Interesting Stat

[DBAHO]

Saw this on a FoxSports Team Report;

 

BY THE NUMBERS: 62-29 -- White Sox's record last season when leadoff hitter Scott Podsednik recorded a hit.

 

Does he really make THAT much of an impact for this team when he's playing well do you think?

[Jordan4life_2007]

Saw this on a FoxSports Team Report;

Does he really make THAT much of an impact for this team when he's playing well do you think?

 

Nope. None at all. He's just a waste of space. Not only did he suck last year, he was just along for the ride in 2005. It's a guaranteed lock that he will suck again in 2007 as well.

[RME JICO]

Saw this on a FoxSports Team Report;

Does he really make THAT much of an impact for this team when he's playing well do you think?

The Sox were 24-6 when Pods stole a base in 2006.

 

The Sox were also 48-17 when Pods scored a run in 2006.

 

So there is definitely a lot of supporting evidence.

 

In comparison, the Sox were 56-41 when Gooch got a hit. So it is not necessarily related to the batting order.

Edited February 25, 2007 by RME JICO

[Kalapse]

It's not necessarily Podsednik himself but when the White Sox have a semi-capable leadoff hitter, no matter the name they tend to play better. You can pretty much say this for most winning teams no matter who their leadoff hitter is as long as they're getting on base. I could only imagine how productive this lineup could be if they had a leadoff hitter with a .360+ OBP.

[beck72]

Saw this on a FoxSports Team Report;

Does he really make THAT much of an impact for this team when he's playing well do you think?

I think so. If it's Tad, Dye, Thome or PK, who doesn't want to hit with runners on base? With Pods on base, pitchers have to pitch to the other hitters far more carefully. Not to mention how the pitchers have to hold Pods on and alter their pitching to keep him from stealing.

[Dick Allen]

So if the leadoff hitter gets a hit or steals a base the Sox probably win. Maybe its time for KW to find someone who does it more often. Its amazing that a guy who hardly drives in any runs, and in 2005, when he was supposedly driving pitchers crazy with his basestealing, making them lose all concentration, finished in 31st place in the AL in runs scored, and last year with one of the best offenses in team history, with Dye, Konerko and Thome behind him, finished in a tie for 33rd place in the AL in runs scored. Add to all this his difficulty moving runners over, and you have one of the most overrated players in White Sox history, save for October 24, 2005.

[RME JICO]

So if the leadoff hitter gets a hit or steals a base the Sox probably win. Maybe its time for KW to find someone who does it more often. Its amazing that a guy who hardly drives in any runs, and in 2005, when he was supposedly driving pitchers crazy with his basestealing, making them lose all concentration, finished in 31st place in the AL in runs scored, and last year with one of the best offenses in team history, with Dye, Konerko and Thome behind him, finished in a tie for 33rd place in the AL in runs scored. Add to all this his difficulty moving runners over, and you have one of the most overrated players in White Sox history, save for October 24, 2005.

Holy crap that is bad.

 

It's not necessarily Podsednik himself but when the White Sox have a semi-capable leadoff hitter, no matter the name they tend to play better. You can pretty much say this for most winning teams no matter who their leadoff hitter is as long as they're getting on base. I could only imagine how productive this lineup could be if they had a leadoff hitter with a .360+ OBP.

It could be anyone, but it is amazing how there is such a disparity between Pods and Gooch.

 

If your theory was the case, you would think those two would have a similar effect on the rest of the team, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

 

It would be interesting to see the impact of other leadoff hitters in the league with the same stat.

[TLAK]

As miserable a time as Pods had last season he was one of the more consistant players in terms of doing something - anything positive at least once a game ll season. A lot of guys on the White Sox had bad second halfs and the standings reflected it.

[3E8]

Saw this on a FoxSports Team Report;

Does he really make THAT much of an impact for this team when he's playing well do you think?

Look at April, where Pods was s*** at the plate with a line of .233/.281/.311. We were 13-1 in April games which he recorded a hit.

 

Now for June, Pods hit better with a line of .245/.318/.362, but this is still quite poor by leadoff man standards. Well in June we were 14-2 in games which he got a hit.

 

So to answer your question, he makes a pretty big impact when he's not playing well. But like others have said, we obviously have a better chance of winning games where men are on base for our 3-4-5 guys.

[Buehrle>Wood]

Yes, he makes a huge difference when he is playing well. That part is undeniable. The whole problem though is that he doesn't play "well" often enough.

