Much has been made of our club record home runs and our power loss for this year. I am wondering if we really might not suffer as much as many expect.

 

 

2004 homers lost Lee 31 Valentin 30 Maggs 9 Borchard 9 Harris 2 Olivio 7 Davis 6 total 94

 

I included Borchard, Harris, and Davis though still on team I expect at bats to drop or vanish(Borchard).

 

2005 replacements

 

Pyrzinski as primary catcher I think can handle the 13 of Olivio/Davis

 

Podsednik and Iguchi (I don't want them swinging for fences) I don't think a combined 15 is unreasonable. That would nearly equal what Maggs, Borchard, and Harris provided.

 

That leaves 61 from Lee and Valentin. Dye and Everett if both can remain healthy should reach a combined 40-50. These are pretty realistic projection, I think. Net loss is around 15-25. Now I expect some of our regulars may not repeat their numbers of last year but I don't suddenly see us as a Go Go Sox team. We still have pop.

 

I have intentionally left out Frank. 74 games in 2004 with 18 hr and 434 OBP. I think he can improve on the totals. If he takes a while to get healthy and we only have him for the second half, no team in our division will add as big a presence to the lineup at the trading deadline. When people talk about our power numbers last year they forget Frank and Maggs (our mashers to most general public) only accounted for 27 homers. I don't think 200 -220 is unreachable.

I can't disagree with any of what you said.

I will, however, suggest that PK will probably hit a few fewer than he did in 2004.

I'll take a lower HR total if the new lineup gets on base and makes things happen.

And I'm thinking 15 or so from Frank if her returns in late May or early June.

If Frank is ready by June aprox 120 games remain. I would bet closer to 25. If we are in the race, I think he may just go nuts and turn back the clock. Call me an optomist.

he does have a tendency to do that

I agree with the post, but i also agreed with the 16 other times it has been broken down

We'll score more runs than last year and more importantly we'll score "the key run" we need more frequently.

yeah i still see us in the 200 HR range which is still plenty of them. but i dont see those explosion days we had as much but i rather be consistent than explode 1 day and nothing the next.

i agree the power will be there, but maybe not 242 homers. but a team that hits 200 is generally thought of as a good power hitting team, and the white sox and yankees are the only teams to do it for 5 straight years in history. i think they will hit 200 and make it 6 in a row...here are my projections.

Podsednik 10

iguchi 12

Dye 27

konerko 36

Everett/Thomas 29

Rowand 27

AJ 16

uribe 21

crede 24

_____

202.....plus add in some pop from the bench (gload, borch, timo)

Am I the only one who thinks AJ will hit 20 homers this year? He hit 8 on the road last year, and USCF should really help him out.

We hit too many solo homeruns. I would take less home runs as long as men are on base.

Even the optimistic numbers are a 15-20% drop in HR. Which is also a drop in runs scored. Don't forget Maggs was are most consistent (.300+ avg.) hitter. We need guys to get on base.

 

Let's say that the first part of the equation is happening, guys are getting on base and advancing. Pitchers are less likely to challenge the hitters with 1st base open than with no one on base. All of a sudden those 2-2 fast balls out over the plate, become corner nibblers and breaking balls.

 

This changes more than just adding and dropping power numbers.

Much has been made of our club record home runs and our power loss for this year.  I am wondering if we really might not suffer as much as many expect.

2004 homers lost      Lee 31  Valentin 30  Maggs 9  Borchard 9  Harris 2      Olivio 7  Davis 6 total  94

 

I included Borchard, Harris, and Davis though still on team I expect at bats to drop or vanish(Borchard).

 

2005 replacements

 

Pyrzinski as primary catcher I think can handle the 13 of Olivio/Davis

 

Podsednik and Iguchi (I don't want them swinging for fences)  I don't think a combined 15 is unreasonable.  That would nearly equal what Maggs, Borchard, and Harris provided.

 

That leaves 61 from Lee and Valentin.  Dye and Everett if both can remain healthy should reach a combined 40-50.  These are pretty realistic projection, I think.  Net loss is around 15-25.  Now I expect some of our regulars may not repeat their numbers of last year but I don't suddenly see us as a Go Go Sox team.  We still have pop. 

 

I have intentionally left out Frank.  74 games in 2004 with 18 hr and 434 OBP.  I think he can improve on the totals.  If he takes a while to get healthy and we only have him for the second half, no team in our division will add as big a presence to the lineup at the trading deadline.  When people talk about our power numbers last year they forget Frank and Maggs (our  mashers to most general public) only accounted for 27 homers.  I don't think 200 -220 is unreachable.

