ptatc

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.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 17, 2010 -> 09:20 AM) This reminds me of that meaningless college basketball stat, where I hear that the reason 2010 Duke shouldn't beat 2010 UNC is because 1956 Duke had a great record against them. We're talking about completely different players under completely different circumstances, run by completely different people, in a completely different time. That's right. This pitching staff is more talented than the one that lead the 2005 to the World Series.

QUOTE (kitekrazy @ May 17, 2010 -> 10:37 AM) Someone once suggested, fire Ozzie and make AJ a player manager. No one would be able to tolerate AJ as a manger. No one likes him now and they aren't supposed to listen to him.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ May 16, 2010 -> 09:28 PM) Salty = Rube Baker. Trade for him and get him a subscription to Playboy and we're good.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ May 5, 2010 -> 08:14 PM) I think this might be drugs. Believe it or not, from what I understand he doesn't do drugs or really drink. Maybe he should start.

QUOTE (WCSox @ May 4, 2010 -> 08:27 PM) No, it's not. Mark routinely threw 89-91 five years ago. Now his four-seamer is more like 87-89. The year after the WS, it was more like 86. That's what age and heavy use do to a pitcher's arm. And while I won't argue that Mark's going to tear his labrum or rotator cuff any time soon, the risk obviously increases with increased use. And even if we accept the premise that Mark is the next Tom Glavine and his arm troubles won't manifest until his 40's, his arm strength and durability will, at best, diminish slightly as he approaches his mid-30s. Since it's unlikely that his command will improve significantly over that time (it can't get much better than it already is), it's difficult for me to believe that he's going to pitch any better than he has over the past three years. So we're looking at either more of the average of the past few years or a slight decline. And that's a best-case scenario. I think this is the scenario we are seeing now. There is currently something different in his delivery. After watching the tape of his last start again I think it's his arm slot. It looks lower, which is common in someone with shoulder issues no matter how slight.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 3, 2010 -> 02:57 PM) Disagree about Buehrle, simply because he's been horrible for a month now after Opening Day. Still, he'll turn it around for 2-3 months and be the Buehrle (dependable version) we all know and love, and that every opposing GM would love to have on their roster, IF IF IF they could afford him. I do agree with one aspect, the Cardinals have been much more budget-conscious and have gone with the "diamond in the rough" theory of acquiring starters since overspending from 1995-2005 in this area. There is something different in his motion this year. I can't quite figure it out yet. I think the decreased innings in spring wasn't about resting him for the season. I think it was about lingering shoulder issues from last year.

QUOTE (G&T @ May 4, 2010 -> 06:06 AM) I think you have it easy if Taylor Swift is the problem. I agree. The Taylor Swift concert I took my daughter to was tolerable. Some of the others were Demi Lovato, Miley Cyrus, etc. and they were unbearable

QUOTE (hammerhead johnson @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 04:37 PM) I think the dude that's hitting .197 as a member of the White Sox while making an outrageous amount of money can use a confidence boost. Get this guy a set routine, coddle him, vote for him as best CF on the team (this is an important one), put him in the 5th slot behind Konerko and leave him there. He could potentially have a monster year. Ozzie is coddling him by not putting him in the greater pressure situation of hitting higher in the order. He is protecting Rios by hitting him lower in the order and building his confidence.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 03:31 PM) Can I just say how proud I am of being on a Sox message board, that allows debate, and doesn't resort to screaming, "OZZIE PLAYED MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL!!! YOU HAVEN'T!!! YOU CAN'T QUESTION HIM!!!" when the legitimacy of a managerial move is called into question? This board is great, and one of the best things that ever could have happened for my White Sox fandom. there is validity to the point of the people on this board not being in the cluhouse and knowing the players. Maybe Jones is down and needs a confidence boost so he is putting him the situation to see how he does. I'm not saying this is the case but Ozzie will do this for his relief pitchers and young players alot. ozzie may not always be the best x and o manager but he knows players and gives them plenty of room to excel or sink themselves. He basically allows the players to determine if they should be with the team or play. He will do the same with Jones and Kotsay.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Apr 8, 2010 -> 03:12 PM) I agree Rios should never be moved from center. The boobirds will be out tonight if Jones makes some obvious blunder in cf. It would be funny in a way cause Rios got booed some last year. it's part of Ozzie's plan to semi-rest his players. Rios is still playing defense but at a less physically demanding position than CF.

Great pics. Thanks for getting one of me in there. Your pics are so good you can see me over PK right shoulder in the pic where he is rounding 3rd after the homer.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 24, 2010 -> 02:29 AM) Are you insinuating what I think that you're insinuating about Pujols? Let's just call it an educated guess and leave it at that.