[Jordan4life_2007]

So if the leadoff hitter gets a hit or steals a base the Sox probably win. Maybe its time for KW to find someone who does it more often. Its amazing that a guy who hardly drives in any runs, and in 2005, when he was supposedly driving pitchers crazy with his basestealing, making them lose all concentration, finished in 31st place in the AL in runs scored, and last year with one of the best offenses in team history, with Dye, Konerko and Thome behind him, finished in a tie for 33rd place in the AL in runs scored. Add to all this his difficulty moving runners over, and you have one of the most overrated players in White Sox history, save for October 24, 2005.

 

Either I'm really hung over, or this post makes no sense. 31st place in the AL? What the hell does that mean? 33rd place? Last I checked there were 30 teams total. Pods was bad last year. Make no mistake about it. But he was great in 2005. To say he's overrated, save for the biggest HR in White Sox history, is to be blind and ignorant.

 

Edit: I realize now you meant out of individual players. The rest of the post still stands. And our offense was flat mediocre in 2005. Dye and Konerko were terrible the first two months. Rowand was nowhere near the hitter he was in 2004. Oh, yeah, we had Carl Everett hitting third. So I wouldn't blame Pods for the amount of runs he scored. He was consistent enough (save August when he was clearly hurting), and got on base at a good enough clip that he should've scored 100+ runs.

Edited February 25, 2007 by Jordan4life_2007

[Jordan4life_2007]

If he was such the distraction he was made out to be in 2005, with the getting in pitcher's heads that all his apologists claim and all, and he was so dominant, 80 runs is not all that much. The fact that 30 players in the AL alone scored more than him, the fact that he only had 25 rbi when the 9th place hitter and 2nd place hitters both had over 70. He's only guaranteed to be the leadoff hitter once a game, but he is guaranteed to make as many plate appearances as anyone else (assuming he doesn't get replaced during the game). Pods was not nearly as good in 2005 as a lot of people would lead you to believe. Great, you say, and you have to nerve to personally attack me and call me blind and ignorant?

 

Is Pods supposed to drive himself in? PK hit like .225 the first two months. Dye? Remember the same Dye everybody wanted run out of town at the start of 2005? All the lame Jermaine 'Die' or 'Princess' Dye jokes? He did next to nothing for the first two months as well. Our DH/#3 hitter sported a .745 OPS. Pods had an OBP of .350 or better every month except for August. So it's not hard to see why he didn't score as many runs as you would like from your leadoff guy. Of course, it's just hip and cool to blame it all on Pods. Also, nobody has led me to believe s***. I watched just about every game in '05. I saw the difference Pods made. The impact he had, especially the first four months.

Edited February 25, 2007 by Jordan4life_2007

[effectivelywild]

I'm not debating the worth of Pods in 2005---especially in the first half, he was a dangerous looking basestealer and I fully expected him, whenever he was on-base, to steal second and maybe even third if the situation required. Pre-ASB, his SB% was a fantastic 83%. It seemed like every time the Sox needed him to steal in a close game, he came through. Then the wheels came off, literally and figuratively: His SB% dropped to 52%, and his OBP suffered as well: 0.326. Neither stat is good.

So, OK, he was injured and tried to gut it out and suffered as a result. No big deal, right, he'll come back strong? Not so: 2006, Pre-ASB, he went 29/41 in SB attempts, leading to a 71% success rate. His OBP, though, was 0.353 which, while far from ideal, isn't disastrous. But after the midpoint of the season, both numbers dipped again: 61% SB rate, OBP of 0.296. Both of those are abysmal for a lead-off guy. Especially one whose defense is suspect in a corner outfield position. And I have a hard time remembering him getting a crucial SB late in a close game.

 

So that leads to the question: What does Scott bring, nowadays? He seems to have lost a lot of his speed. He doesn't get on-base consistently enough. And he's an adventure out in LF. While I hope he bounces back to some degree, I worry that the skillset that he used to have to make him a dnagerous leadoff guy has eroded away. Time will tell, I guess.

[Dick Allen]

Is Pods supposed to drive himself in? PK hit like .225 the first two months. Dye? Remember the same Dye everybody wanted run out of town at the start of 2005? All the lame Jermaine 'Die' or 'Princess' Dye jokes? He did next to nothing for the first two months as well. Our DH/#3 hitter sported a .745 OPS. Pods had an OBP of .350 or better every month except for August. So it's not hard to see why he didn't score as many runs as you would like from your leadoff guy. Of course, it's just hip and cool to blame it all on Pods. Also, nobody has led me to believe s***. I watched just about every game in '05. I saw the difference Pods made. The impact he had, especially the first four months.

