Game 159: White Sox (69-89) vs. Royals (68-90) -- Broadway vs. Buckner

by The Wizard on Sep 27, 2007 6:17 PM CDT in Game Threads

Lance Broadway (R, 0-1, 2.08, 3, 0, 4.1, 6, 3, 1.38) vs. Billy Buckner (R, 1-1, 4.50, 6, 4, 28.0, 13, 14, 1.57) [Throws, W-L, ERA, G, GS, IP, K, BB, WHIP]

Time: 7:11 p.m. CT, TV: CSN, Radio: WSCR AM-670 (B-R preview, Live Boxscore; 2006 MLB Gameday; 2007 MLB Gameday)

GO SOX!

Tweet Comment 60 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Lineups

Good Guys:

        Name             AVG    HR      RBI     SB
1. J Owens, CF          .268    1       17      32
2. J Fields, 3B         .246    22      65      1
3. J Thome, DH          .274    33      93      0
4. P Konerko, 1B        .257    29      84      0
5. J Dye, RF            .253    28      77      2
6. A Pierzynski, C      .263    14      48      1
7. S Podsednik, LF      .246    2       11      12
8. J Uribe, SS          .231    20      66      1
9. D Richar, 2B         .224    6       14      1

Bad Guys:

        Name             AVG    HR      RBI     SB
1. D DeJesus, CF        .264    7       58      9
2. E German, 2B         .268    3       35      11
3. M Teahen, RF         .286    7       59      13
4. B Butler, DH         .292    8       52      0
5. R Gload, 1B          .285    7       51      2
6. A Gordon, 3B         .247    15      59      14
7. J Smith, SS          .198    6       14      0
8. J Buck, C            .228    18      48      0
9. J Gathright, LF      .309    0       17      9

GO SOX!

by The Wizard on Sep 27, 2007 6:17 PM CDT reply actions

dear mr. Broadway

I'll be skipping your first start in favor of the Gilmore Girls -- Crap! that excuse doesn't work anymore.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Sep 27, 2007 6:34 PM CDT reply actions

Dear Mr. Broadway

I am looking forward to watching you show why you belong with the White Sox next year instead of others who have shown nothing this season, please show us why you belong. Go get'em Tiger!

by Florida Jim on Sep 27, 2007 6:47 PM CDT reply actions

The best thing about this season ending?

No more Hawk and DJ for six months, hooray! They're bad enough when we're winning, on a losing team they're unbearable.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 27, 2007 7:11 PM CDT reply actions

totally unbearable

especially when DJ goes into "excuse" mode...

by The Wizard on Sep 27, 2007 7:13 PM CDT up reply actions

faces made for radio

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 27, 2007 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions

DJ only had a mere 8 bong hits for this pic

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 27, 2007 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions

LOL

Like an episode of "The Sorpranos". Or the supportng cast of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest".

Embrace the race to disgrace.

by winningugly on Sep 27, 2007 7:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Guess the attendance 2008

I think we've got a Tim Floyd Bulls thing going on at the Cell. I predict very minor dropoff next year to 2,400,000.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 27, 2007 7:25 PM CDT reply actions

did you know Lance has a nickname?

"Hollywood"
according to Singleton, his teammates think his "stuff" is more laid back ALS California, rather than "in your face" New Yorkish.
I swear I didn't make that up. He told the story to Farmeo on Sunday.

It should be called Bill Veeck Park!

by Chiburb on Sep 27, 2007 7:31 PM CDT reply actions

ala, not ALS

It should be called Bill Veeck Park!

by Chiburb on Sep 27, 2007 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions

Maybe they should do a takeoff

of "Lance", not "Broadway".

Because that nickname absolutely sucks.

Embrace the race to disgrace.

by winningugly on Sep 27, 2007 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions

I worry about ...

KW's thinking process if the Sox finish Sept. .500 + will he conclude that he has a great team and it was simply misfortune this season, or will he conclude like most of us that this team needs 7-10 players replaced. After waiting all season "for this to get hot" will .500 be considered "hot"?

by Florida Jim on Sep 27, 2007 7:35 PM CDT reply actions

Lance's jam

That was good pitching getting out of that- 2 on no out- jam and holding them scoreless. Good job! Only 7 more innings to go unless Ozzie is counting pitches.

by Florida Jim on Sep 27, 2007 7:47 PM CDT reply actions

Bad Juan...

