Greg Hibbard

Look, I've gone on record as stating Ozzie is the worst in-game manager in baseball. Still, for whatever reason, he probably contributes to some of the success that this team has had in some capacity over his tenure, and his managerial record seems too good to just be players performing despite him.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 11:06 AM) John Lannan was probably the worst pitcher we faced this entire road trip. Probably. I still think Rios did need the day off, as he had hit .200 for the previous week. Whether or not Konerko should have sat is another story, I suppose.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 11:01 AM) LOL "Rios hit .250 against 3 particular MLB pitchers and then had an 0-fer once." Bill Braski was really struggling, huh? The previous point I was attempting to refute made it seem like one particularly poor pitcher that Rios faced was the difference in how he hit.

So the consensus seems to be "Ozzie deserves no credit for players performing, but plenty of blame when things go wrong"

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 10:55 AM) Yeah but look at the pitcher on the mound for the Nats. That probably had a lot to do with it as well. Rios went 3 for 12 against three pretty mediocre Pittsburgh pitchers, including an 0-4 against an 0-5, 5.22 pitcher.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 10:50 AM) Wouldn't it have been smarter to rest them one at a time instead of both in one game? Maybe, but it worked out seemingly as he planned it...Peavy showed up and pitched a monster game, he didn't need Rios and Konerko in the lineup to bail him out, and then Paulie and Rios were sharp on Sunday.

QUOTE (mmmmmbeeer @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 10:52 AM) If scoring 1 run against JD Martin is considered as having "worked pretty well", what exactly is not working well? I mean we got the W, but it had nothing to do Oz's gut being right about resting Alex and Paulie. My point was that Rios conveniently came right out of his slump on Sunday, and Paulie drove in three. Seems like the rest might have contributed to that.

QUOTE (mmmmmbeeer @ Jun 22, 2010 -> 10:43 AM) It was just plain ignorant to sit both Paulie and Alex on the same day when you're already running without a DH. Guillen has always seemingly maintained the philosophy that occasionally resting players refocuses them. Seems to have worked pretty well this time.

As much as we blame Ozzie for making stupid in-game decisions, I'd like to point out three instances in which his hunches seemed dead-on * sitting Rios and Konerko on Saturday, which arguably gave them a breather they needed to bang out multiple hits each on sunday. Rios had been 5 for his previous 24 after that 4-4 at Wrigley, and although Konerko had hit in the previous three games, he was on a 5 for 19 cooler with no XBH. * putting in Putz in the ninth on Sunday * leaving in Peavy in the ninth proved to be the right call What others?

1) Absolutely everything seemed to go the Sox's way vs. the Nationals. We got a strike zone very favorable to us on Saturday (which resulted in Riggleman getting tossed), one bang-bang play was miscalled in favor of us, and it seemed as though every line drive off of Peavy late in the game Saturday was caught. Yesterday, every time we needed something, it seemed to happen for us, ditto friday. 2) We have the most wins of any major-league team and best winning percentage in 1-run games (14-8). When you glance at that statistic, and our run differential, which is still -20 despite our .500 record, it makes me think the ball has really been rolling the Sox' way of late.

I'm in, after having to chase down the bus after jumping off early... To be honest, everything through July looks relatively doable, but I can't see them making or losing meaningful ground in the next 40 days because they just don't seem to have that kind of talent. I'd bet they'll hang around or just above .500 for the next month or so but not make a huge run, and end up 4-5-6-7 games out heading into the first of decisive stretches of baseball this season, August 3rd through the 19th. (the second is September 6th through the 19th)

I love Hawk as much as anyone, but s*** like that is just inexcusable

If we work the count, we can have him out of the game by the fifth or sixth inning. That's the key to victory, IMO.

What troubles me about this year's campaign is that it resembles 2001 so much. Start off terrible, climb all the way seemingly back in it against the NL to around .500, get handcuffed into making no moves, go 5-10 under in August and September, end up with 79-83 wins.

2010 - 24-32 vs. AL, 6-2 vs. NL 2009 - 67-77 vs. AL, 12-6 vs. NL 2008 - 77-68 vs. AL, 12-6 vs. NL 2007 - 68-76 vs. AL, 4-14 vs. NL 2006 - 76-68 vs. AL, 14-4 vs. NL 2005 - 87-57 vs. AL, 12-6 vs. NL 2004 - 75-69 vs. AL, 8-10 vs. NL 2003 - 76-68 vs. AL, 10-8 vs. NL 2002 - 73-71 vs. AL, 8-10 vs. NL 2001 - 71-73 vs. AL, 12-6 vs. NL 2000 - 83-61 vs. AL, 12-6 vs. NL 1999 - 66-77 vs. AL, 9-9 vs. NL 1998 - 73-75 vs. AL, 7-9 vs. NL 1997 - 72-74 vs. AL, 8-7 vs. NL 988-946 vs. AL (.511 winning percentage) 134-103 vs. NL (.565 winning percentage) Man, what a disparity. Also, it's a .585 winning clip against the NL since 2000.

Forget about what the W/L total will be or where will finish in the division. What do you think the team batting average and team ERA will be, if the club remains essentially unchanged throughout the season? Currently the team batting average is .245 and team ERA is 4.56.

I honestly can't figure out whether being 5 games under .500 with a .244 team batting average, a 1.39 team WHIP and a 4.60 team ERA means the team is way good despite their statistics or way bad despite their record.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 15, 2010 -> 11:44 AM) Offensively. You can tolerate these numbers if they have value defensively, especially at catcher. AJP while he cannot throw runners out is outstanding a calling games, making pitchers comfortable and blocking pitches. I should have said hitter. I was responding to the previous point that they were the same basic hitter. They aren't. One is falling off precipitously and the other is falling off slightly.