 

 

I dont know why people are so fixated by homeruns. I know they are exciting and everything but the last 4 seasons we've had boppers up and down the lineup, led or nearly led the leauge in HR's and won nothing better than a tee time in Florida in October. I for one welcome a transition from a musclehead lineup to one that has a little more speed and singles/doubles.

I dont know why people are so fixated by homeruns.  I know they are exciting and everything but the last 4 seasons we've had boppers up and down the lineup, led or nearly led the leauge in HR's and won nothing better than a tee time in Florida in October.  I for one welcome a transition from a musclehead lineup to one that has a little more speed and singles/doubles.

 

Even though he swings from the right side of the plate, I agree. The question is, how much did we give up vs. how much did we gain.

Once again, if you take a conservative estimate of R & RBI production of the guys we picked up vs the guys we lost we have a deficit of about 20-25 R, & RBI. That is not a big deal. Not when the same analysis produces about 70-75 less R, RBI against us. So think of it this way. Whatever we loss offensively we gain 3 times as much defensively.

 

Now with respect to both analysis there are wildcards. The arms we picked up did not pitch in the Cell. They can expect to do worse. The bats we picked up did not hit in the Cell. They can expect to do better.

 

Dye: He could have an MVP type year at the cell. If you look at his hit range over he's hit many of his HR's along the lines. At 330, 335 the Cell

is tailor made for him.

 

AJP: Again should flourish in the cell.

 

It's realistic to say that both Dye & AJP should have improved numbers at the Cell & thus improved numbers overall. That alone should make up for the calculated deficit in R, & RBI.

 

Pods: Let me be the first to say that his drop-off from 03 to 04 had more to do with pitching changes in the NLC than anything else. Take a look:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/bvsp...=4405&teamId=16

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/bvsp...=4405&teamId=18

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/bvsp...=4405&teamId=24

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/bvsp...=4405&teamId=17

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/bvsp...=4405&teamId=23

 

A pattern emerges there. He is strong vs power pitchers & weaker against

finesse pitchers. Maddux is the best finesse pitcher in the game. The ALC

has few quality finesse pitchers.

 

You can see this clearly in his G/F ratio.

03 Mil 628PA 247TB 2SF 8SH 4HBP 2IBB 11GIDP 204GB 148FB 1.38 G/F

04 Mil 713PA 233TB 1SF 6SH 7HBP 2IBB 7GIDP 243GB 167FB 1.46 G/F

 

As much as we hear about him swinging for fences the truth is he generated about 25% more GB outs in 04. That's evidence of good finesse pitchers like Maddux shutting him down. The ALC has very few such arms & the AL has a whole doesn't have many. This is one of the stark contrasts between the 2 leagues right now. AL is power pitching & NL is more of a mix.

 

I never bothered to look at Uribe's numbers that closely but I would expect it a similar pattern for him as well. NL guys who fare better against power & flyball pitchers are likely to improve in the AL.

 

When you look at the type of pitchers Pods will face in the ALC I agree with the fantasy baseball reports that he's expected to return to a 300 hitting form. If you play fantasy baseball he would be a player you'd want to grab.

 

Iggy: He's a complete unknown but he's had more post-season success in Japan than Katz had. I think that means something. I expect his first year to be 350+ OBP, & mid 700's SLG. A marked improvment over Harris.

 

As for the regulars, we should expect some decline in Koney & Rowand, but some improvement in Uribe & Crede. The contribution of all 4 should be a slight decline over '04.

 

Finally we look at DH. A healthy Everett + Thomas should have a marked improvement over last year's DH production.

 

That's why again, assuming we remain healthy (a big IF) I think we should surpass last yr's R total.

I dont know why people are so fixated by homeruns.  I know they are exciting and everything but the last 4 seasons we've had boppers up and down the lineup, led or nearly led the leauge in HR's and won nothing better than a tee time in Florida in October.  I for one welcome a transition from a musclehead lineup to one that has a little more speed and singles/doubles.

 

Hitting so many homeruns weren't the problem.

 

Hitting so many solo homeruns were the problem.

 

Homers aren't a bad thing. It's just, when men are on base, it's a lot more productive for an offense.

Hitting so many homeruns weren't the problem.

 

Hitting so many solo homeruns were the problem.

 

Homers aren't a bad thing.  It's just, when men are on base, it's a lot more productive for an offense.

 

 

Why were there so many solo HR's though? Its cause they all were swinging for the fences so much they ended up popping up or K'ing instead of going with a pitch sometimes and slapping it into right.

AJ is key.

We need him to be a stud in the order.

If he's a big offensive upgrade at catcher, it can make up for some of the power

outages with the loss of Lee/Maggs, etc.

Hitting so many homeruns weren't the problem.

 

Hitting so many solo homeruns were the problem.

