elgonzo4sox

QUOTE (hi8is @ Aug 23, 2010 -> 04:38 PM) i'll eat some asshole if the twins lose 2 of 3 against seattle. Between now and October 3, we need to make up 2 games versus the Twins if we sweep them at the Cell in September, or 4 games if we take 2 of 3. It's that straightforward, and eminently doable if we play a little bit better. If we played a little bit better over the past 6 game roadtrip, we'd be in first place right now. Things can turn around quickly.

QUOTE (spiderman @ Aug 23, 2010 -> 03:56 PM) The White Sox are probably looking at 3-3 in the next 6 games (2-1 vs Baltimore, 1-2 vs NY), but that's an optimistic viewpoint given the struggles of the bullpen to hold any lead, and the lack of clutch hitting. We beat NYY 3 of 4 at the Cell last year. Maybe the Yankees spend too much time sampling the night life on Rush Street when they come to Chicago - that's one element of our home field advantage.

QUOTE (stretchstretch @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 11:51 PM) I hear you man, it literally is just that close. But you have to wonder why those season determining single pitches, or seeing eye singles ALWAYS seem to go their way. It's not like year after year they kick us out of the race over a few days by blowouts, it's those agonizing "if one thing happened" scenarios. I think those one thing in a team's favor comes from confidence, and WRT to the Sox they have that edge just knowing. Same way you see Boston fans on their feet when their team is down 7 in the 9th, the team and fans simply know a charge is going to be made. I cannot recall the last time I EVER saw a Boston home game where they went down quietly on a few ground balls and a strikeout. No matter the situation, they find a way to threaten..... MN I swear between them and Boston there cannot be any other teams in baseball even close to scoring more runs at home after the 6th inning, it's uncanny.... I think you make a good point about confidence. Sox hitters are failing in the clutch now - 1 for 10 in Sunday's game is bad. That's why Ozzie is so frustrated: he takes a lot of grief for his smallball approach and giving up outs, but he did manage to create 10 RISP opportunities in Sunday's game, and the team came through with just one hit (Konerko's single after Rios's leadoff triple). We don't need an HR when there's a RISP - a good single will do, or even a productive out if the runner's on third. And we couldn't even get that. I don't see enough Red Sox games to know anything about their ability to come from behind. I do know that they have major league baseball's most infamous blown save, when they lost Game 6 of the 1986 World Series to the Mets when they were up by 2 runs with 2 outs and nobody on, and two strikes on the batter, thereby prolonging their World Series drought for what turned out to be another 18 years. I did happen to check our head-to-head record versus the Red Sox this morning, to get ready for the upcoming series with them, and discovered that over the past 10 years, we have won or tied the season series with the Red Sox 9 times. So we match up well against them. Versus the Twins, however, we're pretty pathetic over the years, although we beat them solidly in 2005.

We hold a late lead, recover from a blown save, win a one-run game, and win an extra inning game. Awesome! If only we had won game one tonight, we'd be three back. Oh well, let's get the Royals again this afternoon. Go Danks!

We can't possibly blow yet another late lead, right? I'm lighting the victory cigar...

QUOTE (southsidepride15 @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 07:30 PM) Easy Morel Orel. Hot chick in sox shirt, throwing out free T's...need I say more? Exactly. Does anyone really want me to replace these GIFs with the fat chicks in bikinis that someone used to start a gamethread recently? Now that's creepy!

QUOTE (southsidepride15 @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 06:57 PM) You sig is awesome...I've seen that Pride Girl at the Cell before. Smokin Hot (here's hoping it's not ur GF...in that case, Congrats!) If you've seen her in person, you're a step ahead of me - I stumbled across the GIFs online.

We're not 4 games out. We are only 1 or 3 games back. Hear me out: We have three head-to-head games left with the Twins. If those were the next 3 games on the schedule, at the end of that series we'd be 1, 3, 5 or 7 games back. The Sox almost certainly aren't going to win the division unless they win 3 or 2 of those games. That just leaves 1 or 3 games to make up over the other 38 games. Eminently doable.

QUOTE (southsidepride15 @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 04:54 PM) Let's worry about tonight. Sox can beat ZG and Swead Fred is capable of righting the ship in KC with a solid outing. I like our chances Agree. ZG 2010 is not anywhere near ZG 2009.

Great post Quinarvy! There's been far too much Twins Envy and Twins Love on this website. The Twins aren't invincible, nor are they light years ahead of the Sox. In fact, the two teams are about as evenly matched as they could possibly be, with the Twins holding a big edge in head-to-head W-L due more to good luck than anything else. Here is my proof that the Twins and Sox are just about dead even this year. The Twins 4 game edge in the standings sounds big, but it is merely 2 head-to-head wins. The Twins have beaten the Sox 10 times, but 7 of those wins are by one run. Pick your most agonizing two Sox losses to the Twins, and change one thing in those two games to make the Sox win, and the teams are tied in the standings. What if Bobby Jenks nailed down the save in the game when the Sox lead by 3 in the ninth? What if Thornton threw a letters-high fastball to Thome (who can't catch up to high heat) instead of a belt-high one, and he whiffs instead of hitting a walk-off home run? When you lose 7 one-run games, it's easy to find one thing in a couple of games that, had it gone differently, would have flipped the outcome. That is how far back the Sox are behind the Twins: two bad pitches, or two missing clutch hits, or two Twins seeing-eye singles that just eluded a Sox fielder's glove. The Twins are +4 games ahead of the Sox in the standings, but +5 games ahead during head-to-head play. That means the Sox have played the rest of MLB one game better than the Twins so far this season. If the Twins are so great, why do the Sox have a better record vs. the rest of MLB? The Sox and Twins have played 15 times so far this season. With tonight's 11-0 shellacking, the runs scored by both teams over those 15 games now stands at 71 runs for the Sox, and 72 runs for the Twins. If those 71 and 72 runs had scored at different points in time, the games won/lost would be something other than 5 games won by the Sox and 10 games won by the Twins. In fact, if the runs were basically evenly distributed, the Sox would have won 7 times and the Twins 8 times. And the teams would be tied for first. Yes, I realize that at the end of the day all that counts is wins and losses, but when you look at the evidence, the Twins and Sox are a lot more evenly matched than most people probably think. The difference right now is very small, and the Sox still have 3 more games versus the Twins at home to close the gap. So as Bluto would say: LET'S GO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O!!!!!!

Yes the Sox benefited in multiple ways from Delmon Young's stupid attempted cheap shot: -- The Twins gave up an insurance run and an out in a close, important game -- This meant that Capps only had a one-run lead in the ninth, and led to his second blown save in six attempts as a Twin, which should hurt his confidence -- Caused the game to go into extra innings and Gardy to use his fifth and sixth relievers out of the bullpen -- Got Rauch into the game, who looked shaky, which will further hurt his confidence and the Twins' confidence in him So yes, it was a stupid play by Delmon Young, and it demonstrably hurt his team, even though they won the game. But the Twins are definitely out for blood, as evidenced by this play and the four hit batsmen (Quentin 3 times, Beckham once) in the previous two games. Ozzie may be right that Gardy isn't directing this behavior by telling his players to do this, but he's probably inciting them to "go kill the Sox", or at a minimum he's tolerating it (he didn't bench Young or lecture him in the dugout after that play). It's time for Ozzie to stop his well-publicized Twins Love, and do something about their dirty play.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 10:59 AM) here's the silliest thing about running Rios (or anyone) with two outs and Konerko up: In the case of a homer, triple ,double or walk, it doesn't matter whether Rios is on second base or 1st base. The only time it matters is if Paul singles. Konerko has a combined 2518 hits+walks. He has 1402 total homers, triples and doubles, and walks combined. He has 1116 singles. In other words, there's around a 60% chance if Paul reaches that it doesn't matter whether Alex is on first base or second base, and that's before you even factor in CS percentage. Secondly, why the f*** are you playing for 1 run, down 5? Dumb, dumb, dumb. If Konerko kept that first inning going longer, who knows what happens last night. QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 11:04 AM) Great points. Even beyond your points as well though, it's an AL game, we're facing a really good offense with one of our bottom 2 starters on the mound, and our already bandbox of a ballpark was playing even smaller than usual with the heat and humidity. Playing for one run in the first inning isn't how you beat the 2010 version of the Minnesota Twins, especially not at The Cell on a hot night. These are exactly the thoughts I voiced to my companions at the game last night. Playing smallball on a night when the ball was absolutely flying out of the Cell, especially when the Sox fell behind early, made no sense. I also fault Ozzie for having 3 smallballers in the batting order (Pierre, Vizquel and Lillibridge, with exactly 1 HR each this year) for the entire game. I can understand wanting Vizquel's defense in the game early when Freddy was on the mound (Freddy, like Buehrle, needs all the defensive help he can get), but after Freddy was gone and the Sox had a big deficit to make up, and the Twins had already shown how the ball was flying, why not give our power hitters some at bats to try to get back into it? Viciedo could have played third and Jones could have played LF (it would have been nice to have Beckham available, but I understand the reason not to push him back into service too soon). If Vizquel is an end-of-game defensive substitute when we have the lead, why isn't Viciedo a middle-of-game offensive substitute when we have a big deficit to make up? It wouldn't have helped much to have a power-hitting lefty DH last night. Kotsay was not the problem. The problem was the at bats that Pierre, Vizquel and Lillibridge got, on an ideal night for power hitters. We had power hitters on the bench - Ozzie just didn't use them. That said, this is only one loss in the series, and we should win tonight, based on the pitching matchup (Danks vs. Perkins). That sets up Game Three to determine first place in the AL Central, at least for now. Go Sox!