Better Juan in 3 batters, please don't keep him, KW.

by Florida Jim on Sep 27, 2007 8:03 PM CDT reply actions

How's his stuff look?

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Sep 27, 2007 8:11 PM CDT reply actions

A lot of movement on everything

Command isn't too great, I can see why he walked 4.5 guys per 9 this season if tonight is a good indicator

by 3E8 on Sep 27, 2007 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions

All of his pitches move a LOT

but his fastball tops out at 87-88. KC hitters are swinging at a lot of pitches out of the strike zone to help him out. Deceptive stuff, they don't seem to have any idea what's coming.

Would have been nice to have seen more of him in September, especially would have liked to have seen him face the same team more than once to see how effective he is the second time around. I think he'll be in trouble if you lay off his stuff out of the strike zone.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 27, 2007 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions

His numbers in AAA say it all

He doesn't have the control to succeed in majors. Did he top out at 88? Gameday had him at 90 - 92 sometimes, but that doesn't mesh with the scouting report I read (which said his fastball sits at 86 MPH). Right now, I don't see how anyone could think he has either the control or stuff to succeed in the big leagues. I think it is possible his control could improve enough that he could pitch useful innings in the bigs. I don't know how likely that is.

That said, he certainly pitched a nice game tonight, whether or not the Royals helped him out.

by hitlesswonder on Sep 27, 2007 9:20 PM CDT up reply actions

I thought it was Phillips that sits

at 86? Still that's at least somewhat encouraging.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Sep 28, 2007 12:31 AM CDT up reply actions

When I saw him in Syracuse

He was around 88-91. Hit 92 a couple of times, hit 87 a couple of times.

Sox Machine

by Sox Machine on Sep 28, 2007 1:33 AM CDT up reply actions

That's actually encouraging

A 90 MPH fastball from a RHP may be fringey in the bigs, but it's much better than what I read...

by hitlesswonder on Sep 28, 2007 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions

where'd you read that?

i've never seen a report saying he was out of the 89-91 range. i'll know to discount whatever source that was in the future.

by larry on Sep 28, 2007 9:26 AM CDT up reply actions

FWIW

I heard Broadway say on the radio this morning that last night he mostly threw a cutter that he had just learned, and that it was the only pitch he could consistently throw for strikes?

Another potential Dr. Coop success story?

by Ryno on Sep 28, 2007 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions

It's

kind of amazing how we look to discredit a guy like Broadway so readily....I'm not particularly high on him , either, but at this point it appears he has a clue and should be taken every bit as seriously for a rotation spot next year along with Haeger, Floyd, and Danks.

by dantesox on Sep 28, 2007 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions

well

i'm not sure coop has had much to do with the cutter. he's been working on it all year down in charlotte. i'd give credit to juan nieves, if anyone, though lance still needs to work on it.

by larry on Sep 28, 2007 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions

I'm

kinda thinkin' Broadway could turn into a poor man's John Garland...so, in his prime, he may be a good 3 or 4 for 2-3 years.

by dantesox on Sep 28, 2007 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions

I think he's more like Contreras

He's got crazy stuff that moves so much that he has a hard time keeping it in the strike zone. Big difference is Contreras throws a lot harder.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 28, 2007 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions

Broadway last night

was pretty much the opposite of what I expected from him. I know he's been working on a two-seamer all year, but I expected a guy who hit his spots with a straight fastball, average change and above average curve.

I only saw an inning or two, but he had some great movement. He threw a pitch to a left-handed hitter (don't remember who) that reminded me of Greg Maddux' two-seamer -- i.e., the pitch that starts inside but sort of "drops" (don't know how else to describe it) onto the inside corner, rather than runs back (like Bartolo Colon, Josh Beckett or Scot Shields). Very encouraging stuff, but it's only one start -- and as Cheat as mentioned, if he's even halfway as good as his start was last night, he should be able to do better than a 4.00 ERA in AAA.

