Ranking the 8 pitchers added

by The Cheat on Dec 26, 2006 11:58 PM CST in White Sox Minors

John Danks -- LHP | 6'2" | 190lbs. | 04/15/85
Upside: Frontline starter with good stuff, projectability.
Attrition: If he falls short of his ceiling, he still figures to be a league average innings eater.
Baseball America: "three average-to-plus pitches. His four-seam fastball sits at 90-92 mph and touches 94... curveball (rated best in Rangers system) can be a plus pitch when he commands it... easy delivery... changeup that at times is his best pitch"
Cheat: I believe I called Danks the Ryan Sweeney of pitching prospects back when his name was first brought up. And I loves me some Ryan Sweeney... Danks becomes the Sox current #1 prospect over Sweeney thanks to his upside as a frontline starter being greater than Sweeney's as an eventual corner outfielder.
Gio Gonzalez -- LHP | 5'11" | 195lbs. | 09/19/85
Upside: Number 2 or 3 starter
Attrition: Small frame makes him an increased injury risk. High BB and HR rates at AA in '05 are scary. Left-handed set-up man is future if he fails as a starter.
Baseball America: "generates easy velocity -- occasionally reaching 93-94 mph -- and spins a hard curveball as his out pitch... mixes in a quality changeup."
Cheat: I've been a big fan of Gio's ever since the Sox left their mic on too long during the draft conference call. An unknown voice was heard to say of the 18-year old HSer, "He could start at Kanny, right now."
Andy Sisco -- LHP | 6'10" | 270lbs. | 01/13/83
Upside: As a reliever, Sisco has the opportunity to be one of the best lefties in the game. As a starter, which would probably require a season in the minors, his frame and stuff make him an upper rotation possibility.
Attrition: Sisco has well known motivation/work ethic problem, so he's a big risk. He literally ate himself out of his winter league job.
Baseball America: "has a mid-90s fastball and a plus curveball, but his velocity has wavered from appearance to appearance"
Cheat: Kenny claimed that he had a good changeup or a splitter, remarking, "we don't know what it is." In '06, the Sox were all over Sisco, who was reportedly tipping his pitches. It sounds like he has a mechanical flaw that the Sox know they can fix. I'm very confident that they can at least convert Sisco into a very good reliever.
Nick Masset -- RHP | 6'4" | 190lbs. | 05/17/82
Upside: As a reliever, he has closer potential. As a starter, he's nothing more than back of the rotation filler.
Attrition: After what looked like a breakout season in '04, Masset regressed and was dropped from the Rangers 40-man roster in the '05 season. So he's already shown the ability to be very volitile. He's appeared very comfortable in his move to the pen though.
Baseball America: "plus fastball that has hit 98 mph at times... hard mid-80s curveball and also uses a changeup and cutter... more likely to be a setup man than closer, at least in the near-term."
Cheat: Kenny compared his stuff to Bobby Jenks, and he appears to be ticketed for the bullpen. He might be in the competition for 5th starter role, but I'd rather him stick to the pen where his added velocity increases his value.

