Pants Rowland

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Oct 27, 2006 -> 10:00 AM) Joe torre almost got fired for losing three straight to these guys. they did sweep Oakland. Can't explain how the Cardinals the world series. But they will be one of the absolute worst World Series winners ever. Worst record but they have a lot of talent and have stepped up when it counted most. You make it through 162 games with some significant injuries (Pujols and Mulder), overcome terrible defeats like the Sox handed them earlier this year, and still have enough confidence and talent to win it all, then my hat is off to you, no matter what the record. Did the White Sox not deserve it last year because they did not have to play the Yankees or Cardinals? How about the fact that they played poorly the last couple months? I do not think so. Some pitchers will win by one or two runs every game no matter how big a lead you give them (see Jack McDowell). Others find a way to lose 1-0 and 2-1 games and look like tough luck pitchers (see Mike Sirotka and Matt Clement). If you get yourself into the playoffs, you have a good shot of winning it all, no matter how poor your regular season record. The Cardinals almost didn't make it, but they found a way to stave off their competitors. The slate is wiped clean then and true champions rise to the occassion.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Oct 20, 2006 -> 11:45 AM) Dont forget Rooney... Please do not remind me. I was just starting to forget the worst offseason move of all.

QUOTE(Molto @ Oct 20, 2006 -> 11:23 AM) Problem #1 with current first-round format: You play 162 games and then are a couple games away from it all being for nothing. In football you play 16 games a season, so one-game elimination works. In the NBA, they play 82 games, so even a 5-game first-round makes sense. But in baseball, you can go out and have a 100-win season and then lose three out of five to an 80-win team. There is really no point in having 162-game schedule then. Problem #2: Every team plays 162 games with a five-man rotation, the fourth and fifth guy coming into play roughly 40 percent of the time. But come first-round of the playoffs, who cares about them two? As long as you have a couple really good starters, you're good to go. Once again, why play so many games during the season then? Problem #3: The home-field advantage, in some cases, is pointless. If there is a team that won 10-15 more games than their opponent during the season, does one game at home really make that much of a difference? In a short-season, yes. Fewer games, fewer road games, but when you are talking about 81 games on the road, one game in a five-game series doesn't mean anything. Problem is, all you can do with a five-game series is go 4-to-1, and that would completely screw a team in certain situations (Like the Yanks/Tigers series this year). The current system could definitely use some tweaking. First, I'd shorten the season though. You bring up some excellent points. Any thoughts on a compromise where there are two wild card teams in each league who play each other in a one game playoff to face the team with the best record of the division winners? There is always a day off before the postseason starts so there is no lengthening of the season for anyone. This will help lessen the advantage a team with a great 1-2-3 punch might have even though they are not nearly as balanced at the back of the rotation over 162 games. If one game is not enough, make the play-in a three game series on three consecutive days followed by an off day where the two division winners not facing the wild card winner would play their first game. Then the wild card winner would have to start their 4th starter or choose to go on short rest. This would reward the division winners with extra rest and an extra bonus to the team with the best record. Overall, however, I think most wild card teams have performed so well because they typically come from the toughest division in the league and are already in playoff mode when the postseason starts. Odds are they have been in a dogfight with several other teams and realize how close they were to elimination. The Tigers this year and the Sox (although not the WC) last year are both great examples of this fact.

Don't forget the other ex-Sox players, products and draftees. Detroit Ordonez Grilli St. Louis Weaver (drafted but never signed) Miles (traded for Uribe) Duncan? (wasn't he once the White Sox bat boy?)

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 5, 2006 -> 05:17 PM) There are reasons why every thread I close is being closed. Not all of them are disclosed. Sometimes its to protect people from themselves. Sometimes its because its being bumped up for little to no reason. In this case, it was both. Did you really read Che by John Anderson? That was long but a great read. Can someone now close this topic for going down the path of Marxism?

I have followed baseball closely for roughly 25 years. The Yankees had some excellent teams in the late 90's through 2000. However, to me there was no WS champion more impressive than the 1984 Detroit Tigers. They were the 1985 Bears of baseball. One truly dominant season that still stands alone despite the lack of a dynasty. Couldn't agree more on Koufax and Drysdale. I may sound like a Tiger fan here, but I think Lolich and McClain may have a nice claim for 1-2 punch as well. Didn't the Mets have a heck of a rotation from top to bottom in 1969, too? It is amazing how the cable era has turned evey modern champion into the "Best Ever".