At the very least, however, I think Broadway should be considered for the long-man spot in the bullpen next year. If he has a successful year in that role, I'd consider him for the 5th spot in 2009.

by CWSKeith on Sep 28, 2007 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions

I think he'll drive you crazy in the bullpen

He's not the type who's going to come in and pound the strike zone, so he'll be walking patient batters. He's definitely not a guy you want to bring in with men on base.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 28, 2007 11:27 AM CDT up reply actions

He's a starter

So he really shouldn't be in the bullpen anyways - lets hopefully not start the B-Mac thing all over again. If we can't use him as a starter in the near future, then the opportunity should be taken to find some position talent.

by Brush Back on Sep 28, 2007 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions

You can't be serious, BB

You're comparing B-Mac -- a guy who absolutely flew through the minors, dominating every level (except AAA, and even there he showed dominance in the second half) -- to Lance Broadway, a guy who couldn't even manage a 4.50 ERA at Charlotte? That comparison doesn't even come close to passing the smell test.

One dominant major league start or not, I still think Broadway is behind Gio and Egbert as far as guys who I'd have competing for the 5th starter's spot (assuming one of Garland or Contreras is gone). I'd say he's on Floyd or Haeger's level.

And you bring up B-Mac as a notion against easing guys into the rotation, but I'll throw Buehrle and Santana right back your way. Taking a very vague look at things, Broadway seems like a guy who could be really useful in that 7th reliever, long-man role.

I'm glad Lance did what he did last night, but he's got to do a lot more than one start against the Royals.

by CWSKeith on Sep 28, 2007 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions

wrote mine while you were posting

dead on.

i think floyd based upon what he's done recently has moved himself to the head of the list of 5th starters, not to mention that he's out of options. it should be an "open" competition but i think the transactional reality comes into play and probably rightly so. i said it a while ago, and while i'm not as confident as i once was in it based upon how gavin is pitching now, i think floyd is the man out of ST with gio appearing in may/june to replace him.

my hope, of course, is that we move two starters and have both floyd and gio in the rotation to start. but the contreras situation complicates that hope.

by larry on Sep 28, 2007 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions

on mccarthy

i think this is one of those situations where perception didn't really match-up well to reality. people seem to think he sucked out of the pen. if you look at this peripherals, he was pretty decent. sure, he got banged up at some inopportune times and tossed a few too many longballs but he was basically fine.

the problem is that it seemed like he went out of his way to be disgruntled and make people aware of his feelings. and it looks like he got shipped out of town based upon that (deservedly, in my opinion, if that's the case). there's nothing wrong with wanting to start. and he did all the things he should have on the mound to be the 5th starter this year. but he also needed to realize that there were 5 pitchers better than him and, by taking the route guys like MB did with our team or santana did with the twins, a spot would open up eventually for him. accept your role and be happy to be making a big league salary instead of bussing around the eastern united states.

by larry on Sep 28, 2007 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions

i'm not sure those considerations

are particularly important with a long reliever.

by larry on Sep 28, 2007 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions

Ah, crap

Up 4-0. Need "The Arsonist" badly tonight.

Is Paulie's 30 HR season the worst 30 HR season (most useless) since Ron Santo? Or Dave Kingman? Or Bill Melton? And is his 87 RBI with those 30 HR the most inefficient since Rob Deer?

God, I'm getting pissed with this salary drive.

Embrace the race to disgrace.

by winningugly on Sep 27, 2007 8:11 PM CDT reply actions

we don't called him that dammit before he

does his job, ask larry!

ahh, it's useless tonight
donny lucy will go yard next...

by The Wizard on Sep 27, 2007 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions

OK, Kelly's Heroes on TMC

Sutherland saying "Too many negative waves" is cool. I've calmed down.