Gavin Floyd -- RHP | 6'4" | 220lbs. | 01/27/83
Upside: He was once thought of as the Phillies next ace, but now figures to top out as nothing more than an average innings eater.
Attrition: Any more attrition here and Floyd will be a minor leaguer for the rest of his career.
Baseball America: lively 94 mph fastball and hard, 12-to-6 curveball... seemed to lack conviction in the pitches when he struggled, causing both to lose bite.
Cheat: I really had trouble placing Floyd on this list. He's had three years to conquer AAA/MLB, and hasn't succeeded in either. He's a classic "change of scenery" guy. Hopefully, Chicago is his kinda town.
David Aardsma -- RHP | 6'4" | 205lbs. | 12/27/81
Upside: Top flight set-up man
Attrition: Lack of secondary pitches and control have caused two organizations to give up on him.
Baseball America: "brings 93-97 mph heat... shows an above-average slider at times... pie-thrower mechanics have at times short-circuited his command and his velocity"
Cheat: Aardsma closed the season with a flourish, logging a 1.59 ERA over his last 22.2 innings. He needs to work on his secondary pitches, but if he keeps his mechanics straight, he'll be a good power-righty bullpen arm.
Jacob Rasner -- RHP | 6'4" | 195lbs. | 12/04/86
Upside: back-of-the-rotation starter
Attrition: He's got a long way to go, starting with posting an ERA below 5.
Baseball America: "Rangers' No. 30 prospect due to the sink and armside run his 90-92 mph fastball possesses... touches 94... slider and changeup are both raw."
Cheat: He's worth keeping an eye on, and ranks ahead of Vasquez because he still projects as a starter.
Carlos Vasquez -- LHP | 6'2" | 220lbs. | 12/06/82
Upside: LOOGY
Attrition: The Cubs had no intention of keeping him on their 40-man roster. If Vasquez doesn't perform, he'll be one of the names brought up every time the Sox have a crunch on their 40-man.
Baseball America: "touched 94 mph with his sinker, but usually pitches at 88-92."
Cheat: He'll be in the competition for LOOGY dooty in camp.

Tweet Comment 47 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

BTBS

Got their comments up on the trade last night:

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/12/25/2278/7428#readmore

Nothing really groundbreaking in terms of evidence cited one way or another. Still, it's a worthy read.

by madvillian on Dec 27, 2006 12:33 AM CST reply actions

not bad

but Mike Pindelski needs to do a little more research :-P last time I checked Nick Masset is a RHP.

by beautox on Dec 27, 2006 2:18 AM CST up reply actions

well done

but don't you think floyd has a higher upside?

AIM: shaftr01

XBL: TheMattressMan

by shaftr on Dec 27, 2006 8:50 AM CST reply actions

But I'm surprised at the pessimism re Floyd. He's only (soon to be) 24 which seems a little young to write off. If you're right though, maybe he'd look good in a package for a left fielder? Even a league-average LF?

And you thought things would be dead here 'till ST.

It should be called Bill Veeck Park!

by Chiburb on Dec 27, 2006 9:18 AM CST reply actions

Brady Clark

Brewers need bullpen help. His BA/OBP last 3 years:

.280/.385
.306/.372
.263/.348

AIM: shaftr01

XBL: TheMattressMan

by shaftr on Dec 27, 2006 9:22 AM CST up reply actions

Yeah

I think a more conventional list would have Sisco lower, based on risk, and Floyd higher.

I've seen enough of Sisco to know what he can do. I'm very confident the Sox can "fix" him.

With Floyd, it seems more like a confidence issue, like when Garland was getting rocked in the first half. I don't think it's a stuff issue, it's between his ears at this point. I'm much less confident that the Sox can get that part straightened out.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 27, 2006 11:56 AM CST up reply actions

BTW

Why is everyone referring to Gio as having a "small frame"? At 5'11, 195 he has a BMI that is 2.2 over what is considered an "ideal" weight. I bet he wore "husky pants" as a young lad...

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 2:26 PM CST up reply actions

As a matter of fact,

Fernando Valenzuela is listed in the B-R exactly 5'11, 195, same as lil' Gio. and I can't recall anyone complaining about his "frame" or durability.

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 2:31 PM CST up reply actions

well

he did have arm trouble. we can debate what the cause of that was.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 2:36 PM CST up reply actions

His average year

was 227 innings over his career - 9 of 10 consecutive years over

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 2:57 PM CST up reply actions

Dammit, premature post

To complete the thought - 9 of 10 years over 192 innings from 1981-1990. A workhorse.

I'm 5'9, so 5'11" is not "small" to me. And his girth is definitely not "small". why don't we just say he's "short by today's standards".