QUOTE(Balance @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 12:33 PM) Word. I am here for you, brother.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 11:05 AM) Yes, I'm quite aware that the pitching allowed us to win one-run ballgames. The point was that the offense last year, whether it be one-run or multiple runs, was clutch. And here's the key point multi-dimensional. As somebody pointed out, we could kill you with homers or we could kill you with a walked-in final run. Either way, we could get the job done. BTW I never posted any numbers about how many games we were shut out--that was somebody else. Now, to shoot down the myth that it's all the pitching. Really? Because for the last month and a half at least I've seen killer starts by Contreras, Garland and yes, Javy--more than a few--completely wasted because the offense couldn't score either enough runs or any at all. Even Buehrle in his second half woes would only give up 3, 4 runs in some games and we'd STILL lose. So while the pitching certainly was not 2005, there were MORE than a few times second half where they did their job but were left out to dry by our impotent, feast-or-famine offense. Granted, the bullpen got into the act of blowing it all in the last months as well, but again: our offense this year was ONE DIMENSIONAL. Sluggers in the heart of the order surrounded by weak hitters. As Bill Melton pointed out last night, quite astutely, our offense was getting killed by pitchers who had good offspeed stuff or just throwing "junk" because with out kind of pull, full-body slugger-type hitters, they couldn't hit crap. Whereas Minnesota (his words not mine) has dangerous "slap" type hitters up and down their lineup. Which brings us back to the point: slap hitting. Smallball. MIA in 2006. In one word....BALANCE. This team did not have it all year, including when they were pounding the world in the first half.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) Unfortunately, I don't think the numbers in terms of our offense agree with your conclusion that the offense was effective last year. I haven't yet added the last 2 weeks to my database, and I'm not sure it's worth it because the team has clearly quit and that's a bit of a statistical anomaly...but I've been keeping a database of the final scores of each game for the last 3 seasons in order to look at the offensive performance...and you know what I've found? At least until this week...under any way that I sort the numbers....this year's offense was significantly better. It's not just a matter of them averaging more runs because they score more in a few games but have more shutouts or anything like that...this year's offense was better all around. Last year, we scored 0-1 runs 7 times. Through the end of August 2006, the Sox scored 0-1 runs 3 times. The 2005 Sox scored 3 runs or less 42 times. Through the end of August 2006, the Sox scored 3 runs or less only 17 times. That's 20 games through the first 133 games of the season where the White Sox scored less than 4 runs...as compared to nearly 50 in 2005. The 2005 Sox scored 4 runs or more 81 times. The 2006 Sox scored 4 runs or more 113 times in that first 133 games. The offense was not just better this year. Under every means of sorting I can find...under every way of grouping I can find, the offense was better and more consistent the entire year until they finally gave up this last week or so. I looked through again and again to see if I could find some trend that would make 2005 look more favorable under any circumstances...and it's just not there. The offense gave more runs per game, gave fewer games with very little runs, and did so consistently throughout the entire year. Have you tracked plays that should have been made but did not show up on the stat sheet as errors? To me, that is the most telling non-statistic of 2006. I do believe the 2006 pitching staff from top to bottom was inferior to the 2005 staff. However, poor defense, particulary in the outfield, played a significant part in the inflated ERA. From your breakdown, it is evident Sox have enough offense to trade for defensive and bullpen help. The Twins not only have one of the best organizations at teaching fundamentals from the ground up, but they also know that they will never be the most talented team on the field. Thus, they emphasize defense and balance through the lineup and it has resulted in a consistency rivaled by only a few elite organizations in baaseball.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Sep 27, 2006 -> 09:04 AM) I'd do that so fast .................... I would do it faster than that. I think B-Mac could be good, but I think a lack of leadoff hitter and poor outfield defense hurt the Sox significantly this year. Crawford would help the Sox both offensively and defensively. However, I would still try to convince TB that Garcia or Vzquez would be a better fit for them and then pick up some of the salary at the same time.

QUOTE(Balance @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 05:26 PM) I don't know if I can bring myself to root for any of the AL playoff teams. I loathe the Twins, I dislike most of the Tigers' players, and I loathe the A's almost as much as I loathe the Twins. In fact, I dislike the Yankees the least of the bunch! This is not to say that I'll root for them, either. I don't want my father to disown me. But still, I'd almost rather see them win than any of the other teams. I think I'm going to pull for the NL team, although we know that's a futile gesture. Every once in a while I find that I dislike an AL team so much that I am indifferent to the result of the World Series. In years past, it was typically the Indians I had trouble cheering on. This year, unless Detroit makes it (I really do not mind them), I will be doing something other than watching the World Series.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 03:27 PM) Santana got hit hard his only start against NY this year. With that lineup, it doesn't matter who the Twinks throw at them. NY is going to be damned tough to beat in the postseason and will run right over minny. I want the Twinks eliminated first round because Nick Punto and Jason Tyner are pussies. I can't stand Yankee fans. If the A's win it's another 5 years of hearing about freakin' Moneyball. I REALLY don't like DET but I would like seeing another team from the ALC win the championship....so I've got to root for DET. That is the scenario I like best. I would not mind seeing Detroit win it all this year. The only drawback is the seasoning a long playoff run will give them for next year. However, it did not seem to help the Sox too much this year.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Sep 25, 2006 -> 01:39 PM) i think Id rather have the Twins win then the Yankees I would probably be with you if it weren't for that damned dome...and Johan Santana.

