ptatc

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 11, 2010 -> 08:05 AM) While I wouldn't be sad to see both quit/fired, if KW goes and Ozzie stays, that would be worst case scenario. It baffles me that certain people can't see how out of control Guillen and his family have become. But hey, winning a World Series ring gives you immunity I guess. Yes, it does give you more latitude. JR lived with winning 3 playoff titles in 20 years. While this situation is a soap opera, it has been comparatively very successful. I'm sure he will do all he can to try to keep it together. However, the Sox have had the same GM and manager for a long period of time compared to most teams so it will come to an end in the not too distant future.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jun 10, 2010 -> 08:00 PM) Beckham with a double 2 games in a row. Nice to see. I also noticed that everyone in the lineup is hitting over .200. I don't think that's happened in a while!

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 9, 2010 -> 05:51 PM) JAVY VAZQUEZ and Kaz Tadano Ouch, that's below the belt.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Jun 8, 2010 -> 02:18 PM) The red sox have a deep system because they spend money on the draft. When we figure that out, we will replenish our system and become a force again. Our division is figuring this out. Maybe at some point someone in our organization will as well. We all know the Sox operate on a given budget and this won't change. The dilemma is that if you add money to the draft budget you need to take it fom elsewhere. Do you take 6 million off the MLB salary budget? Personally I would but then you will hear the complaints about not spending money on the MLB team.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jun 8, 2010 -> 01:16 PM) Not sure why we had to take a 1B with a big swing, questionable contact skills, and below average speed in the 5th round. Guys like that are a dime a dozen. Baseball America thought he'd go somewhere between rounds 7-10. I do like guys with power who walk as much as they K though.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 8, 2010 -> 01:10 PM) I didn't think that post required green. I know. It wasn't necessarily directed at you, as we usually agree on the topic. More just a point thrown out there to some of the others.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 8, 2010 -> 12:40 PM) But, but they're billionaires. They're in bankruptcy because they choose to be. they're also businessmen for whom the baseball team is not their only focus. They didn't buy the baseball team to blow all thier money on and go broke. They're in bankruptcy because if the teams don't generate large profits and if you don't inject outside money in, they are bankrupt divisions. Just because they have the money it doesn't mean they should put it all into a sports team which won't generate the revenue that one of their others businesses will. By the way, this only applies to a team that is primarily owned by one individual.

QUOTE (BaseballNick @ Jun 6, 2010 -> 09:07 PM) My point is the organization needs talent, not projects. But isn't the definition of a project the "high risk-high reward" player for which many are asking? If you don't want projects, you want the safe pick.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jun 5, 2010 -> 02:39 AM) I was really happy to see that Danks went 2-5 but then i saw he had two k's and i stopped caring. He's very close to falling off the map completely. Also, Dayan is turning into a really, good hitter. One bad year (it's not even a full year yet.) at a new level is no reason to totally write someone off. that being said a high strikeout rate is a reason for concern at any level of the minors. It doesn't usually bode well for his future production.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 11:57 AM) And the way we've become obsessed with taking on reclamation projects and putting faith in guys who haven't done s*** for years. It worked in 2005. But that was an outlier. That's no way to build towards a sustained run of success. It'd be nice to go into a season not praying for bounce back or career years from half the roster. when you put as much money into the pitching staff as the Sox did, they had to make the lineup this way. The bottom line is the Sox thought the starting pitching would carry the team and the undermanned lineup would score enough runs to win. We all knew the lineup wasn't going to very good thus I'm not really to disappointed in them. The starting is the first last and biggest disappointment and the cause of this team's poor performance.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jun 1, 2010 -> 08:22 AM) I hope Nix gets legit playing time over the next 1.5 weeks. He has received too inconsistent playing time this year to make any sound judgments on his performance. I really think if he gets starter's at-bats, he would post these type of numbers over a full year: .260, 25 HR, 75 RBI with good SB numbers. With alot of K's and mediocre to poor defense.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 28, 2010 -> 09:07 PM) I remember watching Ryan do all of those drills in Old Comiskey Park. He seemed to turn out all right. Yeah but that's like saying everyone is physically capable of doing what Jordan did. Studies have shown that the way Nolan Ryan threw is one of the worst way to throw. The "pull string" curve ball alone should have ripped his elbow apart. Ryan was a physical anomaly with terrible mechanics. It worked for him but I wouldn't teach it to anyone. Besides, he was barely a .500 pitcher for his career. He had great stats but usually pitched just well enough to lose.