrle-like stuff to do the same. Finding a Buehrle is very, very rare.

The comments about lower ceiling also have to do with control. While Broadway was drafted as a control pitcher, he hasn't shown very good control this year in Triple A. His movement has increased with maturity and the development of his 2-seamer, but he still has a ways to go.

If you watched his start, which was indeed a very good start, Lance was the benefit of some very nice defensive plays and he also benefitted from KC hitters chasing pitches out of the zone regularly. That won't happen like that once the league gets used to him. Lance also found himself in a few situations where one swing of the bat could have meant total disaster. I too loved the way he battled out of those spots, but a true ace/#2 aka "high ceiling" pitcher does not provide the opposing offense that many chances to explode because a true ace/#2 is much more efficient with his pitches. Lance seems to get in a lot of 3-ball counts.

If anything, Broadway would be the right handed version of Buehrle. They both throw high 80s sometimes touching 90 and use their breaking stuff to keep hitters off balance which makes their fastball better. Garland throws 89-93 and relies on his sinker, every other pitch he has besides his curve is average and he rarely uses his curve.

And are people forgetting Jon has a mysterious knot in his shoulder? What if that turns into something down the road?

Buehrle has much, much better control than Broadway. Buehrle knows how to get major league hitters out because he has a history against these guys. Buehrle has balls. Lance I think has the balls, but he doesn't have the knowledge and he doesn't have the control. Saying Lance could be as good as Buehrle... well, nothing he has ever done in his professional career says that.

Daver
09-28-2007, 08:29 PM
I don't believe in categorizing pitchers as 1,2, etc., I never have. According to many so-called "experts", the Sox wouldn't have a number 1 starter at all right now based on their criteria. I much prefer Rick Peterson's theory, because he truly understands that a #1 starter is meaningless in the sense that many think it is important. His method is to start his best pitcher opening day, and play the matchups for the rest of opening week, that sets your rotation, you use off days early in the season to adjust your rotation based on matchups again. If you make the playoffs, you try to set your rotation on who has the best track record against your opponent and work your way down through the next three, that sets your playoff rotation.

Oh, as far as Broadway, the so-called "experts" call him a low ceiling prospect because he doesn't throw hard, he's a control pitcher that relies on location and finesse to win, that approach worked pretty well for a few pitchers that are going to go to the hall of fame, like Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux.

KRS1
09-28-2007, 08:33 PM
They both throw high 80s sometimes touching 90 and use their breaking stuff to keep hitters off balance which makes their fastball better.

Someone either correct me if I'm wrong, or support me if I'm right because I could have sworn I saw him sit at 91 with his four-seamer, and even hit 92 quite a few times yesterday.

champagne030
09-28-2007, 08:33 PM
People who bash low-ceiling players outside of the context of where they were taken in the draft do not know what they are talking about. Players, especially pitchers, with Broadway-like ceilings aren't a bad thing at all. They are necessary for the success of the 28 other teams that can not afford to spend like the Yankees and Red Sox. And they can also win championships. Jeff Weaver and Jeff Suppan did pretty well in the postseason last year, and those guys IMO are barely #5's.

Garland is not a true #2. #2 starters are one step down from a true ace. IMO, these guys are relatively proven #2's in the AL: Wang (although you can justify calling him an ace IMO), Pettite, Matsuzaka, Beckett, Kazmir, Bedard, maybe Vazquez if he has turned the corner, Buehrle, Sabathia, Carmona assuming 2006 was a fluke, Jared Weaver, and John Lackey. The only true aces I see in the AL are Halladay when he's healthy, again maybe Wang, Verlander, Santana, and Danny Haren.

Calling Broadway a future #3 is already a whole lot to hope for, because IMO that puts him company with guys like Garland, Westbrook, Bonderman, and Gil Meche in the Central. That would be quite an accomplishment. But a #2? What, outside of one Major League start, makes you think he should have that kind of ceiling? Broadway has never posted GO/AO numbers that would indicate a #2, has never posted K/BB numbers that would indicate a #2, he has never posted a K/9 that would indicate a #2 outside of half a year in W-S, and as far as I know has never posted a BAA that would indicate a #2.

#2 pitchers are very, very special in their own right. Saying Lance doesn't have the ceiling of a #2 pitcher is again, not a negative. Sure, you are right, he CAN be a #2, but in the same way Danny Richar CAN play SS and put up Miguel Tejada-like numbers. It's possible, but very, very unlikely. The only pitchers the Sox have in their minor league organization above Rookie ball with a ceiling of a #2 or higher are Jack Egbert, Fautino De Los Santos, and if you are optimisitc Gio Gonzalez.


If you look at the pitchers in baseball who are aces and #2's they generally all have some filthy stuff. That is just the way it is. Every once in a while a Buerhle comes around, but it is much, much more likely for a guy with nasty stuff to turn into a top-flight pitcher than it is for a guy with Buehrle-like stuff to do the same. Finding a Buehrle is very, very rare.

The comments about lower ceiling also have to do with control. While Broadway was drafted as a control pitcher, he hasn't shown very good control this year in Triple A. His movement has increased with maturity and the development of his 2-seamer, but he still has a ways to go.

If you watched his start, which was indeed a very good start, Lance was the benefit of some very nice defensive plays and he also benefitted from KC hitters chasing pitches out of the zone regularly. That won't happen like that once the league gets used to him. Lance also found himself in a few situations where one swing of the bat could have meant total disaster. I too loved the way he battled out of those spots, but a true ace/#2 aka "high ceiling" pitcher does not provide the opposing offense that many chances to explode because a true ace/#2 is much more efficient with his pitches. Lance seems to get in a lot of 3-ball counts.



Buehrle has much, much better control than Broadway. Buehrle knows how to get major league hitters out because he has a history against these guys. Buehrle has balls. Lance I think has the balls, but he doesn't have the knowledge and he doesn't have the control. Saying Lance could be as good as Buehrle... well, nothing he has ever done in his professional career says that.

Spot on post. He had a nice start yesterday. Got himself into trouble, but got out of it with no damage. Maybe, MAYBE with a ton of improvement Lance could become Jon. He's a long, long, long way from there now. 78 BB and 108 K in 155 innings = not good. He needs tons of work with the cutter because his two-seamer (self admittantly) sucks and he needs something other than breaking pitches and a mediocre four-seamer.

Sockinchisox
09-28-2007, 08:56 PM
Buehrle has much, much better control than Broadway. Buehrle knows how to get major league hitters out because he has a history against these guys. Buehrle has balls. Lance I think has the balls, but he doesn't have the knowledge and he doesn't have the control. Saying Lance could be as good as Buehrle... well, nothing he has ever done in his professional career says that.

Well, obviously, but I'm saying it terms of stuff, they're comparable pitchers.

KyWhiSoxFan
09-29-2007, 08:35 AM
I just hope KW does not trade Broadway in the offseason. I'd like to see him hang around for awhile till we know exactly what we've got.