Embrace the race to disgrace.

by winningugly on Sep 27, 2007 8:13 PM CDT reply actions

Riske

Never realized he was having such a good season. Thank goodness we ditched him.

by Bull Pain on Sep 27, 2007 9:44 PM CDT reply actions

It's a good thing that our great GM...

didn't even offer Riske arbitration.

by SSH2005 on Sep 27, 2007 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions

There was a chance he might have accepted

...and then the Sox would have had to have Riske in the pen instead of Sisco, or Aardsma, or Masset, or Bukvich, or....wait what was the question again?

by hitlesswonder on Sep 27, 2007 11:09 PM CDT up reply actions

pedro alvarez sweepstakes (thursday final)

looking at Ls:

94 tb

91 kc, pit, bal

90 fla

89 sf, sox

88 hou, cin

87 was

tiebreaker: previous year's record
L: tb 101, kc 100, pit 95, bal 92, was 91, sf 85, fla 84, cin 82, hou 80, sox 72

kc at #2

we are going to spain... (ozzie's vacation place, pinata link)

by The Wizard on Sep 27, 2007 9:55 PM CDT reply actions

God Dammit

This is really retarded, everyone decides to be great when it can only hurt us. Fuck this, Im out till the first trade.

Who is the 5th pick...6th pick...7th...8th,9th...fuck it why bother?!

by omnipotent grab on Sep 27, 2007 11:25 PM CDT reply actions

yeah seriously.

i'm not going to not come here, but i'm not going to care about what happens with this team. i'm not sure how those two things mesh.

CHOO!! CHOO!!

by colintj on Sep 28, 2007 12:33 AM CDT reply actions

Stellar September performances.

Uribe    86 AB,     .314/.362/.558
Owens    89 AB,     .348/.408/.382
Cintron 33 AB, .364/.371/.576

You reap what you sow.

by ballyb on Sep 28, 2007 8:13 AM CDT reply actions

Which is awful because it might...

convince our GM to bring Uribe back, make Owens our starting CF'er, and bring back Cintron for the bench.

by SSH2005 on Sep 28, 2007 10:02 AM CDT up reply actions

Might?

You think might make him do that? Heck, Ozzie is already justifying Uribe with the ... there's no one out there available better ... statement.

by Brush Back on Sep 28, 2007 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions

See, I told you the 20hr & 70rbi

will be all they look at. Now they're rationalizing why they should bring guys like Uribe back.

The problem the Sox have is that they have no one in the minors who can replace any of these clowns. So if you cut Uribe, Owens, Cintron, Hall, MacDougal, Crede, Erstad etc. how are you going to replace them? We can't go out and buy 6-8 FAs, the budget is already committed to over $90mm in guaranteed contracts for just PK, JT, JD, MB, JG, JV, JC & AJ in 2008. The only assumption you can make on revenues for next year is that they'll be down, so you can jack the payroll budget. As it currently stands, we're stuck with this same cast of characters because that's about all we can afford.

Our strength is pitching, the only way to really make any major changes is to start dealing it - a LOT of it. I wouldn't be opposed to unloading pitchers, it'll be a lot more interesting than standing relatively pat. The team's going to suck next year anyway, why not?

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 28, 2007 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions

Who has the spreadsheet

of players with guaranteed contracts and $$$$??

You reap what you sow.

by ballyb on Sep 28, 2007 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions

I seeked, but cannot find

Whoever finds it please copy it and post it into a new diary. Based on the guaranteed money for 2008, KW really has his hands full this winter - he's definitely gonna earn his paycheck.

"I thought we were just playing bad, but, no, we're horseshit." - Oswaldo Guillen, Sr.

by ChicagoPete on Sep 28, 2007 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions

For the 8 referenced above.

$88.5 million - $6 or so (for Thome from Phillies)
= $82.5 million.

MacDougal $2 mil
Thornton $1 mil
Ozuna $1.25 mil
Hall $1.75 mil
Danks, Fields, Richar another $1.5 or so

= $90 mil for 15 players

That's without
1. Jenks, Crede ?????
AND
2. CFer, SS. ?????
AND
3. 3 more relievers
AND
4. 3 more utility players

Subtract a starters (about) $11 million (from trade) and we've got $79 million for 14 players. Assume $110 million payroll and we have $31 million for 11 players.

You reap what you sow.

by ballyb on Sep 28, 2007 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions