iamshack

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:54 PM) This slump cant last forever. I just wish they would have given the kids a shot, at least they have different mojo. If I was Ozzie, I would tell Jermaine he's sitting and give him some movie passes and say I don't even want to see you in the dugout this weekend.

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:34 PM) Why the f*** do I still watch these games and let myself get emotionally invested by the 5th inning and then get pissed? It's just your sense of reason. As I said earlier, I gave up on these bums last week, but even if you watch just as the most casual fan, their sheer ineptness and incompetence is impossible to watch and not get angry about. I'm not sure I have ever felt this disappointed and angry with a White Sox team before. Even after we got swept in the dome late last year.

I would laugh, but these guys don't deserve laughs. They deserve to have s*** thrown at them when they come home. Who thinks they will get booed when they come back home Friday night?

QUOTE (zenryan @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:24 PM) I'm so glad that this will be the last time I see this team on tv this year. I sort of wish that applied to our White Sox as well.

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:12 PM) Isn't it on WGN today? Oh crap, I forgot. Bad call by the umpire there.

QUOTE (jphat007 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:10 PM) What the hell are we gonna do about our offense in the offseason? Just hope everyone hits better next year? We're going to have to, for a large part. But I would LOVE to let Dye walk, trade Konerko, bring Scottie back, pray the Quentin comes back to some semblance of who he was in 2008, hope that with a new season Rios shows some f***ing life, let Flowers get his feet wet as C and DH, and hopefully sign a FA or make a trade or two.

I actually came to grips with us not doing anything this year after that second game in Boston last week. But honestly, this is enough to make anyone crazy. The level of incompetence is beyond ridiculous. I'm not sure I have ever seen an entire team look so horrendous and pathetic all at once. And having to watch it on the Twins broadcast makes it double the fun.

Great approach, Alexei. f***ing Brilliant.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:45 AM) I wonder if ozzie ever gets held accountable for this lack of effort. Honestly, what is he supposed to do? He has a team with a middle of the order full of veterans. They probably don't react much to Ozzie swearing at them at this point. This is on the players. If we had a team of young guys who were moping around like this, then I could understand a little better. But this is a veteran team that just doesn't gel. These personalities need to be disbanded.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:41 AM) I actually didn't see the play, as I haven't sat down to watch a game in probably 10 days. I was more talking about basic philosophies on a hit and run, or what it sounded like in that situation. You never just run with your head down, "praying for the best" Be happy. You probably have avoided shaving the 6-8 years off your life that those of us who have been watching have lost.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:31 PM) No, it's about right and wrong. Podsednik got hung out to dry. You run tenitivily to protect yourself. When Podsednik takes off, and Beckham makes contact, a baserunner is going to pick up the ball, see where it goes. You don't just put your head down and run. If Beckham hits a lazy pop up to LF in that situation, if Podsednik has his head up, he can make it back to first, no damage done. In your situation, he is just going to bust his ass to 2nd, no idea where the ball is, and eventually be thrown out trying to get back to first. Well, I don't necessarily agree with this either. Podsednik should have been running a bit harder. If a ball is hit to LF, he is going to get back to first regardless of whether he is running tentatively or not. Also, Podsednik should be a bit more advanced in terms of base stealing and hitting and running than your average player. There is not a huge difference between Scott just going on his own and Scott going on a hit and run. Would anyone have been surprised had he gone on his own there? The problem comes in when the runner gets no jump on the hit and run. He actually got a negative jump, as he was headed back to first base on first move. He then ran only because he felt obligated to because of the sign. So it was a combination of two bad things happening at once - Gordon sees Scottie break back to 1st, then doesn't swing (not sure if it was because of what Scottie did or because he just missed the sign), then Scottie runs because he saw the sign and feels obligated to run despite the horrible jump. Bottom line, it was just botched all-around.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:29 PM) Assuming Pods has a good read on the pitcher, he's going from when the pitcher hits the windup. Caution exists prior to the pitch, after that you have to hope the other guy does his thing. Did you actually watch the play?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:25 PM) What? He got caught stealing. Scott can't just prance in to second, he needs to run flat-out. It's hit and run, not run tentatively, and hope like hell the other guy does his job Umm, yeah, it is "hope like hell the other guy does his job." Thus the HIT part of "hit and run."

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:21 PM) He still got caught. No excuse not to run under the expectation that Gordon might miss. It's not that simple. It's not a pitch he would have normally run on as he initially thought Duensing was throwing over to first. He only went after he knew the ball was going to the plate and that was WITH the expectation that Beckham would at least freaking swing.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:19 PM) booted Jeesh Nix, don't dive or anything. Wouldn't want to get a rash on that elbow...

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.

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.

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...

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:09 AM) Yes, because if our chances have been helped by anything this year it's been by bunting and having Pods get picked off trying to steal a base. 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. Again, this is not directed at you, Thunderbolt, but there is a chasm that exists on Soxtalk between those that will present extreme value of the home run and the OBP and all that, and those that champion the manufacturing of runs through stealing bases, sacrificing, etc. Just because a poster does not advocate one of these positions does not mean he, by default, advocates the opposite extreme. What we are going for here is something in the middle. I think most of us realize that.

QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 09:46 AM) Seems like we've been hearing 'younger and more athletic' for a while now. My only concern is: Can "younger and more athletic" hit?

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 10:37 AM) I think thats the first time Phillips said something baseball related that I agreed with I know it is fashionable to bash basically every sports talking-head on television, but are you guys watching the same ESPN that I am? Of all the yahoos on ESPN and other networks that carry and comment on baseball, you're going to include Steve Phillips on the list of idiot commentators? I don't get that. I have always thought he was insightful, bright and well-spoken, especially as compared to his peers like Joe Morgan and John Kruk. I dunno, I've always felt like he is undeserving of so much criticism and venom.

Are we going to get Flowers today?

Steve Phillips has always been a fan of the Chicago White Sox - at least the Chicago White Sox as run by Kenny Williams. Had a chance to meet Mr. Phillips back in December, and he was just as bright and engaging as he is on tv. I did forget to ask him how annoying Joe Morgan is, however.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Sep 1, 2009 -> 11:56 PM) Actually I disagree with that a bit. Logic games is only about 25% of the LSAT. In fact, it's my best section of the test. Usually I miss at most two questions on the sections, many times getting them all. I need to continue to get better at the LR and RC. But if all goes well on test day, I could do pretty well. I know it is only part of the test, silly. I took the test. Most people do fairly well on the other parts, but the people who can master the LG seem to be the ones that get the best scores. It's usually what separates the men from the boys...

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Sep 1, 2009 -> 11:04 PM) If the Dodgers don't offer him arb then any team is free to sign him without relinquishing a pick. If he's offered arb and declines then we'd have to give up our 2nd round pick in order to sign him, since we're going to have a top 15 pick we wouldn't have to give up a 1st rounder (the top 15 picks in the draft are protected). If they offer him arb and he accepts then they'll have to pay him $10M+ to come off the bench next year (or find a trade partner). Ok, that is what I thought. So basically, we will be free to sign him without relinquishing a pick, unless Ned makes another, well, Ned-like move this offseason...