I'm going to miss Lou...here's how I will always remember him:

GQ is the worst men's magazine in the world (according to me and many others).

QUOTE (stretchstretch @ Jul 14, 2010 -> 11:31 PM) I ended up buying tickets at noon and going to the game, sat about 10yards behind first base in the forth row, picked the seats specifically to see PK, knowing I'd be in full 90F sun facing west. When Matt came on I felt supremely confident he'd get out of the mess Hughes left, but the Byrd walk was the kiss of death. Was great to see the two of them on the field together, but was crushing when McCann hit that ball. You don't see many fans with Sox gear, I saw only two others the whole time and to have the Sox guy give up the go ahead runs really hurt in person. Hope it doesn't carry over for him in the second half. He was bringing absolute gas, the guy just got good wood on it in the right situation, and it didn't help his team scoring only one run in 9 innings.... As is often the case with relievers, especially closers, their failings are the most visible. But there were plenty of other failings on the AL side, including some stupid mental mistakes, that hurt equally as bad: -- Elvis Andrus overrunning second base after Konerko's strike out and getting tagged out. -- Joe Girardi not having a pinch runner available when Ortiz got on base in the ninth. -- Torii Hunter made multiple mistakes: didn't charge a ball hard and misfired to third, allowing a runner to go first to third on him; and two pathetic at bats with men on base, including a strikeout against Wainwright in which he swung at a pitch that was a foot outside - Hunter was swinging for the fences trying to be the big hometown All Star Game hero, instead of patiently taking what the pitcher was giving him. -- Adrian Beltre's pathetic "swing hard at anything" strike-out in the 9th. It seemed like the AL didn't try hard, and was waiting for the 3-run homer that never came. Ozzie will whip the team into shape next year, when he's the manager.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 14, 2010 -> 01:47 PM) I was b****ing about Ortiz not being pinch-run for after the game, but in hindsight, keeping him in the game was the right move. The AL was down two. Ortiz's run was not the important one. You save your pinch runner for the tying run. Yeah, a fluke play happened and Ortiz was called out when a faster runner would have been safe, but in normal situations you don't pinch run for him. If Byrd doesnt make that throw, you have runners at 1st & 2nd, then you pinch run for Buck to make sure that the tying run can score an a gapper. Whether or not they had the personnel to do that is another discussion for another day. But in order for the tying run to score, Ortiz has to make it to home first. He was clogging up the bases - this was the most blatant example possible - putting Rickey Henderson as the tying run pinch runner behind Ortiz isn't going to help. Ortiz not only couldn't go from 1st to 3rd on a single to the outfield, he couldn't even go from first to second. This is the sort of thing that drives Ozzie nuts, and the primary reason Thome isn't on the roster this year. So yes, Girardi should have had a pinch runner ready knowing that Ortiz was coming up in the ninth. That inning illustrated the difference between Ozzieball, and Titoball (the Red Sox get a full season of watching Ortiz clog the bases) and Girardiball (depleting almost the entire bench by the ninth, and not being in a position to play for the 2 or 3 runs needed to tie or win).

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 02:20 AM) I'm not saying they will compete as I have a hard time believing, but anytime it's less than a 7-game deficit like now, I won't call anybody crazy for thinking the Sox still have a chance. Sox were 6 back on May 4 - now we're 6.5 back. In other words, we've played basically even with the Twins over the past 6 weeks, but are still in a hole due to the poor start in April. There is still plenty of time to overtake the Twins, especially with the number of games we have left versus them and the Tigers. The Twins have their issues too: injuries to their middle infield, Mauer not having an MVP season (only .310 with 2 HRs), and Rauch is starting to blow some saves...

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 03:15 PM) I'll maintain that this is not a bad team. They are not as good as the Twins andthey've obviously played like dogs***, but i really feel with a couple breaks they could have competed this year. We're not at all a bad team. We're just in the wrong league.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 14, 2010 -> 04:47 PM) You don't sign someone to an extension just to potentially move them the next season, and beyond that, AJ would seriously probably block a trade in that instance. AJ is falling off rather quickly, and counting on him to be anything more than a replacement level catcher in the years to come is a bit scary. I also don't see how you can assume Flowers can't handle MLB pitching, considering he only had 5 starts. 3 of them were bad (Mark Buehrle against the Twins, Freddy Garcia against the Tigers, and Carlos Torres against the Indians), and 2 were good (Jake Peavy against the Royals and John Danks against the Indians). You need to see what you have in Flowers at some point, and if the season becomes a lost cause for a division championship, you let Flowers take the reigns. The #1 thing that would drive AJ out of the Sox organization is if he doesn't like the amount of playing time he gets. Right now he catches 1000+ innings per year. The Sox should not bet on Flowers to immediately step up and catch 1000 innings. Better to do it gradually, by signing AJ to an extension. Then bring Flowers up. If Flowers performs well, and Ozzie plays him more, AJ will sit more and start to grumble and eventually demand to "play me or trade me". By not signing AJ, the Sox would be betting that Flowers (or a combo of Flowers and Castro or Lucy?) could step in and catch 1000+ innings. That's a huge gamble with more downside risk than upside potential.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I am very glad AJ is still here. In fact, I want him signed for an extension. Catcher is such an important position that I don't think you replace a stalwart like AJ until you have his replacement 100% ready to step in. Flowers has not shown that he can handle major pitching (in his cup of coffee last year) and he is struggling a bit in Charlotte. Let him get his groove, come up to the Sox late this year or next year, and start battling AJ for playing time. If AJ still thinks he can catch 1000 innings and Flowers shows he's ready and Ozzie gives Flowers more starts, that will cause AJ to want to go elsewhere. So ultimately he can be moved, but now is not the right time. If we move him now, we are just going to be another team with a revolving door at catcher, pinning our hopes on a new savior (Flowers).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 1, 2010 -> 03:08 PM) I can't argue with that. I can't tell you how many runs we have given away this year, that didn't show up as errors. Agree. Witness the fourth inning of Danks' start against the Rays on Saturday.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jun 1, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) Awesome, Vizquel. Yay. I am to blame - but having Vizquel's glove behind Buehrle is a good thing, given that Buehrle is only as good as the defense behind him, since he puts so many balls in play. Ozzie is following my suggestions (which I emailed to him 2 weeks ago) for getting Buehrle's season back on track: 1. Separate Danks and Buehrle in the rotation, so that teams don't see Buehrle Jr. (Danks) followed by the softer-throwing Buehrle Sr. (this was accomplished after the Detroit rainout). 2. Always bring in Santos (flame throwing righty) after Buehrle (a soft throwing lefty) leaves the game (this happened in Buehrle's last win vs. the Marlins). 3. Put the best defensive lineup on the field when Buehrle pitches, which means Vizquel starts in the infield. If our defense does not give any extra outs tonight, Buehrle will be fine and we'll win. A nice 4-1 or 5-2 win in 2 hours 10 minutes is my prediction. Burls goes 7, Santos gets the 8th, and Putz closes.

QUOTE (soxfan3530 @ Jun 1, 2010 -> 12:56 PM) agreed. they need to pick up some ground asap. Need to keep winning series, and pick up an occasional sweep. If we win all three on this homestand, and sweep one, we'll go 7-2 and be 1 game under .500. June is the best month of the schedule to make up some ground...

Coming off a 3-3 road trip, there's too much angst among the fan base...too much talk of "fire so-and-so" and "fire sale"... We haven't started making up ground yet versus the Twinkies, but tonight's another good opportunity to do so, especially with our best 2010 starting pitcher on the mound: GO GO GO JOHNNY GO!!!

QUOTE (jeffro2525 @ May 5, 2010 -> 07:37 PM) It aint over...nothings come easy this year. I doubt tonight will be any different. Agree - we need an easy win, for both the players and us fans.