White Sox & Trade Deadline

Rod · **Posted:** Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:26 pm

lipidquadcab wrote:

:lol:

Have fun with this one guys.

Okay. Who is the great starting pitcher with a losing record. If what you believe is true there must be one out there. Go hit Baseball Reference and see if you can find him. I won't be holding my breath.

Rod · **Posted:** Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:32 pm

Which of these guys was the better pitcher? They were both starters whose careers pretty much overlapped.:

A:
224-166
3.26 ERA
1.134 WHIP

B:
116-117
3.11 ERA
1.190 WHIP

Terry's Peeps · **Posted:** Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:49 pm

Based just on those stats, I'd say they're pretty much equal.

Rod · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:19 am

Keeping Score wrote:

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Which of these guys was the better pitcher? They were both starters whose careers pretty much overlapped.:

A:
224-166
3.26 ERA
1.134 WHIP

B:
116-117
3.11 ERA
1.190 WHIP

So it's A) Catfish Hunter vs B) Joe Horlen

Catfish had 1000 more strikeouts than Horlen. But it may have taken it's toll as he died at 53 and Horlen is still kicking it at 74.

Yeah, but he also pitched about 1500 more innings. The point is nobody in his right mind would tell you Joel Horlen was better than Catfish Hunter. Horlen's ERA was a direct result of where he pitched most of his games.

Hawkeye Vince · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 8:15 am

SomeGuy wrote:

lipidquadcab wrote:

:lol:

Have fun with this one guys.

Matt Thornton.....what a worthless piece of shit.

His fall from grace is shocking.

I was looking for this. He's become Will Ohman with a 95 mph heater. They desperately need to shore up the pen. I'd roll the dice with the starters if I had to choose one over the other.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

You really love that Win stat.

This day forward isnt the proposal. Starts next year with the replacement.

I dont know. I think a 3.85 ERA over a 1000 innings, mostly spent in the AL east, is better than "not good"

Right. Because winners are winners. It isn't an accident when a starter has a .580 winning percentage over 200 starts. An ERA is subject to conditions far more than a winning percentage.

Ted Lilly was a .500 pitcher when the Cubs signed him. Then he went 15-8, 17-9, 12-9

Overall since that signing he is 71-53

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

Garza is a useful starter.Like Javy Vazquez was. They're similar in many ways. They aren't guys to build a rotation around.

Well then why would you describe him as "Not any good"?

All star or Bust?

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And they're not going to put you over the top. If the Sox are going to replace Humber or Axelrod with Garza, that's great. He isn't likely to replace Peavy. He can probably replace "Losing Pitcher" John Danks.

While they might not be Game 1 starters, adding that depth to a starting rotation can help you win a division.

I guess you are saying Garza is not some dominant force of nature who will change the complexion of the whole Pennant race. Thats fine. He IS good though.

And regarding Peavy, which one are you talking about? This years version or the last two years prior?

Garza was also very good in post season unlike Jake

good dolphin · **Joined:** Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm **Posts:** 82222

Bartolo Colon might be someone worth taking a look at as a cheap alternative if they need starting pitching...although I am not convinced they will need it.

SHARK · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:20 pm

Remember Clayton Richard? According to FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal & Jon Paul Morosi's Twitter, the White Sox, Tigers & Orioles have expressed interest in the Padres' lefty who starts today vs. the Astros.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:23 pm

Whatever happened to him? Is he doing well?

SHARK · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:26 pm

FavreFan wrote:

Whatever happened to him? Is he doing well?

Clay Richard? He's 6-10 with a 3.83 ERA for the Padres. They're clearly a seller. Carlos Quentin might also be available...if the price is right.

FavreFan · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:27 pm

SHARK wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

Whatever happened to him? Is he doing well?

Clay Richard? He's 6-10 with a 3.83 ERA for the Padres. They're clearly a seller. Carlos Quentin might also be available...if the price is right.

Sounds like he was expendable. Gotta think that ERA goes up over 4 if he moves from the NL West to the AL also.

SHARK · **Posted:** Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:32 pm

FavreFan wrote:

SHARK wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

Whatever happened to him? Is he doing well?

Clay Richard? He's 6-10 with a 3.83 ERA for the Padres. They're clearly a seller. Carlos Quentin might also be available...if the price is right.

Sounds like he was expendable. Gotta think that ERA goes up over 4 if he moves from the NL West to the AL also.

FavreFan, I think that also explains why 2B Orlando Hudson is here, too. Hudson was expendable...The Padres are in the midst of a youth movement and they've been bad at baseball on the whole the last 2 years. FOX Sports San Diego's Dick Enberg is probably older than the guys on that roster now.

good dolphin · **Joined:** Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm **Posts:** 82222

FavreFan wrote:

SHARK wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

Whatever happened to him? Is he doing well?

