Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NorthSideSox72

FutureSox interviews RHP Chris Beck

Recommended Posts

A lot of great stuff in there. And an early congrats to Chris and his soon-to-be-wife! Hopefully Chris gets a really big raise soon, holding down a spot in the Sox rotation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great interview! He sounds like a very smart and humble guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic interview. Really great answers and responses in there. Love his approach from a mental perspective and his overall mindset. Beck is going to play for the Sox. Not sure if it will be in the rotation or pen long-term (I still buy the rotation) and he's a part of our future and I am very optimistic that he'll have a positive impact on the major league club starting in the next year or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of Jon Garland to Chris Beck's repertoire and approach. That's not a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I get caught up in K rates, but so long as you have command and can locate, pitching to weak contact early in the at bat is a very good thing. Shoulder problems eventually derailed him, but Roy Halladay did the same thing and he was a workhorse for years and years. He had the stuff and ability to strike a lot of guys out, but he kept pounding the strikezone with really good pitches. A lot of times, the first pitch you got in the at bat was the best you were going to see, even if it wasn't a good pitch to hit, and you swung at it a lot of times hoping to do something with it.

 

I keep making these comparisons of the Sox prospects to these all time greats, but it's primarily just to show these examples exist. I do not expect Beck to turn into Halladay (more along the lines of a Jon Garland, about a league average pitcher), just saying that there is precedent for his philosophy working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going to have another interview tomorrow with a different prospect - see the thread in FutureSox asking for suggested questions. Should be posted Thursday morning.

 

Trying to make up for not doing many this year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 19, 2014 -> 09:07 AM)
Also, I get caught up in K rates, but so long as you have command and can locate, pitching to weak contact early in the at bat is a very good thing. Shoulder problems eventually derailed him, but Roy Halladay did the same thing and he was a workhorse for years and years. He had the stuff and ability to strike a lot of guys out, but he kept pounding the strikezone with really good pitches. A lot of times, the first pitch you got in the at bat was the best you were going to see, even if it wasn't a good pitch to hit, and you swung at it a lot of times hoping to do something with it.

 

I keep making these comparisons of the Sox prospects to these all time greats, but it's primarily just to show these examples exist. I do not expect Beck to turn into Halladay (more along the lines of a Jon Garland, about a league average pitcher), just saying that there is precedent for his philosophy working.

 

 

That's being pretty darned optimistic, as Garland was one of the Top 20-30 prospects in all of baseball as an 18-19 year old.

 

If you told me he was going to be in the 2015 starting rotation, I would quickly say it's another 76-86 rebuilding year, unless they've also addressed the significant holes in the line-up and bullpen.

 

Even then, a rotation of Sale/Quintana/Rodon with Beck/Noesi/Danks fighting for the 4th and 5th spots is at least a year away, optimistically. If we were willing to get rid of Danks' contract and/or add another veteran to the back end for stability, I would be a bit more optimistic, as the assumption now has to be they're going to want no part of a FA pitcher over a 2-3 contract.

Edited by caulfield12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 07:27 AM)
If you told me he was going to be in the 2015 starting rotation, I would quickly say it's another 76-86 rebuilding year, unless they've also addressed the significant holes in the line-up and bullpen.

 

Even then, a rotation of Sale/Quintana/Rodon with Beck/Noesi/Danks fighting for the 4th and 5th spots is at least a year away, optimistically. If we were willing to get rid of Danks' contract and/or add another veteran to the back end for stability, I would be a bit more optimistic, as the assumption now has to be they're going to want no part of a FA pitcher over a 2-3 contract.

Stop and think a bit more about this post. "If a rookie who has spent 1 month at AAA is in the starting rotation next year it's probably a rebuilding season".

 

That's surprising why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 06:27 AM)
That's being pretty darned optimistic, as Garland was one of the Top 20-30 prospects in all of baseball as an 18-19 year old.