 

 

I watched just about every game, but then again I'm blind and ignorant. Pods created 105 runs in 2005. He wasn't horrible. I said he was very overrated. Konerko drove in over 100 runs. Dye hit over 30 homers. Carl Everett drove in 87. Frank Thomas even hit a few over the wall. Pods doesn't have to drive himself in all the time, although it would help on occassion. My big point, which you fail to understand is if he was reeking the havoc that a lot have claimed, how is it that it didn't result in more runs? If the pitcher was so distracted like Hawk had everyond believing, how come the poor performances you mentioned? His 25 RBI was pretty low as well. Uribe and Crede were hitting 9th all year and they were at about 70. Iguchi was over 70, but Pods, right in the middle of them was 25. There is no doubt in my mind if the White Sox pitched in 2005 like they did in 2006 and weren't in the playoffs, many of those who admire Pods would change their minds.

Edited February 25, 2007 by Dick Allen

[Vance Law]

Either I'm really hung over, or this post makes no sense. 31st place in the AL? What the hell does that mean? 33rd place? Last I checked there were 30 teams total. Pods was bad last year. Make no mistake about it. But he was great in 2005. To say he's overrated, save for the biggest HR in White Sox history, is to be blind and ignorant.

 

Edit: I realize now you meant out of individual players. The rest of the post still stands. And our offense was flat mediocre in 2005. Dye and Konerko were terrible the first two months. Rowand was nowhere near the hitter he was in 2004. Oh, yeah, we had Carl Everett hitting third. So I wouldn't blame Pods for the amount of runs he scored. He was consistent enough (save August when he was clearly hurting), and got on base at a good enough clip that he should've scored 100+ runs.

 

He scored only 80 runs because missed 33 games. Remember.

 

Only 1 guy in the AL had fewer plate appearances and scored more runs than Pods. David Dellucci. He hit 29 home runs and played for Texas, the #3 offense in baseball, while the Sox were the #13 offense in baseball.

[Dick Allen]

He scored only 80 runs because missed 33 games. Remember.

 

Only 1 guy in the AL had fewer plate appearances and scored more runs than Pods. David Dellucci. He hit 29 home runs and played for Texas, the #3 offense in baseball, while the Sox were the #13 offense in baseball.

Pods scored runs at roughly the same clip per game in 2005 and 2006. He drove in more runners in 2006 and that's with BA and Uribe in front of him not getting on base. Even his biggest backers would say Pods was pretty bad in 2006. I can't see how this translates into him being "great" in 2005. But for me, enough about 2005, I wonder what he'll do in 2007, and obviously I was very dissappointed he wasn't replaced. This latest injury and his history directly after his injuries would indicate to me that Ozzie and Kenny probably aren't expecting too much in 2007. It would be inexcusable to me if he plays like he did last year and still is a regular in the line-up.

[santo=dorf]

Am I the only one who thinks when Pods gets a hit and the Sox win it speaks more about the opposing pitcher not Pods' influence on the team itself?

[jackie hayes]

The other interpretation of that number is that Pods doesn't get a hit unless the opposite pitcher's so bad we'll pummel him, anyway.

 

If Pods is just really important, you'd expect that the runs he created would've often been the difference in those games in which he got a hit and we won. Suppose we subtract from the margin of victory all the runs Pods scored and all the runs he knocked in. This will overstate Podsednik's importance -- we're replacing those contributions with zeros, and it's not likely that a replacement would never score or knock in runs in those games.

 

It turns out that only 6 of those 62 games turn to losses. So, Pods gets hits but doesn't score or knock anybody in, or scores a run or two in a blowout. I think we need to start talking long-term contract before this guy gets away.

[fathom]

Am I the only one who thinks when Pods gets a hit and the Sox win it speaks more about the opposing pitcher not Pods' influence on the team itself?

 

I think there's a huge correlation between the opposing pitcher and our W-L record. Lets face it, the lefty pitchers are much tougher in our division than the righty pitchers. Thus, of course our record is going to be better when Pods gets a hit, as it's against RHP most of the time. I agree with some of the other people on here....his skills have deteriorated to the point where I can't see how he'll be valuable as a starter. I hope he proves me wrong though.

[jackie hayes]

Am I the only one who thinks when Pods gets a hit and the Sox win it speaks more about the opposing pitcher not Pods' influence on the team itself?

Shut your mouth!