Greg Hibbard

This quote says it all to me. Ozzie is basically stating that the White Sox could simply not contend this season with their opening day roster. So, a little speculation is in order: Does Williams believe the same thing, and did he believe it at the beginning of the season? If the answer is YES, he is disingenuous for what he sold us as a "contending team", if the answer is NO, he was a piss-poor evaluator of starting talent when it came to several players. Were Williams and Guillen at odds in terms of the way they evaluated this team going into this season? Most disturbingly, here in print Wise gets thrown under the bus after being publicly defended by Ozzie many times. What else was said about guys like Betemit, Fields, etc? I am a little peeved that the company line was "we're contending, we're winning this division", when a quote like this makes it seems like they were always rebuilding this season and knew with their opening day roster they had no chance.

Desperately needs a day off. His avg has dropped 30 points over the past 3 weeks.

unless we can stay within 3-4 games over the next week, I'd shut him down. If the tigs' lead gets to 6, I'd wave the white flag.

With six of the last nine games against detroit, and considering the talent of our starting pitching staff and detroit's mediocrity, there's essentially no way we'll be eliminated before the last two weeks of the season.

You know, if this team goes 2 over .500 for the next 36 games at 19-17 (a likely record given the shape of the season since May) and then wins 5 of their remaining 7 games (not impossible if we find a groove once Peavy's healthy), we probably win the division at 85 wins. They've already more than exceeded my expectations. I figured this team for a 77 or 78 game winner.

QUOTE (T R U @ Aug 13, 2009 -> 01:37 PM) I wish people would shut up about that Cardinals team already.. Yes. That Cardinal team was at one point 16 games above .500. Were the 2009 White Sox ever 16 games above .500? Not even close. That's why you can't compare the two teams. They only finished with just 83 wins because they went on an uncharacteristic slide and lost 8 of 9 during the last two weeks of the season. Pretty much every day from May to early September they were between 10 and 16 games above .500. In retrospect I think they resemble an 87-89 game winner way more than they resemble an 83 game winner.

I might very well be the only guy on the planet with a road grey #22 Josh Fields jersey.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Aug 7, 2009 -> 11:16 AM) I agree with Balta, I think he is just getting his timing back. Against the yankees he looked much better Yeah, I guess he has swung generally better the past few games.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Aug 7, 2009 -> 11:12 AM) What other options do we have. When Ramirez returns, he can play CF and Pods could move to LF. I know Nix has been brutal defensively, but I'd rather take my chances with a healthy Nix over a hurt Quentin... if indeed we did rush him back, that is...

I know it's only been 16 games since he's been back, but his average has sunk to even worse than it was before the DL, and I'm starting to get concerned. Did we rush him back? I guess I'm also wondering why people aren't being as tough on Carlos Quentin in 2009 as they were on Paul Konerko in 2008 when the two have had similar situations. Paul had injury woes last year, hits in the low .200s and people were calling for his head despite his proven track record (and it's not like 32 is ancient, after all). Quentin has apparently a bright future ahead of him despite not having very much of a track record, and yet people seem much more willing to give him a pass on a similar average with injury woes this season.

Assuming a loss today, since the beginning of 2006, the White Sox have a 307-290 record (.514 WPCT) Over the same time frame, in 3 (and 4) games series in which they've won the first 2 (or 3) games, their record going for the sweep is 22-33 (.400 WPCT) Might want to consider changing the f***ing strategy, Ozzie.

is it really accurate to say Dotel is "warming" for the third time, farmio

I can promise you I will refrain from starting threads in the future.

FWIW, I think Beckham is the best young Sox player I've seen since Frank Thomas. I did not know that Francouer was a totally different ballplayer, I just thought it was interesting because he had a very hot start with a similar sample size.

wow, tough crowd delete thread, I guess?

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Aug 5, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) Beckham is not going to go bad because Jeff Francouer. I hate this line of thinking in sports, but especially in baseball. The point was that the sample size was small enough where even a seemingly great player as a rookie can go south to some degree unexpectedly, not that Gordon Beckham was specifically going to be Jeff Francouer.

...check out Jeff Francouer's rookie stats and remember how people were so ga-ga over him too... .300/.336/.549/.885 70 GP, 272 AB, 14 HR, 20 2B, 1 3B, 45 RBI, 11BB it would seem like the lack of walks and reliance on homers made this predictable, but Francoeur was hitting .300 over 70 games with a ton of doubles...doesn't that sound familiar? His career line is currently a disappointing .266/.308/.424/.732 and the power numbers have been relatively down since 06 - just 82 career homers. So what happened to Jeff Francouer? Couldn't the same thing happen to Beckham?

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 11:56 AM) A .325 OBP which is inadequate even for a number 9 hitter. Yes, I edited. I had not had my coffee yet and it was a combination of looking at the wrong stat line and having a momentary brain fart. How do you value Ramirez's offense? He has a .328 OBP and his OPS is 20 points higher than Getz despite a few more home runs. I'm really not sure how we can expect every component of our lineup to have .300/.375/.475/.850 or even an .800 OPS. It's not about "grinderball" or whatever, in my opinion it's that OPS by valuing every home run, triple, a double proportionally the same, it is an oversimplification that weights the same offensive value to a bases loaded _______ to a bases empty ______ . In my opinion, sluggers (like Josh Fields) who just tee off and hit home runs (but have a generally low average) are overvalued compared to players like Getz because the OPS looks to be about 100 points apart which seems like a huge number. Is Josh Fields really scoring 10% more runs+rbi than Chris Getz?

I think too much emphasis is put on OPS when evaluating players like Getz, and even players like Beckham (as he currently stands). A bases loaded double is clearly worth more than a solo shot homer, for example, but a player with 30 homers and 10 doubles is going to have an OPS of .850-.950 whereas a player like Getz who is capable of the opposite gets evaluated at best in the high .700 range, which makes him look like a much worse prospect in some ways than he really is. OBP is much more important to me than OPS is evaluating Getz's value, and as long as he's .325 or better, I'm happy. Really great discussion, btw

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 2, 2009 -> 11:40 AM) I just ejaculated. username/post

YAAAEERRRRRRRR

so maybe I should be making more threads like this. Wise in Rookie A Ball...why isn't this even being considered Acquiring Carl Crawford...why isn't this even being considered etc

if that's the case, LOL at me.

And I actually agree with the article that obp is more crucial to the #2 spot than you think, because typically you are coming up after the 9 hitter or 8 hitter has already made at least one out in the inning and trying to get on for the sluggers to drive you in.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jul 28, 2009 -> 03:32 PM) Please. OBP is not needed in the 2-hole. A .330 OBP is way better in front of the heart of your lineup than a .371 OBP. what were you trying to say here