SoxFan562004 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:21 AM) I think most people go to polar opposites when they talk about lineup construction. The reaction to our issues with offense is that we need to abandon power hitters completely. its really about a balanced lineup. You need a power core in the middle of the lineup to provide high OBP, power, and the ability to drive in runs wrapped around with more pure hitters. Guys who can make solid contact, don't strike out and can hit doubles are the pure hitters that can augment your lineup. Having 9 guys who swing for the fences is dumb, as is having 9 singles hitters. I agree 100%, that's why I'm shocked that the Twins have said they're going to stay the path with the type of players they develop when moving into their new park. Now, having M & M in the middle of the line-up obviously help, but they are going to lose an advantage IMO. Just so I'm being clear, I agree with you SSI. It has to be a mix, I just go crazy when posters focus so much on the myth of 2005 "small/Ozzie ball". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:21 AM) I think most people go to polar opposites when they talk about lineup construction. The reaction to our issues with offense is that we need to abandon power hitters completely. its really about a balanced lineup. You need a power core in the middle of the lineup to provide high OBP, power, and the ability to drive in runs wrapped around with more pure hitters. Guys who can make solid contact, don't strike out and can hit doubles are the pure hitters that can augment your lineup. Having 9 guys who swing for the fences is dumb, as is having 9 singles hitters. Agreed, the problem with out lineup the past few years was missing a couple guys like Beckham who are going to hit line drives to put around the heart of the order of Dye, Thome, and Konerko (except for this year where the entire team just stopped hitting). But people would always complain about those guys rather than the fact our 1+2 hitters have done a terrible job getting on base or that the bottom of the order was a disaster. With a few exceptions, every good lineup is built around sluggers in the middle of the order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:24 AM) Worked just fine in 2005. And worked in 2006 from an offensive standpoint, it was just too bad the pitching staff sucked. Softball team s*** got us to the playoffs last year. I think 05' was more of a balanced line up though. They didn't have to wait on the 3 run shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:28 AM) I think 05' was more of a balanced line up though. They didn't have to wait on the 3 run shot. that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Defense people...defense. This is what we need. I doesn't matter if you hit 3-run bombs if you are giving back 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:29 AM) that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far That's a great point as well... the pitching was so good then... not so much now. You can't get away with the waiting on the 3 run homers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxPride56 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:23 AM) come on Oz, you're 7 back and in third place. Why not throw out a lineup like.. 1. Pods-LF 2. Beckham- SS 3. Quentin- RF 4. Konerko- 1B 5. Dye- DH 6. Ramirez- 2B 7. Rios- CF 8. Flowers- C 9. Fields- 3B Come on now, that would make sense. Why would Ozzie do anything that makes sense?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:29 AM) that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far Pitching and timely HRs won the White Sox the WS that year. The Ozzie Ball myth really needs to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) That's a great point as well... the pitching was so good then... not so much now. You can't get away with the waiting on the 3 run homers. I will echo an ealier post that stresses defense. The sox are 2nd or 3rd in the AL in ERA last time I looked. The SP has been very good lately and the pen not so much. I will give the pen a little excuse that they have had zero margin for error since the offense has failed to give them any breathing room, but again, the pen needs improvement. As I've said since they got Peavy, coming into ST with Floyd/Peavy/MB/Danks as their top 4 gives them a great base to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeavyTime Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 1b-Beckham 2b-Dye 3b-Rios ss-Quentin cf-ramirez lf-getz rf-aj c-paulie lets spice things up a bit....it would at least be exciting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 You'd think the law of averages would give us one win in the dome. It's ridiculous that we are probably going down again today. The Twinks have charged past us in the standings. We're as far behind them now as we were Detroit when this road disaster started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Only way I could get thru this game was to make a bet that the Sox would score over 4.5 runs today. Pretty dumb but it'll make this game more fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) Did anybody see Stoney in the beginning of the WGN broadcast say "hopefully the sox offense can come alive today" followed by a smirk like as to say yeah right,anyone see it?classic Edited September 2, 2009 by MexSoxFan#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 Heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Bacon didn't swing on an obvious hit and run... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 this no name on the mound has nothing,most likely will shut us down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:16 PM) T-Bolt, I don't mean to make an example of you, but you just happen to be the latest one to make a remark like this, so I want to just point something out. There is a position in the middle of these two extremes. Just by going away from the "softball-type hitting, wait for the three-run homer approach" does not mean you go to the "smallball/smartball/ozzieball method of throwing away outs by attempting only to move runners over by sacrificing all the time. There IS a happy medium. And real baseball teams actually play within that medium. I just think it’s irrational to think that we’d get any better if we steal and bunt more. There’s no reason not to play to the park, the Cell is a home-run hitting park, our hitters job needs to be to get On-base, so we can knock them in. The idea isn’t to advance someone to second in exchange for an out, it’s to drive him in by hitting the s*** out of the ball. I keep hearing about how it takes 4 singles to knock our old core in, but there’s also an equal opportunity for four straight bombs, a double, a single, anything. I’m an Earl Weaver kind of guy, we need to maximize run scoring opportunities, spazzing out on the bases and giving away outs isn’t the way to do that. Ideally, we have faster base runners that can score on singles, but an equal ideal is that these guys can hit bombs and play good as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 Two weeks ago a (typical) inning like that would have pissed me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 You would think after like 5000 major league ab's that Paulie would figure out how to avoid giving in to the pitcher and grounding into that double play a bit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 wouldn't mind seeing a few pitches thrown inside today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Hah, Pods got caught stealing again. Small ball for the win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:16 PM) I just think it’s irrational to think that we’d get any better if we steal and bunt more. There’s no reason not to play to the park, the Cell is a home-run hitting park, our hitters job needs to be to get On-base, so we can knock them in. The idea isn’t to advance someone to second in exchange for an out, it’s to drive him in by hitting the s*** out of the ball. I keep hearing about how it takes 4 singles to knock our old core in, but there’s also an equal opportunity for four straight bombs, a double, a single, anything. I’m an Earl Weaver kind of guy, we need to maximize run scoring opportunities, spazzing out on the bases and giving away outs isn’t the way to do that. Ideally, we have faster base runners that can score on singles, but an equal ideal is that these guys can hit bombs and play good as well. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm trying to point out that there are alternatives to the Earl Weaver approach that do not include stealing and bunting all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 01:18 PM) Hah, Pods got caught stealing again. Small ball for the win. Beckham missed the hit and run. But yeah, it doesn't even bother me anymore though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 booted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:18 PM) Hah, Pods got caught stealing again. Small ball for the win. He didn't. Beckham missed the sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts