Marty34 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 12:48 PM) Who was going to be a 3 win player in platoon situations over two months that the Sox could bring in, and what would they need to give up to get them? Why fix any problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) Why fix any problem? Why create more problems to fix one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 why ask why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 02:20 PM) Why fix any problem? These are the kinds of responses people have called you out on before. Answering a question with a terribly vague, generic, somewhat unrelated question of your own to change the topic and veer off course. If you are going to make bold assertions, you need to be able to back them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 03:08 PM) These are the kinds of responses people have called you out on before. Answering a question with a terribly vague, generic, somewhat unrelated question of your own to change the topic and veer off course. If you are going to make bold assertions, you need to be able to back them up. It all started with Viciedo needed to be platooned then the response was "you wanted to trade for Greinke" and it ends with "what 3 win player do you platoon Viciedo with." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 09:08 PM) The Sox rotation and pen will be very solid. I can't wait for the season to start. Will be at the Cell for about 30 games this season I wish I could be there for at least 30 games. Lucky you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 05:24 PM) Liriano was a bullpen killer with those 5 inning starts. I agree that Liriano was not the answer. The fellow has a lot of talent for sure, but just can't put it together. I did think the trade for Youkilis was a good move though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 03:16 PM) It all started with Viciedo needed to be platooned then the response was "you wanted to trade for Greinke" and it ends with "what 3 win player do you platoon Viciedo with." I'm aware of how it started and progressed. I didn't ask that. I merely stated that the reason you get called on is because you fail to back your bold assertions, instead trying to turn them around and change the topic when you get to a point of having to explain your assertions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 04:26 PM) I'm aware of how it started and progressed. I didn't ask that. I merely stated that the reason you get called on is because you fail to back your bold assertions, instead trying to turn them around and change the topic when you get to a point of having to explain your assertions. It was explained earlier in the thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 03:16 PM) It all started with Viciedo needed to be platooned then the response was "you wanted to trade for Greinke" and it ends with "what 3 win player do you platoon Viciedo with." If the theory is that a platoon partner for Viciedo was the difference between winning and losing the central, the next logical questions are who and how. Of course it was answered with... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilburWilhelm Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 If the theory is that a platoon partner for Viciedo was the difference between winning and losing the central, the next logical questions are who and how. Of course it was answered with... The theory should have been - batting Adam Dunn third all year long was the difference between winning and losing the central. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 QUOTE (WilburWilhelm @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 10:19 AM) The theory should have been - batting Adam Dunn third all year long was the difference between winning and losing the central. No it wasn't. Lineup changes don't make nearly that big of a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 QUOTE (WilburWilhelm @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 09:19 AM) The theory should have been - batting Adam Dunn third all year long was the difference between winning 83 and 85 games Because he wasn't a poor #3 hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 QUOTE (WilburWilhelm @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 09:19 AM) The theory should have been - batting Adam Dunn third all year long was the difference between winning and losing the central. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 09:22 AM) No it wasn't. Lineup changes don't make nearly that big of a difference. Indeed. Tango showed that the difference between the best possible lineup and the WORST possible lineup (pitcher batting 4th, best hitter 9th, etc.) if used every day, all season, was about 2 wins. So the difference between the best possible lineup (which also happens to NOT be what nearly everyone considers the best possible lineup) and practically anything that could arguably be the best lineup is very minimal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilburWilhelm Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Because he wasn't a poor #3 hitter. I completely disagree. Any player that strikes out 222 times and bats .204 is a poor hitter in any spot in the order. Only two more long years till that bum is gone. The Sox would be better off batting Keppinger third. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (WilburWilhelm @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 10:08 PM) I completely disagree. Any player that strikes out 222 times and bats .204 is a poor hitter in any spot in the order. Only two more long years till that bum is gone. The Sox would be better off batting Keppinger third. Then good luck replacing 40 homers and 100+ walks. That's, like, 260 bases you have to make up for, somehow, some way. Seriously...good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 04:07 AM) Then good luck replacing 40 homers and 100+ walks. That's, like, 260 bases you have to make up for, somehow, some way. Seriously...good luck. Do we get Dunn's salary back? I'd rather have that to spend than Dunn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:11 AM) Do we get Dunn's salary back? I'd rather have that to spend than Dunn. on what? Relievers and Travis Hafner? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:13 AM) on what? Relievers and Travis Hafner? 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harfman77 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 11:43 AM) Platooning Viciedo was the easiest problem to fix. It amazed me that they kept sending him out there against RH'ers when he was so overmatched. I thought it was because they were trying to keep his trade value high, but after the deadline he continued to contribute to sucking the life out of the bottom of the order vs. rh'ers. Hes a young guy who needs to figure things out at the plate, he is not going to get a chance to do that on the bench. Platooning him would really hamper his development in the long run. If he is going to be a cornerstone for this offense, as appears to be the plan, he needs to get at bats and learn to make adjustments. There were a lot of players that slid in the second half of the season, no reason to damage the future of your franchise to try to cover up for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 10:02 AM) Hes a young guy who needs to figure things out at the plate, he is not going to get a chance to do that on the bench. Platooning him would really hamper his development in the long run. If he is going to be a cornerstone for this offense, as appears to be the plan, he needs to get at bats and learn to make adjustments. There were a lot of players that slid in the second half of the season, no reason to damage the future of your franchise to try to cover up for that. Development takes a distant back seat to winning games in August & September when the team is in a pennant race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 10:28 AM) Development takes a distant back seat to winning games in August & September when the team is in a pennant race. And yet, the Sox were in first place with two weeks to go, and he was hardly the only one who struggled in those final two weeks. I can't even point to WAR or anything in this situation - if, like, 2 guys step up and play better, the Sox, at the very least, likely have a play-in game against Detroit. Instead, Detroit got hot, the Sox got cold, and they lost the division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 10:31 AM) And yet, the Sox were in first place with two weeks to go, and he was hardly the only one who struggled in those final two weeks. I can't even point to WAR or anything in this situation - if, like, 2 guys step up and play better, the Sox, at the very least, likely have a play-in game against Detroit. Instead, Detroit got hot, the Sox got cold, and they lost the division. I'll repeat LF production against RH'ed pitching was the easiest problem they could have fixed and they did nothing about it. I don't know if that's on the GM or manager, but I found it disappointing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 So who do you suggest should have platooned with Tank? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 QUOTE (MEANS @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 12:22 PM) So who do you suggest should have platooned with Tank? He mentioned Juan Pierre. Like that would have made up 3 games. Pierre was awful in August. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.