As much as they play the game right, I hate the Twins and their high school fans. I would like nothing more than to see them bounced in the ALDS. Barring a miracle pushing the Sox to the postseason, I would like nothing more than the Sox smacking the Twins around up at the roller dome and keeping them from taking the division. The Twins are brutal against the Yankees. Setting them up for a three and out would be nice considering how many times they have broken the Sox hearts in 4 of the last 5 seasons.

The 2006 CWS were deficient in the bullpen and outfield/infield defense off the bench from the start of the season. KW bulldozed through the offseason assembling a juggernaut offense and slowly traded away the bullpen, which was already in trouble with bone spurs in politte's shoulder and Hermanson's highly suspect back going into spring training. As Anderson failed to hit, Guillen was forced to use incompetent replacements in CF and a lot of balls got down and into the gaps (see Mack in center in the finale against the Cubs). Uribe and Podsednik also were terrible at the plate during this time and slumped in the field (see Uribe's inability to turn a DP in the same game against the Cubs for example). This combination took a toll on the starters who slumped horribly going into the break and carried it through to mid-August. Meanwhile, KW frantically tried to deal for arms for the pen. He did a good job but the bullpen never had a chance to define roles and gel. Add it all up and you have a ton of impressive statistics from the offense and decent numbers from the rotation overall but still no playoffs. I am sorry, but a poor bullpen will negate all the hard work that the starters and line-up put in over 6 or 7 innings. That results in way too many lost games and overuse of those who are effective. The team may not be "injured" but it is definitely worn out. Wait til next year.

At risk of becoming Al Gore here laying things out for a first grader, it only makes sense that criticism of BA would be the focus of the interview. Ozzie was replying to a "what if" question regarding keeping Frank Thomas and not trading for Thome. The guy they traded for Thome was Rowand who was replaced by BA. He is not going to fault a veteran like Thome, no matter how much he has sucked in the 2nd half. BA is going to catch the brunt here. He is a rookie and has had some terrible stretches at the plate. No matter how we spin Rowand's offensive numbers, overall he drove in some key runs and had a better approach at the plate, despite how the numbers compare on paper. To me it comes down to the fact that Rowand, Uribe, and Podsednik played significant roles on a World Champion. They are veterans who carry a special place in the hearts of many fans. They are not going to catch the amount of heat from Guillen as BA would this year. Further, Ozzie has called out Uribe and Podsednik on multiple occassions throughout the season anyway. This was just not the forum for it.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 10:46 PM) I honestly will not be able to watch a single minute of the playoffs this year. It's just different, I know it's stupid but whatever. This team has basically killed my love for baseball this year and I just won't be able to watch the playoffs. I understand even though I will probably watch some games. It has been a tough season to stomach. Just put on the Sox Pride DVD and live in denial through October.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 10:40 PM) So am I the only one who won't watch a single game of the playoffs this year? What did you do in October the past 87 years prior to 2005? I still love baseball and will always be sad after the last out of the season, no matter who wins the title. I just can't get as excited about sports played during the cold parts of the year.