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 3:00 PM CST up reply actions

takes too long to write

sorry.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 3:06 PM CST up reply actions

didn't you get the memo?

if you're under six feet, you're small now.

seriously, you'll note that our 40 man roster contains only two under six feet - iguchi and ozuna. our pitchers probably average 6-4. he's got a small frame.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 2:33 PM CST up reply actions

I posted prematurely - you were fine

Lastly (promise) our new Numero Uno Guy (think Jack Palance in "Batman") Mr. Danks for the Memories-to-Be, is 3 inches taller but 5 lbs. lighter, and he's #1? I think 3 inches of height might be important in some endeavors (basketball, perverts) but not necessarily as a pitcher (how tall is Johan S.? He's 6', 195 lbs.).

Just challenging the "conventional wisdom". Gio's size is not quite "small" IMO.

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 3:59 PM CST up reply actions

"husky pants"

lol.......ug, I think your age is showing.

I reject your reality and substitute my own

by Air Raid Siren Stan on Dec 27, 2006 6:25 PM CST up reply actions

Brady Clark would be a sweet pickup

I would love that move.

by RME JICO on Dec 27, 2006 9:24 AM CST reply actions

it makes sense

They also have a surplus of OFers:

Jenkins/Mench/Gross/Hall/Hart/Clark

AIM: shaftr01

XBL: TheMattressMan

by shaftr on Dec 27, 2006 9:29 AM CST up reply actions

also

Article on Hardball times about teams #4 & #5 starters. The average #5 starter in baseball had a 6.24 ERA.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/how-good-is-your-4-starter/

AIM: shaftr01

XBL: TheMattressMan

by shaftr on Dec 27, 2006 9:41 AM CST reply actions

joe cowley has an article up with

coop's take on the guys that came and went

link here

HEY THIS IS JI
JIM THOME
THE PEORIA POUNDER

by The Wizard on Dec 27, 2006 10:22 AM CST reply actions

"their services are no longer needed"

so sentimental! coop is such a softie.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 10:27 AM CST up reply actions

I freaking LOVE Coop,

especially when he's toasted while being interviewed. "I'm not just kissing the GM's ass." How Shakespearean! We need more
Coops in baseball.

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 2:06 PM CST up reply actions

I really can't stand

When anyone refers to a pitcher as "An X game winner".

Freddy Garcia won 17 games last year because he had the 3rd best offense in baseball behind him.

Worse, I've seen way too many articles that mention Danks' W/L and ERA and then go no further. Of course, I shouldn't really be surprised or even upset by this ignorance in the mainstream media anymore, but still -- get a clue guys.

It just surprises me that people that get paid to write about baseball know so little about what makes a good player.

by madvillian on Dec 27, 2006 10:28 AM CST up reply actions

would you prefer win shares?

VORP? anytime a player is defined by one or two statistics, it's still imperfect to some degree or another. i mean, is a writer going to go into a long digression about how danks pitched in a hitter's league? we all know where to get better analysis - the trib and sun times are good for getting the thoughts of the players/coaches/management.

i think it would just be easier to refer to freddy as a proven above average major league pitcher - that's pretty much what needs to be replaced. of course, that doesn't tell anyone much either. these guys have word counts, you know.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 10:37 AM CST up reply actions

Well

I have some experience in the newspaper world and have considered going to J-School, I know these guys have word counts. I also know that they write for an audience that is largely ignorant.

I know that they face pressure from their editors to write stuff that people will understand.

But just once I'd like to see a writer go out on a small limb. For example, would it really be that hard to say:

"It's been suggested by more than a few experts that some stats are more important than others when judging young pitchers. By one measure of relative importance, a pitcher's ratio of strikeouts to walks, Brandon McCarthy was one of the best pitchers to come through the Sox minor league system in a long time. John Danks hasn't been able to replicate the success in this area that Brandon had in the minor leagues.

Although there are always mitigating factors to consider in any purely statistical analysis, Brandon is better than Danks by quite a bit using this measure.

It's just one reason Sox fans might be fighting more than an eggnog hangover this holiday season.

