Sox Vs. Royals

[Balta1701]

Sure because Jeff Jackson was the consensus overall number one pick a year before the draft. Dont worry if we are further down in the draft KW will pick Danks brother like he wants to anyways.

So in other words, what you're saying is...the consensus number one pick doesn't always dominate?

[southsideirish71]

So in other words, what you're saying is...the consensus number one pick doesn't always dominate?

 

Actually in other words, getting a better selection of talent is better than a winning 70 games.

 

Here is an easier way of putting it for everyone.

 

There are 25 girls in the room, would you like to be the first guy in the room to get your pick. Or would you rather be the 13th and see whats left over.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

Actually in other words, getting a better selection of talent is better than a winning 70 games.

 

Here is an easier way of putting it for everyone.

 

There are 25 girls in the room, would you like to be the first guy in the room to get your pick. Or would you rather be the 13th and see whats left over.

The point was that the White Sox second choice in the 1989 draft was actually better than their first. Thomas was picked #7. Robin Ventura was picked #10 the year before. There were 3 players picked before him that never played in the major leagues including Ty Griffin a guy the Cubs, a team looking for a 3rd baseman for decades picked right before the Sox picked Ventura. In 1987 if the Sox had their first pick, they would have chose Mike Harkey,but fortunately he was unavailable thanks again to the Cubs and Jack McDowell wound up on the right side of town.

[BearSox]

Actually in other words, getting a better selection of talent is better than a winning 70 games.

 

Here is an easier way of putting it for everyone.

There are 25 girls in the room, would you like to be the first guy in the room to get your pick. Or would you rather be the 13th and see whats left over.

Well, Greg is into guys...

 

j/k

[whitesoxfan99]

A "good" loss? An "ideal" loss?

Glad you don't mind seeing your team get embarrassed again by the worst franchise in baseball.

A draft pick? Yeah that pick is really going to help this team on the field next year.

 

This team has been embarrassed by the opposition all year. We might as well get something out of it. And a draft choice will help this franchise more than meaningless September wins.

[hitlesswonder]

So in other words, what you're saying is...the consensus number one pick doesn't always dominate?

 

I think his more interesting point is that the Sox will pick Jordan Danks regardless of what number pick they have. I know that's complete speculation but I have a disturbing feeling that might be true unless they get the number one pick.

[beautox]

I didn't see the game but judging by the box score Fields, Thome, Richar, Floyd and Wasserman all had pretty good games AND we lost? Sounds pretty good to me.

 

+1 i love seeking the rookies do well only too see us come up short and closer to the #1 overall pick.

[southsider2k5]

I was really glad to see Floyd recover well after a crappy first inning. The first two hits off of him were balls that Joe Crede probably gets to. At worst he gets to one of them, and that alone changes the whole complexion of his outing. Even including the first inning, I was really happy to see Gavin didn't lose his composure, and instead gave the Sox five scoreless innings after the 3 run first. Those are the kinds of little things you look for to see if a guy is turning the corner mentally. When Garland got to the point that he didn't let giving up runs bother him is when those four run innings started to turn into one run innings, and instead of going 5 innings, Garland was pitching into the 8th most nights. Floyd has work to do, but the signs are good.

[kapkomet]

 

Floyd sucks.

 

 

 

[RockRaines]

I was really glad to see Floyd recover well after a crappy first inning. The first two hits off of him were balls that Joe Crede probably gets to. At worst he gets to one of them, and that alone changes the whole complexion of his outing. Even including the first inning, I was really happy to see Gavin didn't lose his composure, and instead gave the Sox five scoreless innings after the 3 run first. Those are the kinds of little things you look for to see if a guy is turning the corner mentally. When Garland got to the point that he didn't let giving up runs bother him is when those four run innings started to turn into one run innings, and instead of going 5 innings, Garland was pitching into the 8th most nights. Floyd has work to do, but the signs are good.

I agree totally with your post. Gavin didnt get rattled by bad defensive play which is nice.

 

Also he seems to have really started to but some sink on a 2 seamer which really changes the way hitters look at his 4 seam fastball. I think this kid does have a chance to be good, its just very touch and go right now.

[Gregory Pratt]

 

Floyd sucks.

 

 

 

I thought I'd let Ozzie's continued skepticism speak for itself. And I didn't want to make the point that, hey, KC has very little power and one of their more "potent" bats, Alex Gordon, wasn't in the lineup, but I wouldn't want to take anything away from Gavin Floyd. If you take the little he has he goes away with nothing, so he can celebrate the fact that his outing teetered on disaster a hundred times and that he got hit pretty hard by a punchless Royals team. Good for him, though, he reached the "quality start" qualification.

[kapkomet]

I thought I'd let Ozzie's continued skepticism speak for itself. And I didn't want to make the point that, hey, KC has very little power and one of their more "potent" bats, Alex Gordon, wasn't in the lineup, but I wouldn't want to take anything away from Gavin Floyd. If you take the little he has he goes away with nothing, so he can celebrate the fact that his outing teetered on disaster a hundred times and that he got hit pretty hard by a punchless Royals team. Good for him, though, he reached the "quality start" qualification.

You didn't have to post anything, I posted it for you.

 

[Rowand44]

I thought I'd let Ozzie's continued skepticism speak for itself. And I didn't want to make the point that, hey, KC has very little power and one of their more "potent" bats, Alex Gordon, wasn't in the lineup, but I wouldn't want to take anything away from Gavin Floyd. If you take the little he has he goes away with nothing, so he can celebrate the fact that his outing teetered on disaster a hundred times and that he got hit pretty hard by a punchless Royals team. Good for him, though, he reached the "quality start" qualification.

That 0 quality start prediction of yours is driving you nuts, isn't it?