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 30, 2010 -> 11:37 AM) He said he doesn't want to stay where he isn't wanted, and he wouldn't block a trade. I never remember him saying he didn't want to be here. There is a big difference there. This is what I've heard. It's not that he doesn't want to be here but knows the Sox won't re-sign him.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 28, 2010 -> 09:48 AM) He needs to play long toss, I've totally bought into the Rangers way of pitching. Much more long toss from greater distances. Be careful with that. The Rangers have a reputation of beating up their pitchers pretty badly. Also, with Nolan Ryan taking be ready for the Tom House/ Larry Rothschild theory of long toss, towel drills and throwing a football to improve your pitching, ie. Mark Prior.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 26, 2010 -> 07:40 PM) Shingo Takatsu was 8 for 9 in save opps. with lower ERA than Jenks when he was replaced and eventually released. Its not micro managing. You consider yourself lucky he hasn't cost you more games and replace him in this critical role. Its a pre-emptive move. Why wait for the coming disaster if you have a chance to avoid it? Its not like you are firing him. He gets a different role and instead of just being annointed closer based on what he did 2 or 3 years ago he has to earn it again. The White Sox are getting to the point they cannot lose games they are supposed to win. You can't just say the White Sox won today, so everyone did fine. Tomorrow is a different day. Jenks has had too many days when he's been absolutely terrible to be considered a top closer right now. The White Sox have tons of options in their bullpen. Its time to make a change. Bobby will have a new role. If he shows he's up for a return to the closer's role eventually great, but right now, he has to give up the 9th. I do agree a win is a win. I don't think Jenks' implosion will have any carry over, just like I thought Jose Paniagua's appearance in 2003 in a White Sox win, wasn't the thing that cost the White Sox a playoff spot like some believe. I don't disagree with the concept however Shingo didn't have a track record multiple good years in the majors. Bobby does. I know he hasn't pitched very well. However, I don't think he has lost his stuff and until he repeatedly loses games I'm going to give him the chance to correct himself. I'm not going to take him out of the closers role until he loses games not just gives up runs.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 26, 2010 -> 05:08 PM) Give Santos the shot. Keep Thornton as the 8th inning guy. I would be afraid of injuring his arm with the lack of times he's had back to back work and other factors that go along with closing. However I would spend the season conditioning him and give him a chance when he's ready.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 26, 2010 -> 05:20 PM) Thornton's entered in 12 high leverage situations this year and gave the opponent the lead 3 times. Jenks has entered 9 high leverage situations this year and gave the opponent the lead 3 times. When Jenks enters a game he typically has a much higher margin for error than Thornton whether it be a 3 run lead or the fact that he's starting the inning and doesn't have to deal with inherited runners. You can't just go based off how many games a reliever has "blown" because the 2 roles are not created equal. Matt Thornton actually leads our relievers in WPA meaning over the course of the season he has added to our win probability more than any other reliever, almost always your leader will be your closer just because there's so much more WPA+ to be gained by finishing the game than getting a few outs in the 7th and the high volume of high leverage situations a top of the line set-up man is required to pitch. Oddly enough though Thornton is at 0.77 (12th in the AL) and Jenks is at -0.47. Thornton actually finished 5th amongst all AL relievers (closers included) last year which just speaks to his incredible success rate in high leverage situations. I disagree. When it really comes down to it the only thing that matters is winning. Granted if Bobby keeps up his performances the odds are that he will lose more games. I couldn't care less about the stats he puts up as long as they win. I know if had this discussion about starting pitchers as well but all I care about is the win. It's like managing people. Do you give your group a goal and then micromanage them and check on the progress hourly or do you let them do what they need to do to accomplish the goal. I for one don't care how they do it as long as the job gets done. Again, if he starts losing the games the situation changes.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ May 26, 2010 -> 02:32 PM) Hahahaha, rotoworld with the first use of it... That's like working in a restaurant and sending out a dish an hour after it was ordered burnt to a crisp. But atleast it got the job done! Except in both cases you pay for results. The dish was burnt and the job wasn't done. Bobby is paid to preserve wins. He did that. Thornton stats look better than Bobby's but he has cost the Sox more games by giving up leads. It wasn't pretty but he still did what he was supposed to do.