..."

by madvillian on Dec 27, 2006 10:54 AM CST up reply actions

Passive voice!

cardinal sin.

we're seeing some of these "new" stats infiltrate baseball writing. i see WHIP included all the time now. part of a journalist's job is to "educate" the audience. but going overboard doesn't help. i'd say writing that freddy is a 17 game winner probably gives as good a picture to your average reader (i.e., he's pretty good) as writing a number of other things. like i said, you go to these guys for one thing and go to others for analysis. you and i know they could probably do a slightly better job but, hey, we're not on the inside.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 11:21 AM CST up reply actions

I need a good editor

There is a guy that posts on the Bulls RealGM board that also writes for SI. One day we got into a long discussion on the board about the inner workings of sports writing for a major media outlet. He was quick to point out that many of these guys are just in their positions because it's their "time". That is, they've paid there dues with the company and when an opening comes up, they don't necessarily get it because they are great writers, but because that's how it's always been done: you stick with it long enough you'll get a better gig.

I have a couple of friends from college that are now sportswriters, one with the Detroit Free Press, and one with a podunk paper out in California. I know they realize that statistical analysis of sports is real and isn't going away. They are just slaving away as the local sports beat writers for now, but hopefully when it's there "turn", this new generation of writers can start the process of educating the readers about how baseball really works.

Who knows though, the newspapers might go the way of the dodo bird if they don't find a way to beat back the hounds of the electronic press.

by madvillian on Dec 27, 2006 11:38 AM CST up reply actions

yeah

you also have to keep in mind that these guys aren't immune to being just lazy. it's a heck of a lot easier to just cite wins and be done with it. it's also easier to not keep up with trends in analysis (like sabrmetrics) or, heck, even in journalism itself. of course, doing that is likely to make them go the way of the dodo.

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 12:02 PM CST up reply actions

But...

Newspapers are by and large the electronic press. They're the largest news-gathering organizations around, and blogs aren't much without 'em.

Newspapers are sinking because they're cutting from the bottom relentlessly, trying to keep stockholders happy by maintaining profit margins that are higher than companies in other fields would ever expect.

Sox Machine

by Sox Machine on Dec 27, 2006 7:32 PM CST up reply actions

Newspapers are dying

because they are not providing relevant, interesting information/opinions on topical issues and thus not capturing the (young) eyeballs necessary to keep it interesting or necessary. We are an Immediate Gratification culture, and the once-a-day news is old hat, bro. Plus, the local interest is waning, as national syndication is the way of the world (to save $, which is not necessarily evil from a competitive viewpoint).

It is not all about the margin. It's about what's relevant, and they are not as relevant. If they employ columnists that write interesting shit people pay for it. They have lost touch with the audience, same as the traditional TV media (ther Big 3 stations).

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 7:41 PM CST up reply actions

And why is the information suffering?

Because work forces are being slashed left and right. The reader isn't the goal anymore -- and while it's probably way too idealistic to say that the reader was the ultimate goal (it's always about $$$), there were at least enough staffers in the newsroom with enough different ideas to serve a greater amount of people.

Now it's all top-down stuff. The industry has become an oligarchy, and companies are forcing papers to conform. You get fewer original and inspired ideas, and instead are replacing quality content with "hip" re-designs that make the paper less readable and marginalizes the content to sound-bites because many editors think the only way to lure younger readers in is to treat them like they have ADD.

Sox Machine

by Sox Machine on Dec 27, 2006 11:06 PM CST up reply actions

Many of them do...

Attention span of a gnat. Not just young readers - most folks don't have time. Plus, print news is too opinionated - everyone has an obvious agenda, yes?

by winningugly on Dec 28, 2006 5:16 AM CST up reply actions

Agendas are overplayed, I think.

The local/national news is losing viewership to O'Reilly, Olbermann, Stewart and Colbert. The New York Post experienced an increase in circulation recently, even though they're so right-wing that their style is to call the Illinois senator "Barack Hussein Obama," just to point out what his middle name is.

Papers used to be a lot more radical in viewpoint. When the market was at its peak, you'd have a Democrat paper, a Republican paper, a Socialist paper, etc. I don't think there's much of a problem with newspapers' politics, there are just a whole lot more people with the ability to squawk about it.

