White Sox Interactive Forums
Minor Observations

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Minor Observations
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 08-09-2004, 10:57 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisoxfn
Awesome Stuff Randar. Hopefully you got the email or two I sent over the weekend. Really looking forward to hearing what you saw.

Also, the other pitcher Cerb and I saw in Kanny was Whisler. He was working on a splitter during his bullpen session with Lisk and went on to pitch a pretty solid game.

We saw Whisler and Miller. Pitching wise, on the most part, we missed all the good prospects, but were able to get a good glance at all the hitting prospects.
Yep, got the e-mails. thanks again, updates to come, lot's of material for top-50 lists and scouting reports.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 08-09-2004, 11:08 PM
Randar68 Randar68 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerberus-WG
Good stuff, Randar. I know that I was supposed to interview Rogowski and Fields when I was down there, but due to time restraints I couldn't fit them in. I'm not surprised at all at Miller's velo, as I said earlier I was sitting right behind two radar guns in Miller's start and was topping out at 90. His delivery was very, very violent too.

As for Sweeney, has he stopped lunging at the ball? When I saw him for two games he was really lunging his entire body towards the ball.

Note: Tracey only needs 9 more HBP to set the Carolina League record w/ 30. Go Sean go! B-Mac joked around with him on that one.
I didn't get to see Miller pitch, but max-effort was something I had heard before. He seems like a real shy guy, either that or he just wasn't very comfortable talking to me. Rogo and Fields were great about everything, and they're both pretty damn funny. Rogo was better than I expected in LF, seemed comfortable, and I talked to him a little about that.

I saw Sweeney against a couple of LH's and it seems like he lunges out over the plate and tries to smack the ball to LF against lefties. He wasn't really jumping at the ball too badly when he was facing a RH'er, and hit balls hard up the middle several times. Ton of plate coverage.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 08-10-2004, 01:23 AM
Chisoxfn Chisoxfn is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: California
Posts: 660
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver
I don't remember ever saying that Jon Garland had overpowering stuff. If he could develop the confidence to use the ability he has he could be a succesful middle of the rotation pitcher. Pitching well within the strike zone is mostly mental, not physical, as for velocity, tell your story to Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine, neither one of them throw with the velocity Garland has.
I agree with Dave on this. Plus, as a kind of sidenote...every since I can remember, this has been his stance on Garland.

Oh ya, if it means anything, I now know why you like Kirk Champion...I don't really think he cares too much about the gun readings. By that I don't think he writes a guy off because he can't throw really hard.
__________________
Dan Evans Sucks...I'll take Ken Williams any day of the week over that bum.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 08-10-2004, 10:55 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisoxfn
I agree with Dave on this. Plus, as a kind of sidenote...every since I can remember, this has been his stance on Garland.

Oh ya, if it means anything, I now know why you like Kirk Champion...I don't really think he cares too much about the gun readings. By that I don't think he writes a guy off because he can't throw really hard.
I like Kirk because he values pitching, and all it entails. There is a hell of a lot more to pitching than what the gun tells you, something Kirk fully understands, I give him credit for the strides made by Ryan Meaux and Arnie Munoz. Turning Munoz into a starter was no small accomplishment in and of itself.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 08-10-2004, 11:40 PM
Gimm Gimm is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver
Turning Munoz into a starter was no small accomplishment in and of itself.
In his Montreal start, he had a BP fastball, floating change-up and a ridiculously overrated (Barry Zito?!) curveball. He was tipping his pitches at times as well.

I know it's in vogue to blame everything and everyone but the pitcher for horrible outings these days, but if that was the real Munoz, then he doesn't not have what it takes to be a ML pitcher, back-end of the rotation or not.

Here is where you explain to me why Munoz will be a very good ML pitcher. I am certainly listening.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 08-10-2004, 11:50 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimm
In his Montreal start, he had a BP fastball, floating change-up and a ridiculously overrated (Barry Zito?!) curveball. He was tipping his pitches at times as well.

I know it's in vogue to blame everything and everyone but the pitcher for horrible outings these days, but if that was the real Munoz, then he doesn't not have what it takes to be a ML pitcher, back-end of the rotation or not.

Here is where you explain to me why Munoz will be a very good ML pitcher. I am certainly listening.
If you are going to base your assesment of his ability on a spot start that he got shelled in, I have no desire to discuss pitching with you.It would be a waste of my time.

If you want to discuss what he has done in the minors, and the strides he has made while under a tremendous workload for what he is accustomed to, it might be worth my effort. Might. I have my doubts about what you follow in minor league ball, if any, and I will leave it at that.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 08-11-2004, 01:30 AM
Gimm Gimm is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver
If you are going to base your assesment of his ability on a spot start that he got shelled in, .
Why shouldn't I? I could care less about excuses, just stating the obvious here. It's one thing to get "shelled" - see Grienke tonight - and quite another to literally not have ONE redeeming quality about you. Velocity, movement, control, deception....nada. If he's going to be a successful ML starter, he is going to have to improve on EVERY area and fast.

Quote:
If you want to discuss what he has done in the minors, and the strides he has made while under a tremendous workload for what he is accustomed to, it might be worth my effort.
Go ahead, dissect the entity known as Artie "Baby Zito" Munoz. I am all ears.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 08-11-2004, 02:20 AM
Rex Hudler Rex Hudler is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimm
Why shouldn't I? I could care less about excuses, just stating the obvious here. It's one thing to get "shelled" - see Grienke tonight - and quite another to literally not have ONE redeeming quality about you. Velocity, movement, control, deception....nada. If he's going to be a successful ML starter, he is going to have to improve on EVERY area and fast.


Go ahead, dissect the entity known as Artie "Baby Zito" Munoz. I am all ears.
Allow me to jump in here.......... First of all, the Munoz you saw against the Expos was not the Arnie Munoz I have seen pitch many times. If he threw like he did that night back in Birmingham, he'd have given up 10 runs there too! He just sucked that night. It had nothing to do with his stuff being good enough for AA but not for the Majors. He just sucked and would have gotten his tits lit on any professional field that night.

That said....... I still think Arnie's ultimate destination will be in the bullpen. That does not mean he is not a very good pitcher. His fastball is not dominant and location is vital to his success. His curveball, is good, but from I saw this year, he seemed to be throwing it a bit harder and with less of a break. I know he was throwing two different breaking pitches, but I never saw the big, sharp breaking curveball that I saw two years ago.

Confidence will be the key for Arnie. Daver referred to it in another thread when referring to Garland and he was dead on. When a pitcher deep down knows he can get hitters out, he is much more successful. When his confidence wanes a bit, he has a tendency to aim the ball more, not get full extension, lose velocity and therefore, get hir much harder. The mental part of what it takes to be a successful pitcher is difficult to understand. The grind of a long season and how it affects a pitcher both mentally and physically is difficult to understand. It is not as easy as looking at one or two outings and deciding the pitcher's future.

This is why I get so pisssed about the Sox 5th starter merry-go-round, but I'll not go off on that tangent now.

Holy crap, I think Daver and I are on the same page on this one.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 08-11-2004, 02:38 AM
Gimm Gimm is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Hudler
Allow me to jump in here.......... First of all, the Munoz you saw against the Expos was not the Arnie Munoz I have seen pitch many times. If he threw like he did that night back in Birmingham, he'd have given up 10 runs there too! He just sucked that night. It had nothing to do with his stuff being good enough for AA but not for the Majors. He just sucked and would have gotten his tits lit on any professional field that night.

That said....... I still think Arnie's ultimate destination will be in the bullpen. That does not mean he is not a very good pitcher. His fastball is not dominant and location is vital to his success. His curveball, is good, but from I saw this year, he seemed to be throwing it a bit harder and with less of a break. I know he was throwing two different breaking pitches, but I never saw the big, sharp breaking curveball that I saw two years ago.

Confidence will be the key for Arnie. Daver referred to it in another thread when referring to Garland and he was dead on. When a pitcher deep down knows he can get hitters out, he is much more successful. When his confidence wanes a bit, he has a tendency to aim the ball more, not get full extension, lose velocity and therefore, get hir much harder. The mental part of what it takes to be a successful pitcher is difficult to understand. The grind of a long season and how it affects a pitcher both mentally and physically is difficult to understand. It is not as easy as looking at one or two outings and deciding the pitcher's future.
Quality post there, Hudler. Input appreciated and well-taken.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 08-11-2004, 12:54 PM
The Tom The Tom is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 126
Default Q for Randar