 

If you told me he was going to be in the 2015 starting rotation, I would quickly say it's another 76-86 rebuilding year, unless they've also addressed the significant holes in the line-up and bullpen.

 

Even then, a rotation of Sale/Quintana/Rodon with Beck/Noesi/Danks fighting for the 4th and 5th spots is at least a year away, optimistically. If we were willing to get rid of Danks' contract and/or add another veteran to the back end for stability, I would be a bit more optimistic, as the assumption now has to be they're going to want no part of a FA pitcher over a 2-3 contract.

 

Jon Garland's optimistic ranking was also based on the projections that his stuff would continue to improve and he'd start throwing a power sinker and turn into a ground ball and strike out machine, ala Kevin Brown. He never got to that point.

 

If Beck comes up and is a league average pitcher, I'll be quite happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 08:37 AM)
Jon Garland's optimistic ranking was also based on the projections that his stuff would continue to improve and he'd start throwing a power sinker and turn into a ground ball and strike out machine, ala Kevin Brown. He never got to that point.

 

If Beck comes up and is a league average pitcher, I'll be quite happy.

 

If you get a league average pitcher out of Beck, you have won his draft pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 07:09 AM)
Stop and think a bit more about this post. "If a rookie who has spent 1 month at AAA is in the starting rotation next year it's probably a rebuilding season".

 

That's surprising why?

 

 

Because wouldn't think JR would like to go all the way down to 1.4-1.5 million in attendance and decline for a 9th season in a row and waste another year of Sale and Abreu together, but if they're still content with profitability at this payroll level, more power to them.

 

Actually, I do not know exactly what it takes for Brooks Boyer to lose his job and for the White Sox to try another approach, because it's going to be challenging to emptier stadiums than US Cellular in September.

 

Even the idea of Rodon coming up quickly is going to be met with a shrug by fans unless he debuts and sustains an ace level of performance instead of profiling somewhat like, say, Kip Wells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 10:38 AM)
Because wouldn't think JR would like to go all the way down to 1.4-1.5 million in attendance and decline for a 9th season in a row and waste another year of Sale and Abreu together, but if they're still content with profitability at this payroll level, more power to them.

 

Actually, I do not know exactly what it takes for Brooks Boyer to lose his job and for the White Sox to try another approach, because it's going to be challenging to emptier stadiums than US Cellular in September.

 

Even the idea of Rodon coming up quickly is going to be met with a shrug by fans unless he debuts and sustains an ace level of performance instead of profiling somewhat like, say, Kip Wells.

These aren't arguments for why it would be surprising that bringing up a pitcher with 2 months in AAA would be inconsistent with a rebuilding season.

 

Basically your first post, to me, said "if new leaves grow on trees its probably becoming spring". I said "why is this surprising to you?" at which point you gave me more details about why leaves grow on trees during the spring.

 

None of that explains why I should be surprised that having Beck in the rotation next year would be a strong sign of rebuilding.

 

It might well be surprising that the Sox would choose to continue a rebuilding process, but this doesn't change what you outlined at first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 09:38 AM)
Because wouldn't think JR would like to go all the way down to 1.4-1.5 million in attendance and decline for a 9th season in a row and waste another year of Sale and Abreu together, but if they're still content with profitability at this payroll level, more power to them.

 

Actually, I do not know exactly what it takes for Brooks Boyer to lose his job and for the White Sox to try another approach, because it's going to be challenging to emptier stadiums than US Cellular in September.

 

Even the idea of Rodon coming up quickly is going to be met with a shrug by fans unless he debuts and sustains an ace level of performance instead of profiling somewhat like, say, Kip Wells.

 

Why do you insist on bringing up attendance? It's like always the crux of your argument over and over and it's never, ever been that big of a deal.