Maybe the fact that there have only been 15 or so perfect games on record in MLB history also has something to do with it? Just a crazy thought.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Sep 14, 2006 -> 11:27 AM) Who is this Mariotti guy? Never heard of him. Tell me what Morrissey and Downey had to say. No Morrissey today. Downey was in usual form talking about the Mannings that play for the Bears. I won't acknowledge the Sun-Times columnist and am also totally against superstitions. However, I was in Phoenix at the airport and checked the score on my Blackberry. I noticed Freddy had a no-no and then did some digging to see he was also perfect through 6 at the time. I was pretty careful not to mention it to any of my fellow travelers on the way to Chicago. To me it is more than superstition. It is kind of a fun tradition to avoid mentioning perfection or no hits. As much as I dislike Farmer, I love how careful he is to send the message without using the words. Hawk typically avoids jinxing players while DJ seems to do it deliberately to get under Hawk's skin. Hawk probably just couldn't contain himself yesterday. I was torn since I really don't care for Garcia but I thought it would be great for a Sox player to pull it off. I am certain even some Angels fans at the game were hoping to see history.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Sep 7, 2006 -> 10:56 AM) Look, no matter what you say, there is no way in hell that the 2005 team wins the World Series without Ozzie Guillen. I don't care what kind of spin you want to put on this. >>> Back to the point. Ozzie Guillen's vision of rebuilding the White Sox was the reason the team was even put in a position to win the division last year. It was Ozzie Guillen who demanded that Kenny reconstruct the roster around what he wanted - with more speed at the top of the lineup. Sure, KW went along with it, and made the moves, but as I understand it, the impetus was from Ozzie. And even though Podsednik basically sucks now, he was the catalyst of last year's lineup and a true leadoff hitter is the reason why we were able to succeed with players like Carl Everett and a one-legged Frank Thomas DHing. It was that style of play that won. Not Carlos Lee and a bunch of right handed beefcakes taking batting practice. Love him or hate him now, Ozzie Guillen is the reason why we got Freddy Garcia to re-sign in Chicago. Without Freddy, we don't win the series last year. It was under Ozzie Guillen's managing that Garland was able to finally live up to his potential, something that Jerry Manuel was never able to have faith in. It was Ozzie Guillen who kept the team's motivation up. Whatever that means, you cannot deny that the team last year NEVER quit. There are several more reasons why Guillen was invaluable. Suddenly now, he's the worst manager to ever don a uniform and people are calling for his head. Yes, he has made some atrocious decisions this year. But to discount his impact last season is ludicrous. Absurdly ludicrous. He may not last even one more season in Chicago, but I will never, ever for a second believe anything else but that Ozzie Guillen was one of the most important reasons the White Sox ever won the World Series. Everything had to go right for us to pull that off. And that includes the manager being the manager. It honestly sickens me to read some of these posts. I agree with just about everything you said. Ozzie was great last year. He was the reason they cut the cord on a lot of talented popular players and added a more balance and diverse attack. The results were amazing and the memories lasting. I am sure it is tough for the manager to keep his edge just as it is for the players after a title year. The fact that no one Ozzie puts on the mound has been consistent all year compounds the problem. I disagree with his use of the position players sometimes but I also think that KW regressed in adding so much offense in the off-season. He went back a bit to the formula that did not work in prior years rather than adding more speed and defense as Ozzie requested. I personally feel that KW should be blamed more than Ozzie at times. However, this year Ozzie seems to have lost something. There is a massive chip on his shoulder and a need to fight anyone who challenges him in any way. He reminds me at times of a child in trouble compounding the issue by not quitting when he is ahead. He calls out members of the media, players on other teams, coaches on other teams, and even his own players. He does it in a very public manner and is typically very insensitive in his choice of words. I am not even thinking about the Marriotti incident as much as his daily routine. He can be very funny and candid at times but he can also be crude and abrasive. I question whether these are typical Ozzie "dumb like a fox" tactics where he is motivating using words he does not really mean. Rather, I think he has let his success from last year go to his head to the point that he feels infallible. I think Ozzie is a smart baseball man and already has shown more than a flash of greatness as a manager. I also think this team is lacking in balance, especially in outfield defense. Overall, though, this year has been a disappointment not just from a player standpoint, but also a managerial standpoint. I agree that Ozzie will always be treasured for helping the White Sox realize a dream. I just hope he is not our version of Mike Ditka.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Sep 7, 2006 -> 10:56 AM) Look, no matter what you say, there is no way in hell that the 2005 team wins the World Series without Ozzie Guillen. I don't care what kind of spin you want to put on this. >>> Back to the point. Ozzie Guillen's vision of rebuilding the White Sox was the reason the team was even put in a position to win the division last year. It was Ozzie Guillen who demanded that Kenny reconstruct the roster around what he wanted - with more speed at the top of the lineup. Sure, KW went along with it, and made the moves, but as I understand it, the impetus was from Ozzie. And even though Podsednik basically sucks now, he was the catalyst of last year's lineup and a true leadoff hitter is the reason why we were able to succeed with players like Carl Everett and a one-legged Frank Thomas DHing. It was that style of play that won. Not Carlos Lee and a bunch of right handed beefcakes taking batting practice. Love him or hate him now, Ozzie Guillen is the reason why we got Freddy Garcia to re-sign in Chicago. Without Freddy, we don't win the series last year. It was under Ozzie Guillen's managing that Garland was able to finally live up to his potential, something that Jerry Manuel was never able to have faith in. It was Ozzie Guillen who kept the team's motivation up. Whatever that means, you cannot deny that the team last year NEVER quit. There are several more reasons why Guillen was invaluable. Suddenly now, he's the worst manager to ever don a uniform and people are calling for his head. Yes, he has made some atrocious decisions this year. But to discount his impact last season is ludicrous. Absurdly ludicrous. He may not last even one more season in Chicago, but I will never, ever for a second believe anything else but that Ozzie Guillen was one of the most important reasons the White Sox ever won the World Series. Everything had to go right for us to pull that off. And that includes the manager being the manager. It honestly sickens me to read some of these posts. I agree with just about everything you said. Ozzie was great last year. He was the reason they cut the cord on a lot of talented popular players and added a more balance and diverse attack. The results were amazing and the memories lasting. I am sure it is tough for the manager to keep his edge just as it is for the players after a title year. The fact that no one Ozzie puts on the mound has been consistent all year compounds the problem. I disagree with his use of the position players sometimes but I also think that KW regressed in adding so much offense in the off-season. He went back a bit to the formula that did not work in prior years rather than adding more speed and defense as Ozzie requested. I personally feel that KW should be blamed more than Ozzie at times. However, this year Ozzie seems to have lost something. There is a massive chip on his shoulder and a need to fight anyone who challenges him in any way. He reminds me at times of a child in trouble compounding the issue by not quitting when he is ahead. He calls out members of the media, players on other teams, coaches on other teams, and even his own players. He does it in a very public manner and is typically very insensitive in his choice of words. I am not even thinking about the Marriotti incident as much as his daily routine. He can be very funny and candid at times but he can also be crude and abrasive. I question whether these are typical Ozzie "dumb like a fox" tactics where he is motivating using words he does not really mean. Rather, I think he has let his success from last year go to his head to the point that he feels infallible. I think Ozzie is a smart baseball man and already has shown more than a flash of greatness as a manager. I also think this team is lacking in balance, especially in outfield defense. Overall, though, this year has been a disappointment not just from a player standpoint, but also a managerial standpoint. I agree that Ozzie will always be treasured for helping the White Sox realize a dream. I just hope he is not our version of Mike Ditka.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 6, 2006 -> 10:06 AM) We still have the best manager in Chicago history, Ozzie Guillen... I liked Pants Rowland a little better.