I don't think we are going to alot of player movement from KW. He likes his young players and will keep them. The only trading you will see is: AJ and PK because they will be free agents and he was going to let them go anyway. Jones if he is playing well enough to get the Sox anything. Jenks because KW really likes Santos. Garcia if he continues to do well. Pena, Linebrink, Vizquel should be gone but no one will want them. He won't trade Danks, Floyd isn't doing well enough with the contract to trade Peavy is being paid far too much with his current performance I really can't see him wanting to trade anyone else so there maybe 3-4 trades at the most.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 20, 2010 -> 09:35 AM) So if we had a laid back manager you're saying our team might be losing even more? Not necessarily. Every manager has his own way to attempt to get players to play their best. Ozzie for the most part has been effective at it. A "firery" manager is not necessarily better than a "laid back" one. different styles can both be effective if used properly.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 19, 2010 -> 11:58 PM) I imagine it’s hard to relax when you’re 7.5 games back, and your manager’s liable to go berserk in the press at any moment. This is the same argument as chemistry. Chemistry is great and players don’t press when you’re winning, we’re not winning. Therefore, we’re pressing? It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. We had some fun personalities in 2008 too, that changed rather quickly after Toronto when these players realized they’d have to shut up and then put up. This is not the same arguement as chemistry. Chemistry implies getting along with each other and interpersonal interactions. Playing confident and relaxed is an internal aspect within the player. The player needs to be confident and relaxed to perform in baseball. If you're tense or hesitant due to internalized pressure, your swing or defense will be off and you won't perform up to your capabilities. Also the manager going berserk is a good thing. Ozzie isn't the best in game manager however he knows players and what they need. More often than not his rants come when the team is doing poorly and the media focus on what a goof Ozzie is and the players do not get as many questions about why they are doing poorly. Look at today's papers. There are articles about the game but the ancillary articles are on Ozzie and KW debated what to do about the team with trades, why the team should stay the way it is etc. There is much on the individual players.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 20, 2010 -> 06:32 AM) You simply cannot build a team around pitching and have a bad defensive team. It won't work. It has never worked. Until the White Sox put some importance on defense and getting on base we will get the annual "I believe in the talent" speeches from KW signalling dissappointing results. Absolutely true. But the problem is the individual players aren't bad defensive players (with the exception of Teahen) but they seem to take turns screwing up.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 19, 2010 -> 05:53 PM) That's not how it works. A lot of teams have a hell of a lot of fun with each other, that doesn't bridge any meaningful talent gap. However, it's talented players like CQ, Beckham, Floyd who are performing poorly. In many cases relaxing a little and not pressing will help. Baseball is a game where increased intensity and getting too fired up can hurt a player. Sometimes that's what players need and that's why Ozzie continues to talk about "nobody being the man" and putting too much pressure on themselves.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 18, 2010 -> 11:51 AM) Biggest difference between 2005 and this team is that I feel like this team has lost more games when tied or leading heading into the 7th inning than the 2005 team did all season. Having one of the greatest bullpens ever makes any manager look good and hides the offensive struggles a team might have. Agreed.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 18, 2010 -> 10:28 AM) And the offense is much, much worse. Currently. Going into 2005 and even early in the year people were complaining about an offense that lost power with Carlos lee and Mags and were replaced with Carl Everett at DH and a no hit speedster in Pods. That coupled with a 3B in Crede who couldn't hit, an injury prone just signed Dye and a 2B in Iguchi who no one had seen play couldn't possibly produce enough runs. The 2010 isn't going to win the World Series with the holes the pitching and offense have dug but there is evey reason to believe the offense will improve from a .227 batting average.