What was your impression of Lumsden? Is there anything redeeming about him that you liked. Also what's your take on Sweeney's progression and development? Finally, how did Fields look on D and at the plate and what are your thoughts on a position change for him? (I know I've previously asked you about him changing to SS. That is pretty much based on seeing him play QB. I'm a bigger football guy then baseball, and he had a great arm and quick feet.)
__________________
I'd still probably be the coolest guy in the world, just a different kind of cool. More of a, "I'm so cool, you don't even know I'm cool" kind of cool.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 08-11-2004, 02:42 PM
jeremyb1 jeremyb1 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Flossmoor, IL/St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68
I saw Sweeney against a couple of LH's and it seems like he lunges out over the plate and tries to smack the ball to LF against lefties. He wasn't really jumping at the ball too badly when he was facing a RH'er, and hit balls hard up the middle several times. Ton of plate coverage.
How well did Sweeney seem to work the count Randar? His walks have been up lately but they're still not very high.
__________________
Jeremy Reed Watch

.252/.316/.343 for Seattle in 2005

23 for 58 with 4 2Bs, 7 BBs, and 3 SBs for Seattle in 2004

.305/.366/.455 with 13 SB in 15 Attempts at AAA Tacoma in 2004
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 08-11-2004, 02:46 PM
jeremyb1 jeremyb1 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Flossmoor, IL/St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimm
Why shouldn't I? I could care less about excuses, just stating the obvious here. It's one thing to get "shelled" - see Grienke tonight - and quite another to literally not have ONE redeeming quality about you. Velocity, movement, control, deception....nada. If he's going to be a successful ML starter, he is going to have to improve on EVERY area and fast.

Go ahead, dissect the entity known as Artie "Baby Zito" Munoz. I am all ears.
I agree with Daver. You don't really deserve a response. You won't find a scout that will insist on evaluating a pitcher on one start, as the pitcher could've had an uncharacteristically bad day (which pitcher does appear to have redeeming qualities when getting hammered?) or an uncharacteristically good day. And you are not a scout, you're a fan watching the game. So not only is it ridiculous to insist on evaluating Munoz on one start, you're not particularly qualified to evaluate him either.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 08-11-2004, 04:56 PM
CWSGuy406 CWSGuy406 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 660
Default

You guys are really hard on Garland. I know it's frustrating seeing him go five excellent innings and then explode in the sixth, but, for fun, let's take the other number three starters in the AL - and compare them to Jon.


Oakland - Zito - 7-8, 4.84 ERA, 1.55 WHIP, 141.1 IP.

Anahiem - Washburn - 10-5, 4.83 ERA, 1.35 WHIP, 113.2 IP.

Texas - (I really don't know who to use from Texas, they've used 16 or so different starting pitchers this year, I really don't know which one is the number 3...)

Chicago - Garland - 8-8, 4.70 ERA, 1.31 WHIP, 153.1 IP.

Minnesota - Silva - 10-7, 4.21 ERA, 1.45 WHIP, 147.1 IP.

Cleveland - Westbrook - 10-5, 3.61 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 147 IP.

New York - Mussina - 9-6, 5.20 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, 107.1 IP.

Boston - Lowe - 9-10, 5.50 ERA, 1.69 WHIP, 124.1 IP.


Add in the fact that Garland is actually our fourth starter, and - at the very least, Jon has logged very good innings for the Sox this year, and has taken pressure off the bullpen. And - if you take out the start vs. Philly, where he was basically asked to stay out there and 'take one for the team', his numbers are in line with what he did last year, and improving.

He's 24. A year younger than Buehrle. Give him time. He'll blossom, and right now, there's a lot of other teams that wish that Jon could be their number 3, I can guarantee you that...
__________________
Make the move, Kenny.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 08-11-2004, 04:58 PM
Gimm Gimm is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremyb1
I agree with Daver. You don't really deserve a response. .
Don't respond then.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 08-11-2004, 06:05 PM
Gimm Gimm is offline
WSI Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CWSGuy406
..Cleveland - Westbrook - 10-5, 3.61 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 147 IP.
Westbrook is their co-ace with Sabathia, not a #3.

Their # 3 is Cliff Lee - 4.77 ERA, 1.50 WHIP.


Of course, Garland is gonna have to become a 3.50 ERA pitcher from now until the end of the season if Sox are to make up the 5-game defict in the standings. Expectations have shot WAY up after Maggs/Frank went down and the offense can no longer score 6 runs a game. No more excuses for Judy.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.