Greg Hibbard

PREFACE: I will not be rooting against Crede or the White Sox in any way, shape or form for the rest of the season. I am a diehard fan and my team and player loyalties come way before any fantasy or betting interest. That being said, I just couldn't pass this bet up. I bet my friend that Crede would finish the season at .284 or lower average-wise If he wins, I have to buy him a Crede jersey If I win, he has to buy me a Blum jersey (or something equally ridiculous) Putting aside what you HOPE will happen....good bet or bad bet?

WINN-AR

what the hell is with this guy heckling AJ

I wonder where all those people are who claimed Garland would eventually settle down. I said it once, I'll say it again....last year was a great year for JG, but a lot of it was sort of fluky. His ERA and WHIP this year will be lower than they are now eventually, but they will be more along the lines of his career numbers, NOT what we saw last year.

he better not be on the plane back or in the hotel tonight, for that matter.

QUOTE(fathom @ May 16, 2006 -> 07:05 PM) That was last season. Their hitting, besides Gomes, has been pathetic this season. their roster hasn't really changed too much. So they went through a collective team slump for 6 weeks. It's not totally impossible, you know. Huff is a good hitter. Crawford is a good hitter. I'd take the Rays lineup over the current Flubs one.

overreact much, guys?

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ May 16, 2006 -> 07:02 PM) No s*** they won't, but getting shelled by a team that has slumped for a month and a half is not accpetable. If we were winning this game 10-6 against any other starter on their roster, this thread wouldn't have any such complaints. The Rays hit very well last season, and are known for hitting well and pitching like s***.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:59 PM) 5 under and they are still last in their division and near the bottom of the AL. They are hitting .230 and have 6 runs in 5 innings. The Rays won't hit .230 all season. Big surprise. 2nd worst in the AL >>>>>> about 2/3rds of the NL. And they are miles above Kansas City. Tampa Bay has some major league talent, and we faced probably one of the 15 best starters in the league tonight. The way he's pitching, it was gonna be hard to put many runs up on the board. Big deal. We'll get em the next two nights. I still think Tampa could win 75 this year.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:57 PM) And they are 8 games under .500, 2nd worst in the AL Whatever, 5 under and 8 under are not a whole lot different at this point in the season.

Guys, the Rays are NOT a joke this year, nor were they really much of a joke at the end of last year. Kazmir is most certainly the real deal, and they have some good young talent that goes through hitting streaks. I mean, they handed the Yankees their asses all season, and routinely give them problems. They are 5 under hitting .230 as a club. Imagine if they had not been slumping so badly.

QUOTE(alexgtp @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:53 PM) why is logan still here? because Ozzieball demands that we have one horrible left hander at all times

QUOTE(TitoMB345 @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:26 PM) Pic please? what, you've never seen Hitchcock's "Psycho"?

surely it's been said before, but damn McCarthy looks like Anthony Perkins.

seriously how long can we afford to be patient with this guy

how did we ever lose two games to these guys last week

is it me or did singleton just go off on farmer? "whatever, you're gonna paint the picture you want I guess..."

I'm not sure how based on 12 games this season people have seemingly concluded that Cleveland has regressed...

cheap win...if I were a jays fan I'd be pissed as hell and yeah, of course I'll take it

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Apr 14, 2006 -> 07:56 AM) Well you could argue that Mark Buehrle isn't a big strikeout pitcher either (although he does have a little more K's than Garland), and his ERA has been good for the last few seasons. Being a damn good strikeout pitcher isn't the end all to be all to be a good pitcher. One of the main reasons Garland was so good in 2005 besides walking hitters less, was the fact that he gave up 8 less home runs that he did the year before. Buehrle is in the top 20 in K/9... For 2005... Santana is #1 in K/9 and #2 in ERA Lackey is #2 in K/9 and #6 in ERA Millwood is #11 in K/9 and #1 in ERA Colon is #16 in K/9 (and I would argue he had an off strikeout year) and #8 in ERA Contreras is in the top 12 in both categories... Buehrle is 20 in K/9 and #3 in ERA (a little fluky, but not really that much) The only pitcher to have a similar outlying statistic to Garland's is Jarrod Washburn, who has a similar K/9 and a similarly low ERA, but again I would argue that that is a fluke season more than a trend. bottom line, there's a very strong correlation.

Guys, a pitcher with that low a K/9 total over an entire season/career is not going to be able to sustain an elite ERA or WHIP. Really, this is elementary statistical analysis. He was 37th in qualified pitchers in the AL in K/9 in 2005, yet he had one of the lowest ERAs. That, my friends, is a fluke. A greater percentage of balls he throws are put into play than other pitchers. It's not about the defense doing things for you. It's about the fact that when balls are put into play, things like hits and runs tend to happen slightly more often than when a pitcher strikes a hitter out. When things like hits and runs happen slightly more, your ERA and WHIP tends to suffer. Jon is and always will be a very serviceable 4/5 starter, occasionally when he's really on (like last year) he's a 3. He will probably end up this season with 14-16 wins and an era between 4.2 and 4.4. Those are extremely realistic projections based on his career numbers. They are also just fine for what this team needs from him.

also, last year Buehrle was 5.67/9 and Garland was just 4.68/9. That's a little more of a discrepency.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Apr 13, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) What's the difference between 5.3 K/9 and 4.9 K/9, aside from 0.4? One of course is the face of the franchise, and one is being shipped out by White Sox fans already. I'm just glad KW jumped to conclusions like this last year when he replaced Jermaine Dye after a bad April and he replaced Joe Crede after a bad May. The only thing I said is that his K/9 is low enough to believe he's gonna get rocked every once in a while. What happened last year in terms of ERA and WHIP is a total fluke. Sorry if that offends some of you. Nowhere in this thread am I saying I am ready to ship Garland out. He's a fine fourth/fifth starter and will probably go 16-13 with a 4.2-4.4 ERA. We have plenty of offense to bail him out most of the time.

I could CLEAN UP this year betting you guys that Garland's season-long ERA will be over 4.00. He's still going to get 15+ wins, don't get me wrong. He is not going to be close to his ERA and WHIP totals from last season

Garland's lack of K's suggest that he's not nearly as good of a pitcher as his ERA and WHIP suggested last season. Simply put, a lot of balls get put into play when he pitches.