 

Homers aren't a bad thing.  It's just, when men are on base, it's a lot more productive for an offense.

Like Nuke_Cleveland mentioned, homers aren't bad. What's bad about them is when the entire team gets homer happy and decide they are going to swing for the fences every single AB, regardless of the situation (see: Juan "Reggie" Uribe).

 

It's like saying goes - money isn't evil. The LOVE of money is what's evil. With a more balanced team, I sure hope the Sox just decide to casually date the HR instead of marry it.

Even the optimistic numbers are a 15-20% drop in HR. Which is also a drop in runs scored. Don't forget Maggs was are most consistent (.300+ avg.) hitter. We need guys to get on base.

 

Let's say that the first part of the equation is happening, guys are getting on base and advancing. Pitchers are less likely to challenge the hitters with 1st base open than with no one on base. All of a sudden those 2-2 fast balls out over the plate, become corner nibblers and breaking balls.

 

This changes more than just adding and dropping power numbers.

 

Counting Maggs as a loss is kind of a misnomer to me. We already lost him last year. The numbers he put up in 2004 were something that a bench player would contribute. I don't look at losing 9 hrs 37 RBI as losing too much power. His big numbers losses were already factored in in 2004. Now Carlos Lee I could see a much more relevant arguement, as we are replaing him with Scott Pod.

I don't think anyone has touched on this subject yet, so...

The problem with homeruns is that they're rally killers. Once someone hits a homerun, the bases are again empty, and the pressure on the defense and pitching has lightened. Having runners on base puts constant pressure and more tension on the other team's defense and pitching. Errors become more costly because they can score runs. Hanging a pitch is an even bigger mistake because instead of a having to hit a homerun to score someone, only a single is necessary. It becomes harder for a pitcher to concentrate when he has to think about the guy on first or second stealing. He has to work out of the stretch, etc, etc. This team was designed with the '03 Marlins in mind, especially since Ozzie saw it work firsthand. I could personally care less if this year's team doesn't max out on homers (although I would like to see Thomas hit number 500 in a Sox uni) because with the speed on the basepaths that we now have, we should be able to score just as many runs or more.

Iggy: He's a complete unknown but he's had more post-season success in Japan than Katz had.  I think that means something.  I expect his first year to be 350+ OBP, & mid 700's SLG.  A marked improvment over Harris.

 

If iguchi has a .700 slg i will set up a shrine.

I don't think anyone has touched on this subject yet, so...

The problem with homeruns is that they're rally killers.  Once someone hits a homerun, the bases are again empty, and the pressure on the defense and pitching has lightened.  Having runners on base puts constant pressure and more tension on the other team's defense and pitching.  Errors become more costly because they can score runs.  Hanging a pitch is an even bigger mistake because instead of a having to hit a homerun to score someone, only a single is necessary.  It becomes harder for a pitcher to concentrate when he has to think about the guy on first or second stealing.  He has to work out of the stretch, etc, etc.  This team was designed with the '03 Marlins in mind, especially since Ozzie saw it work firsthand.  I could personally care less if this year's team doesn't max out on homers (although I would like to see Thomas hit number 500 in a Sox uni) because with the speed on the basepaths that we now have, we should be able to score just as many runs or more.

 

I would rather have the runs on the scoreboard than runners on base. You eliminate double play possibilities as well. The goal is to score runs. You are correct it does take some pressure off the pitcher, it also takes pressure off the hitter. He doesn't have to worry about hitting behind the runner. Protecting the steal, getting out of rhythm with tosses over to first.

I dont know why people are so fixated by homeruns.  I know they are exciting and everything but the last 4 seasons we've had boppers up and down the lineup, led or nearly led the leauge in HR's and won nothing better than a tee time in Florida in October.  I for one welcome a transition from a musclehead lineup to one that has a little more speed and singles/doubles.

 

Agreed..The Twins got no big boppers and haven't had any in years and they've won....We go in the direction of the Twins and all of a sudden all the critics say we suck now cause we got rid of some big thumpers..

Why is it Minny can win with speed and D but we sculpt our team in that same manner and we suck? And we still have I think more pop in the line-up then the Twins ever had even with Maggs and Lee gone. More balance

 

 

.

Agreed..The Twins got no big boppers and haven't had any in years and they've won....We go in the direction of the Twins and all of a sudden all the critics say we suck now cause we got rid of some big thumpers..

Why is it Minny can win with speed and D but we sculpt our team in that same manner and we suck? And we still have I think more pop in the line-up then the Twins ever had even with Maggs and Lee gone. More balance

.

 

The Marlins are a great example of not relying on the HR.

If iguchi has a .700 slg i will set up a shrine.

 

I'll also have his likeness tattooed on my back