He'd be right behind Willie Harris if I were ranking them.

Oh, they have to make an All Star game to be worth it. In that case, I'm glad you think Bryan LaHair and Jay Clam were better players than Eloy Jimenez and Dylan Cease are.

The trade is the definition of a great trade. Move a successful veteran for young guys, and the young guys develop into impact major league players. Regardless as to the team success or lack there of for the White Sox, getting good young players for aging older players is a great trade. Cease will finish in the top 2 of Cy Young voting, and Jimenez has done nothing but hit (.838 OPS) his whole career.

What is strange is for all this shitting on Quintana by the Sox fans, if the Sox would have signed Quintana as a free agent this offseason you're probably looking at a first place White Sox team at this point instead of wasting 20+ starts on Keuchel, Velasquez, etc. Quintana would have the 3rd best ERA on the Sox staff.

He'd be right behind Willie Harris if I were ranking them.

I always liked Quintana. I had many a “is Q better than Sale arguments” in my day.

He was good for us. I don't know what the Cubs did to fuck him up. Maybe he didn't respect 60.6

He was good for us. I don't know what the Cubs did to fuck him up. Maybe he didn't respect 60.6

The trade is the definition of a great trade. Move a successful veteran for young guys, and the young guys develop into impact major league players. Regardless as to the team success or lack there of for the White Sox, getting good young players for aging older players is a great trade. Cease will finish in the top 2 of Cy Young voting, and Jimenez has done nothing but hit (.838 OPS) his whole career.

How could you of seen him as a top of the rotation starter when everyone else say him as a 2 pitch pitcher debating if he was a bullpen guy? He made the step in the right direction in the Sox system.

He was and is a .500 pitcher. On a good team he'll be a little better. On a bad team he'll be a little worse. He usually gets to the point where the game is on the line and he can't make a pitch he needs to make. That's why all his numbers are similar to or better than Mark Buehrle's except the one that really counts.

Overall I agree, but Buehrle had way better control and accuracy than Quintana. 162 average Quaintana walks a hell of a lot more than Buehrle...that's pretty significant.

The only valid comp between Buerhle and Quintana is that they were both Left handed starting pitchers and both played for the White Sox.

Quintana is a great example, though supporting your argument on Wins / Losses.

Where Buerhle would roll a guy up to escape from a tough seventh inning and end up winning 2-1, Quintana would issue his second walk of the game and the next guy would hit one off the wall and he'd lose 3-2 and his fans would complain about a "lack of run support."

That's my point. I don't really believe Buehrle had better control than Quintana in general. Quintana had impeccable control, but he always got to that point in the game where he needed to make a pitch and suddenly he couldn't hit the spot. And that manifests itself in the .7 per 9 difference in their walk rates.

Where Buerhle would roll a guy up to escape from a tough seventh inning and end up winning 2-1, Quintana would issue his second walk of the game and the next guy would hit one off the wall and he'd lose 3-2 and his fans would complain about a "lack of run support."

Quintana had MANY games where he gave up 1 or 2 runs, and the Sox scored 1 or 0 runs. Those games were blended with the handful of stinkers he had in the minds of people who didn't want to like him. In reality, Quintana gave up 3 or fewer runs in the overwhelming majority of his outings with the Sox. The Sox scored 2 or fewer runs in most of his losses.

Quintana had MANY games where he gave up 1 or 2 runs, and the Sox scored 1 or 0 runs. Those games were blended with the handful of stinkers he had in the minds of people who didn't want to like him. In reality, Quintana gave up 3 or fewer runs in the overwhelming majority of his outings with the Sox. The Sox scored 2 or fewer runs in most of his losses.

This again

Q was 50-54 as a Sox starter. He would win if the Sox scored a bunch of runs, or if everything went perfectly and every play was made and there was zero that went wrong.

He would lose more often than not. Other than a few games vs the Brewers in 2017, this has been the case for every team he has played on.

This is one of the better trades is Sox history, case closed.

You just described a pitcher that does NOT have impeccable control...hence the walks.

got some stats to back all that up ?

So basically he faced a lot of pitchers who were better than he was on the days he pitched.

It's not always black and white. The Sox had a shit offense.

It's not always black and white. The Sox had a shit offense.

In 2012 Quintana was 6-6 and the Sox were fourth in runs scored.
In 2013 Quintana was 9-7 and the Sox were last in runs scored.
In 2014 Quintana was 9-11 and the Sox were ninth in runs scored (about league average).
In 2015 Quintana was 9-10 and the Sox were last in runs scored.
In 2012 Quintana was 13-12 and the Sox were eleventh in runs scored.

He seems to post about the same record regardless of what kind of offense his team has.

I don't know what the overall team RS has to do with Quintana's every 5th day RS. A quick check on his best year, 2016, and his offense scored 22 runs in his 12 losses. You say he couldn't make the pitch he needed to make in high leverage situations. Ok, I hear you. But this pitcher vs pitcher thing, I'm never going to agree, because it's nonsense.

Of course it makes sense.

Overall run scoring is a measure of a team's offense. I'm blowing up the baseless argument that Poor Jose Quintana has somehow had worse offenses over the course of his 285 start career than a typical pitcher. Surely, you're not suggesting that Quintana is "unlucky" over almost 300 career starts. Or that his teams refuse to hit on the days he is pitching.

Baseball at its core is a competition between pitchers. Think of it this way. (I don't follow the NFL so I don't really know who is supposed to be good.) Let's say the Chiefs are the best team. The most important guy on that team is Mahomes. Now let's say Mahomes can only start every fourth game. So the Chiefs have a rotation of quarterbacks. Now the Chiefs may only be the best team once every four games.

The starting pitchers are BY FAR the two most important players in any baseball game. And the guy facing Jose Quintana is obviously as good or better than Quintana right around half the time he takes the mound. That's the very definition of "mediocre."

There's no such thing as "run support." All "run support" is is the lesser number of runs allowed by the pitcher(s) facing Quintana than Quintana is allowing himself.

I won't because he's elite. Q wasn't elite. He was pretty good in his time with us.