 

Reinsdorf's goal is to win, and it's quite clear that Hahn has a long term plan that the Sox ownership is comfortable with to maintain winning long term, but that involves taking a few lumps in the short term. When the Sox win - and do so consistently - they draw. This has been proven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 09:07 AM)
Why do you insist on bringing up attendance? It's like always the crux of your argument over and over and it's never, ever been that big of a deal.

 

Reinsdorf's goal is to win, and it's quite clear that Hahn has a long term plan that the Sox ownership is comfortable with to maintain winning long term, but that involves taking a few lumps in the short term. When the Sox win - and do so consistently - they draw. This has been proven.

 

 

The only times they've played well two consecutive seasons are 1993-94 and 2005-06.

 

 

I hope you're right. The only comparison we can make is the falloff from the 1983 White Sox. They lost over half their attendance in the span of 5 seasons, going from 3rd in the American League in 1984 to 14th and barely over 1 million in 1989.

 

It's a good comparison because, while there was no new stadium, that 1990 team had Ventura, Thomas (as a rookie) and many reasons to be optimistic as a White Sox fan with the influx of young talent.

 

However, the 2015 team is going to have to finish at 90 games or better to duplicate that turnaround from 1,045,000 in 1989 to over 2,000,000 in 1990.

 

How likely is that to happen?

Edited by caulfield12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 20, 2014 -> 10:30 AM)
The only times they've played well two consecutive seasons are 1993-94 and 2005-06.

 

 

I hope you're right. The only comparison we can make is the falloff from the 1983 White Sox. They lost over half their attendance in the span of 5 seasons, going from 3rd in the American League in 1984 to 14th and barely over 1 million in 1989.

 

It's a good comparison because, while there was no new stadium, that 1990 team had Ventura, Thomas (as a rookie) and many reasons to be optimistic as a White Sox fan with the influx of young talent.

 

However, the 2015 team is going to have to finish at 90 games or better to duplicate that turnaround from 1,045,000 in 1989 to over 2,000,000 in 1990.

How likely is that to happen?

 

Who cares?? Like others have said, there's no correlation between attendance and salary.

 

Seattle had worse attendance than the Sox the past few years and yet they went out and signed Cano, Rodney, and Hart.

 

Few years ago Cleveland had spent a bunch of money on Swisher and Bourne and they had worse attendance than the Sox.

 

I'm sure there's other cases as well. If JR and Hahn think this team is ready, money will be spent. Whether the fans are ready or not is irrelevant

 

Project-Management-in-SharePoint-Solutio

 

 

EDIT- BTW, Well done on the interview. I'm rooting for the kid.

Edited by scs787

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NS and all you guys basically running FutureSox these days - these are f***in awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This team can be damn competitive next year AND have room for Beck to force his way up. We can win the World Series. Rick Hahn, we both know it can be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 21, 2014 -> 04:26 PM)
Who cares?? Like others have said, there's no correlation between attendance and salary.

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT- BTW, Well done on the interview. I'm rooting for the kid.

 

www.hardballtimes.com/how-are-wins-attendance-and-payroll-all-related

 

The attached, using data from 2000-2011, concludes there is a major correlation between payroll and attendance.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (SCCWS @ Aug 22, 2014 -> 12:42 PM)
www.hardballtimes.com/how-are-wins-attendance-and-payroll-all-related

 

The attached, using data from 2000-2011, concludes there is a major correlation between payroll and attendance.

 

I wouldn't say a major correlation, but there is correlation. It also removes bias within those 3 variables, which sounds like a good thing but is not because bias does exist in real life. It also doesn't show the effects that new stadiums has on it. If a team opens a new stadium, they'll draw much better than previously. You will usually see teams spend a lot more money when a new stadium opens up to build excitement for the fans in the area. You also could not draw the conclusion of "spend money and people will show up." Yes, to some extent that may be true, but it will not be true 100% of the time and it is not a good way to build a fan base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the kind words everyone, I love doing these interviews.

 

Just finished another one today, to go up Monday. An infielder this time. Stay tuned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×