[kapkomet]

That 0 quality start prediction of yours is driving you nuts, isn't it?

 

Zing.

 

 

[Gregory Pratt]

I was clearly being facetious, but I will admit that the great Gavin Floyd has put up more quality starts than I predicted. Good for him. Unfortunately for Floyd, he's still allowing baserunners at a terrible rate, his control hasn't been hot and he's had significant circumstances tip in his favor of late that have little to do with him. Is he for real? I don't think so. We'll have to wait and see, I guess, if he can be good in his next start, if he makes a start after, and whether or not he can win a job that's been once again gift-wrapped for him next Spring Training.

 

I wouldn't have mentioned the terrible Gavin Floyd and was in fact going to keep from mentioning it but Kap had to prompt it and who am I to deny that Gavin Floyd sucks?!

 

But really, I'm happy we've found our Opening Day starter next year. How can we lose?1

[NorthSideSox72]

I was clearly being facetious, but I will admit that the great Gavin Floyd has put up more quality starts than I predicted. Good for him. Unfortunately for Floyd, he's still allowing baserunners at a terrible rate, his control hasn't been hot and he's had significant circumstances tip in his favor of late that have little to do with him. Is he for real? I don't think so. We'll have to wait and see, I guess, if he can be good in his next start, if he makes a start after, and whether or not he can win a job that's been once again gift-wrapped for him next Spring Training.

 

I wouldn't have mentioned the terrible Gavin Floyd and was in fact going to keep from mentioning it but Kap had to prompt it and who am I to deny that Gavin Floyd sucks?!

 

But really, I'm happy we've found our Opening Day starter next year. How can we lose?1

Floyd's WHIP since you made your 8/1 post: 1.34

 

WHIP's for other starters on the team this year:

 

Buehrle: 1.24

Vazquez: 1.15

Garland: 1.39

Danks: 1.54

Contreras: 1.62

 

Yup. Terrible rate. So terrible that its... better than 3 of the 5 other starters? And very close to Buehrle's?

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Garland, Danks and Contreras have been very shaky.

[NorthSideSox72]

Garland, Danks and Contreras have been very shaky.

His WHIP says he is giving up a whopping 1 more baserunner per 9 innings than Mark Buehrle. Clearly, he is not allowing baserunners at a "terrible" rate.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

Let's see where he ends up at the end of the season before we start to proclaim him a new man.

[NorthSideSox72]

Let's see where he ends up at the end of the season before we start to proclaim him a new man.

Agreed 100%.

 

ETA: Actually, he probably only has one start left. 2 at most. I would even say they shouldn't crown him starter #5 unless/until he also "shows up" in Spring Training.

 

[Balta1701]

Agreed 100%.

 

ETA: Actually, he probably only has one start left. 2 at most. I would even say they shouldn't crown him starter #5 unless/until he also "shows up" in Spring Training.

Unfortunately...that means to my eyes that you can't trade either Garland or Contreras until the end of spring training...which means we will have no FA money to spend and will get nothing back until that point. Which, to me, means that you absolutely have to pencil him in as that #5 starter this offseason, because you need to clear one of those salaries and you need to try to find a way to turn Garland into a SS.

[NorthSideSox72]

Unfortunately...that means to my eyes that you can't trade either Garland or Contreras until the end of spring training...which means we will have no FA money to spend and will get nothing back until that point. Which, to me, means that you absolutely have to pencil him in as that #5 starter this offseason, because you need to clear one of those salaries and you need to try to find a way to turn Garland into a SS.

I think it means you can definitely trade one - just not both. Because given Floyd's performances, I think he has shown there is a good chance he will be a serviceable starter. Add that to a few guys like Gio and others who will be vying for it, and I would feel confident that one of them will be OK. Now, trading both, that might be taking a big risk.

 

[CWSGuy406]

his control hasn't been hot

 

FWIW, Floyd's BB/9 of 2.5/9 IP is the best he's had it at for any point of his big league career. I also believe that 2.5 number is well ahead of the league average, so...

 

But really, I'm happy we've found our Opening Day starter next year. How can we lose?1

 

I love how you and DA always add in some hyperbolous (is that a word?) statement to finish off your Floyd posts. Please find for me where some poster said something about Floyd starting to show signs of becoming an ace or a top-of-the-rotation pitcher. Even the most optimistic friends of Floyd wouldn't say that. The Sox -- and a majority of the people defending Floyd -- are wanting to see if he can be an option for the back-of-the-rotation, a guy who can give the Sox 175 innings of a 5.00 ERA. Really not a whole lot more than that.

[Kalapse]

I believe it's "hyperbolic".

[Dick Allen]

I think it means you can definitely trade one - just not both. Because given Floyd's performances, I think he has shown there is a good chance he will be a serviceable starter. Add that to a few guys like Gio and others who will be vying for it, and I would feel confident that one of them will be OK. Now, trading both, that might be taking a big risk.

See David Aardsma's September last year. He was pretty dominating in games that meant nothing. You can't count on anything based on performance the last 3 or 4 weeks of a lost season. I do agree that they are going to trade one of the starters no matter what, and try to replace him with Bartolo Colon-like veteran. Someone who can be had without too much committment in both years and money. The other problem with giving Floyd the #5 spot is you make Danks, a guy who couldn't even finish out the season, the #4 spot. If Danks had the same season that he's had, and the White Sox had been in contention, he almost assuredly would have seen Charlotte himself. There's a good chance Danks improves on his 2007 season next year, but he basically ran out of gas after 90 innings or so this season. It may not be realistic to think he can give you anything near what you are used to seeing from Garland as far as innings goes. If they don't trade him, they will give Floyd a shot at the rotation, but he's going to have to show them something in spring training.