The attention span thing might be a problem. But then again, book sales are tremendous. Bill Simmons can write 10,000 words and his readership is college-aged. Granted, newspapers shouldn't just run doctoral papers, but considering its greatest advantage over other media is 1) newsgathering staff size, and 2) depth, that's what they should be taking advantage of.

Sox Machine

by Sox Machine on Dec 28, 2006 8:57 AM CST up reply actions

Phooey

Like any technique in any art, it's only a sin if you do it accidentally. Once you know the technique and its appropriate use, there's nothing wrong with a little passive voice.

"Polish--mustard and onions." "Any pop?"

by DepotMan on Dec 27, 2006 3:47 PM CST up reply actions

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Aren't the papers playing to an eighth-grade level? Too high-brow, bro.

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 2:08 PM CST up reply actions

Joe Morgan

Whenever something like the "X game winner" comes up, I can't help of thinking about Joe Morgan and how shocked I am by his stance that wins are what matter out of a pitcher, above ERA and all else. If I recall correctly, he feels a pitcher's job is to keep his team in games and get wins. Seems to me that if a guy who gives up less runs will just as easily keep his team in games and win games than a guy who gives up more runs. Hmmm...

Viking God, Bears Fan

by Toonderstrook on Dec 27, 2006 10:49 AM CST up reply actions

I think his point is that...

pitchers need to be 'gamers' that don't give up runs when it matters most.

by defensive indifference on Dec 27, 2006 3:00 PM CST up reply actions

How many pitchers do you know

with consistently low ERAs in the bigs who aren't "gamers"?

Viking God, Bears Fan

by Toonderstrook on Dec 27, 2006 5:09 PM CST up reply actions

i take it

that you're an avid reader of the fine media criticism blog:

http://firejoemorgan.blogspot.com/

not all about morgan but he's certainly a poster child for all that's wrong with sports "journalism."

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 7:01 PM CST up reply actions

I've actually not heard of that.

I take ol' Chicken Wing with enough of a grain of salt to laugh at his foibles.

Viking God, Bears Fan

by Toonderstrook on Dec 27, 2006 8:15 PM CST up reply actions

You legal-types

are getting WAY too cozy.

In a non-related note, bad year for ex-Giants. Chris Brown ("Tin Man", as I recall, because he had no heart) died today in a fire. 2nd infielder w/ Giants pedigree to lose it this offseason.

Ack.

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 8:33 PM CST up reply actions

Watch yourself...

...or us legal types might hang your small frame by your husky pants on a coathook.

Viking God, Bears Fan

by Toonderstrook on Dec 27, 2006 8:42 PM CST up reply actions

Hey, get a room!

:-)

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 9:08 PM CST up reply actions

nice

by larry on Dec 27, 2006 9:15 PM CST up reply actions

White Sox and Alex Cintron agree on one-year contr

[Whitesox.com]

CHICAGO -- The Chicago White Sox have agreed to terms on a one-year, $1.9-million contract with infielder Alex Cintron, avoiding arbitration. ...
Joe Crede is the White Sox lone remaining arbitration eligible player.

HEY THIS IS JI
JIM THOME
THE PEORIA POUNDER

by The Wizard on Dec 27, 2006 12:11 PM CST reply actions

Wow, that is a steal for Cintron

Cheat estimated his 2007 salary at $2.25. That is a 350k savings which equals a league minimum player.

Another great (re)signing for KW.

by RME JICO on Dec 27, 2006 2:38 PM CST up reply actions

I laughed:

"Sisco has well known motivation/work ethic problem, so he's a big risk. He literally ate himself out of his winter league job."

by defensive indifference on Dec 27, 2006 3:01 PM CST reply actions

Fat Andy!

Hey, hey, hey! A Cosby kid! Lutheran General/Parkside has a great overeaters program - Elton John and a few of the Chicago Bears passed through those doors a LONG time ago (mid-'80s). (I worked within the system back then.)

Coop has his work cut out for him. "We admitted we were powerless over Ding Dongs, that our lives had become unmanageable...."

"I'm Andy, and I'm a glutton."

"Hi, Andy!"

by winningugly on Dec 27, 2006 3:09 PM CST up reply actions