Clay Richard? He's 6-10 with a 3.83 ERA for the Padres. They're clearly a seller. Carlos Quentin might also be available...if the price is right.

Sounds like he was expendable. Gotta think that ERA goes up over 4 if he moves from the NL West to the AL also.

He's performing pretty much as expected when traded. He was a 4.5 type of ERA guy with the Sox. Take .5 off for the NL then a little more for the SD and he is a 3.75 guy. He's a legit starter but an upper end of the rotation type

Hank Scorpio · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:22 am

Frank Coztansa wrote:

I am not worried about Detroit.

Do you care to revise this or still not worried?

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:32 am

If you are going to quote me, quote the whole statement so its not taken out of context. I said I was not worried about Detroit, and that the Sox biggest competition in the 2nd half is themselves. If the Sox continue to have bad pitching in the bullpen and cannot get the offense on track soon, they are in trouble. This slide is more about the Sox being bad than it is Detroit.

I stand by the statement that if the Sox take care of their business, Detroit will be a non factor.

Hank Scorpio · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:35 am

OK sir. I will quote the whole thing. Is winning 8 of 10, including a sweep to get the division lead, considered prolonged??

Frank Coztansa wrote:

I am not worried about Detroit. They don't have the pitching or defense to go on a prolonged winning streak. The Sox biggest competition in the second half is themselves. If they don't beat themselves, they will win this division.

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:42 am

Hank Scorpio wrote:

Frank Coztansa wrote:

The Sox biggest competition in the second half is themselves. If they don't beat themselves, they will win this division.

I stand by this.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Frank Coztansa wrote:

Detroit will not win this division.

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:45 am

What is your point? If I'm wrong, we'll find out in October. I'm not going to flip flop now. I think the Sox have the best shot to win this division. If I'm wrong I will eat crow in October, but don't expect me to back down now because the Sox have lost (gasp) 5 games in a row.

spanky · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:48 am

Frank C. is not back.

Brick · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:52 am

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Frank Coztansa wrote:

What is your point? If I'm wrong, we'll find out in October. I'm not going to flip flop now. I think the Sox have the best shot to win this division. If I'm wrong I will eat crow in October, but don't expect me to back down now because the Sox have lost (gasp) 5 games in a row.

Im not asking you to flip flop. Im asking you to stand behind your original preidction that Detroit not win the division because they just arent that good, irrespective of the White Sox performance.

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

I dont see much of that complaining anymore.

I think we've all accepted eachother.

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:09 am

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

I dont see much of that complaining anymore.

I think we've all accepted eachother.

Just a couple hours ago, a few different times in that same thread; viewtopic.php?f=32&t=71825#p1487041

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Frank Coztansa wrote:

rogers park bryan wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

I dont see much of that complaining anymore.

I think we've all accepted eachother.

Just a couple hours ago, a few different times in that same thread; viewtopic.php?f=32&t=71825#p1487041

I slouch corrected.

Hank Scorpio · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:12 am

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

This isnt Sox trolling. I thought it was odd he took such a hard line position on the Tigers not being good enough to beat the Sox. Especially in light of the fact that going into the season, no one thought that way.

Frank Coztansa · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:19 am

If it was the other way around, you guys would be saying its Cubs trolling. Curious Hair pretty much did that this morning in the Santo thread.

Hank Scorpio · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:22 am

Frank Coztansa wrote:

If it was the other way around, you guys would be saying its Cubs trolling. Curious Hair pretty much did that this morning in the Santo thread.

There is no 'other way around' this season... :cry:

rogers park bryan · **Joined:** Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm **Posts:** 81625

Frank Coztansa wrote:

If it was the other way around, you guys would be saying its Cubs trolling. Curious Hair pretty much did that this morning in the Santo thread.

I admitted to trolling just yesterday. Dont include me in that.

Brick · **Posted:** Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:24 am

Hank Scorpio wrote:

Boilermaker Rick wrote:

Every time I read this thread I can't help but think about all the complaining about Frank C. posting in the Cubs section.

This isnt Sox trolling. I thought it was odd he took such a hard line position on the Tigers not being good enough to beat the Sox. Especially in light of the fact that going into the season, no one thought that way.

So the weekend the Sox drop out of first place with a sweep against the only other legitimate team that can win the division a Sox thread is descended upon by Cubs fans and yet it's not the same?

I really don't care either, I just find it funny that Frank is the only one who gets called out for it.

White Sox & Trade Deadline

Who is online