QUOTE(stretchstretch @ Sep 4, 2006 -> 12:19 PM) Simply put, we do not have the pitching this year to negate lackluster offensive outings, errors, and managerial mistakes Couldn't agree with you more. However, I do think the pitching has been hurt by the lack of defense in CF and LF this year. I also think the rotation hurt themselves by not working to hold runners better. Like you said, it all comes down to pitching. However, I think there are many intangibles that have played a role in several losses this year. Williams gave away a little too much speed and defense to compensate for the offensive woes from last year. The balance is not there on many levels. They may be ultimately squeak into the playoffs and possibly win the whole thing, but I do not see it happening. They have been unable to put a solid run of victories together since early in the first half. Without that ability, the playoffs are going to be very difficult. The team that looks like it is set for a sustained run, even without the top rotation is the Yankees. I see them facing either the Mets or possibly the wild card team if it is someone up and coming like the Marlins.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 1, 2006 -> 03:21 PM) Wasn't Harry Caray adored and wasn't he a homer? I'm sorry, any White Sox fan who b****es about Hawk being a homer is really just looking for things to complain about. John Rooney was a homer and he just gets praised and praised and praised. I for one, would rather listen to a guy calling a game that wants the same results I do. Some of Hawk's calls this year have been priceless. The way he belts out Joe Crede when Crede does something spectacular is so good it has to be geniune. Hawk does go overboard with the umpires sometimes, and goes out of his way on occassion not to rip the Sox, but he's also been very candid, and wants the Sox to win just as bad as any of us do. If Bill Simmons doesn't like it, he doesn't have to go out of his way to listen to it. Rooney was the best announcer in Chicago. His departure has made this season even tougher for me as I can no longer handle listening to games on the radio. This forces me to watch baseball on TV on the weekend and listen to Hawk and DJ, who are remarkably better than Farmer/Singleton but still need to STFU and call the game rather than continue their slow abysmal descent down memory lane. Ultimately, the yardwork does not get done since I am inside watching TV rather than outside working and listening to the game. Then I get a lousy dinner and no lovin' because my wife is made at me for neglecting the grass. Before I know it I am back at work Monday all because the Score is to daggum cheap to pay the man what he was worth. Did I mention how much I hate Ed Farmer?