Since turning 30 and prior to being acquired by the White Sox, Kotsay had hit .263 in 1184 at bats from 2006 to mid-2009. His White Sox batting average is .242, bringing his post-30 batting average to an overall .260 clip. Since turning 30, AJP is hitting .277. I'm not really sure at this point, they are the same basic player. They used to resemble one another more.

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Jun 11, 2010 -> 02:45 PM) "If either of them have a bad year, here we are." You could say that about any team. This goes for any place where 2 of your supposed best players struggle, you end up with results like we have now. Only it wasn't just 2 of our best players struggling, it was 7 out of 9 starters being bad. It is 3 out of 5 SP's being bad. We have a bad closer with a horrible WHIP and opp AVG. When 11 out of your 15 most important pieces are bad, you will have a bad team, plain and simple. I don't know how KW was supposed to account for 11 guys who were supposed to be vital members of the team stinking up the joint. You obviously can't expect to go 15 for 15 in terms of hitting on players but to go 4 for 15, you have to put all the blame on the players. They all have track records suggestiing they are better than this and haven't showed it so far. Again, you're taking this argument to a place I'm not going, and I'm not sure why. I'm specifically pointing out what aspect this I hold the GM accountable for. I don't hold him accountable for the years had by many of our other players. However, relying on given production from guys without the track record to show for it, and having a team then augmented by "undervalued" pieces, left us a little thin in my opinion. I also give KW all the credit in the world for Rios. I think Pierzynski, Jenks, Peavy should have been playing much much better and cast 100% of the responsibility for that on them.

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Jun 11, 2010 -> 12:58 PM) What should have KW done to make you feel better about a fallback option at 2B and RF? It's as if you expect to have a MLB starter sitting on our bench to fill in at the drop of a hat or having a quality MLB option sitting at every position in the minors. That just isn't the case for us as it isn't the case for nearly every other MLB team. KW felt that those two players have proved enough that they wouldn't struggle to the point that they each have. Look around the league at other teams who lost players to injury or have players who performed poorly just like the Sox. Jimmy Rollins has been out nearly all season and have had to play a couple of scrubs at SS. Is it Amaro's fault that they don't have a better SS option within the organization? I don't think you automatically have major league caliber backups ready; that's absurd. My entire point is that building a roster by counting on projected production from those two based on a single great partial year each also seems a little far-fetched, especially in retrospect. We were sold that guys like Quentin and Beckham could contribute enough to this team offensively with their limited experience that dudes like Kotsay and Teahen would be non-issues. I thought going in we seemed a little thin, and I think I even remarked 'if either of those two has a bad year...' Well, here we are. The best GMs seem to have solutions when injury/performance issues come up...I'm really not sure KW has any in this situation, other than "dump, start over".

QUOTE (dmbjeff @ Jun 11, 2010 -> 12:26 PM) Q nearly won an MVP 2 seasons ago. If not for his wrist injury the final month, he surely would have won the award. Beckham won the Sporting News ROY last year and if he had come up sooner, probably would have won it over Bailey or at least would have shared it with him. Long track records certainly help gauge a players performance, but very few fans, experts, baseball execs thought Beckham and Q would fall off as they have. To blame KW for their fall off after having great success with each player is idiotic. Your counterpoint is a straw man. I never said I blame KW for their fall off after having great success. I blame KW for having an ill-equipped back-up plan to two guys without enough of a track record.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 11, 2010 -> 03:11 AM) Don't misunderstand what I'm saying. Sometimes it is clear that a GM is not putting together a roster capable of winning anything. Sometimes he hamstrings his organization with ill-fated contracts and set it back for years. Sometimes he makes ridiculously poor trades which continuously work out in favor of the opposition. I think it's hard to say those things about Kenny. One can certainly argue the roster we went into this year with was quite imperfect - and I don't have an issue with that argument. But we must remember that rosters are often a work in progress at the beginning of a season, and appropriate tweaks or more significant changes may be made in order to strengthen an area or areas that need be. I think it's apparent that Kenny is a fan of such an approach. So what you have to look at then is whether their were indications that this core would perform this poorly, or even anywhere near as poor as it has performed. If you can honestly tell me you suspected Mark, Jake, and Gavin would pitch this terribly, well, you are a smart man. If you believed that Carlos, Gordon and AJ would perform this terribly, than you are a smart man. In my opinion, to expect those 6 players to perform this terribly for this long was completely unfathomable. I also don't believe there were ANY steps that could have been taken to produce a winning club with those 6 players performing this terribly. I think this is a case where the blame falls on the players. I don't believe firing this GM and replacing him would yield any different results, other than a full-scale rebuild, which may or may not prove to be any more successful than what we currently have. Honestly, the biggest problem I have on the GM-side is that Williams seemingly counted on Quentin and Beckham to go out there and produce at a clip that didn't have the MLB-experience to necessarily back it up. Yes, AJ, Jake, Mark and Gavin have disappointed, but Quentin and Beckham aren't necessarily what we thought they were, and that's a talent evaluation call. (Alexei as well, to a lesser extent)

QUOTE (Heads22 @ May 17, 2010 -> 05:57 PM) That's inaccurate. It has talent that isn't living up to advance billing (Quentin, Beckham, Floyd, Peavy, Danks, Jenks, Pierzynski, Pierre, Teahen, Ramirez, Vizquel, etc....lots of guys way below career norms). The advanced billing of a lot of that talent contains players who may or may not be reliable offensive pieces year in and year out (Quentin, Beckham and Ramirez)

Awesome game. I wonder how many times this season before today eight of the starters have had at least one hit in the same game - I'm guessing none.