WCSox

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 08:27 PM) Six walks. That should be enough to get things going. You'd think, but it's not like this team has historically torn the cover off the ball early in the season either. This lineup obviously isn't going to score 850 runs, but I wouldn't put too much stock in this game... or the entire month of April, for that matter.

QUOTE (jphat007 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 08:21 PM) Two f***ing hits against the Indians. Thats scary bad It was also against a red-hot Carmona in rainy, 39-degree weather.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 08:00 PM) Bill Hahn needs to quit his job as an umpire. This strike zone is so inconsistent. He's been consistently inconsistent. QUOTE (beckham15 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 08:03 PM) bobby cant find the strikezone I'm getting the feeling that Putz will be our closer by mid-August.

A ball not bouncing our way, to go along with many "hang wiffums" this eveing. *sigh*

QUOTE (Cochise @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 04:07 PM) I live in Oregon too, and have DirecTV, no WGN for me either. Perhaps because I have the bargain basement package though. MLB Extra Innings for DirecTV is doing a free preview from April 5-11. I haven't watched WGN once since moving out here. Not sure what the West Coast aversion towards WGN is, but it's not like their non-sports programming is much of a selling point. I'm watching the free Extra Innings preview on Comcast right now, and none of it is in HD. I can't imagine forking down $200 to watch games in regular def. What a freaking rip-off.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 02:27 PM) Get back to me when you make a point. Your pimping of the Rays' talent-for-dollar ratio fails to account for the fact that they had a decade-long stretch of Top 5 and Top 10 draft picks. That tends to make it a hell of a lot easier to field a talented team for less, and isn't really comparable to the Sox's situation. The only way for the Sox to "trade" for the Rays' roster would be to repeat 2007 10 years in a row.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 01:32 PM) His range makes his lack of arm strength not all that troubling. Pierre looks weak defensively when he's compared to Crawford, but so does just about every other LF in the game. I'll take Pierre's defense over that of Quentin, Pods, Carlos Lee, Albert Belle, etc. QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Apr 6, 2010 -> 10:53 PM) You asked what roster would we take with an equal or lesser payroll and the Rays immediately came to my head. I didn't say they were a perfect team. They've got issues at 2B and C. RF might not be a big thing for them if they leave Zobrist out there, which he played tonight. How do I quantify their offense and defense vs our pitching? I don't understand what you're asking. They flat-out have a better lineup and their team defense is worlds better. You want me to provide stats? I shouldn't have to. Of course they have a better lineup. They had a full decade of high draft picks. What's their excuse for not developing the same level of starting pitching that the Marlins did in 2003?

QUOTE (OsweGo-Go Sox @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 10:00 AM) No WGN, really? Comcast out here doesn't offer WGN either.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 7, 2010 -> 10:17 AM) The problem is...you're picking your poison here. Either you go Kotsay a couple times a week in the 5 spot, which is a weakness, or you're going 5 righties followed by 3 lefties, Alexei, then Pierre, which is a weak lineup late in games that could wind up causing Ozzie to use a lot of pinch hitters. I don't think it would take that much convincing in fact to insist to me that your method would be better in total runs scored, but might be worse in wins-losses, because the starting pitchers would have to face a better overall lineup, but any time a game got into the late innings close, that's where the disadvantage would be most strongly expressed. Maybe your way is slightly better than Kotsay in the 5th hole, Maybe it's not. You can make a legitimate argument for either of them. Either way, there's a significant lineup flaw. You make a good point here. I agree that there's probably not a "best" solution, but at this point my "best" lineup would be: Pierre, Beckham, Q, PK, Rios, AJ, Jones, Teahen, Alexei. I'd be in favor of using Jones more than Kotsay right now for a few reasons: (1) he solves the L-L-L problem and allows Rios to protect PK, (2) he had a nice Spring, and (3) he's actually healthy now. The third point may be the most crucial, as most of us have little confidence that he'll be healthy for a full season. I'd ride him now while he's swinging the stick reasonably well and get as many W's with him as possible before he breaks down. When Jones DOES break down in another 2-3 months, we'll have a better idea of where this team's going. If the Sox are in first place and the pitching looks like it'll carry them down the stretch, Lance Berkman may be brought in to hit behind PK. If the Sox look like another sub-.500 team, it's a moot point. I'd probably go with Monday's lineup twice a week. I imagine that Kotsay hitting behind PK only two days a week would be a decent compromise between RBI opportunities and late-inning matchups.

QUOTE (knightni @ Apr 6, 2010 -> 03:09 PM) The problem is that Konerko might be top 10 in walks this year if Kotsay bats behind him. While walks aren't bad, they aren't singles and RBI opportunities. If a better power threat bats 5th, Konerko has a better chance of actually seeing strikes and driving runs in. This is the best argument for batting Rios 5th. Agreed that going with three lefties in a row is an odd way to go, but taking opportunities away from PK sounds like an even worse option. My solution to this would be to give Jones more reps at DH, and have PK, AJP, Jones, Teahen in the middle of the lineup. His BA splits aren't overwhelmingly unfavorable against RHP. Going Kotsay/AJP/Teahen twice a week doesn't sound like the worst thing in the world to me.

QUOTE (Swingandalongonetoleft @ Apr 6, 2010 -> 12:04 AM) Watching the game and especially the team introduction really made me think about how different games will be without Nancy Faust. I had the pleasure of meeting Nancy Faust about 10 years ago. Very nice person, and a great ambassador for the Sox.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Apr 5, 2010 -> 01:42 PM) We looked dialed in today. A really encouraging start. Yep. I keep reminding myself that it was the sorry-ass Indians in the visitor's dugout. But, man, the Sox looked like they could've hung with anybody today.

QUOTE (johnnymick @ Apr 5, 2010 -> 11:45 AM) I was trying to watch the game on ESPN2, but it says its not available in my area. Is it blacked out or something (I'm in West Lafayette, IN if it matters). West Lafayette is in the blackout area.

Thank God for MLB Network.

I'm glad that Frank's differences with Kenny are not affecting his post-playing career relationship with the Sox.

Even before the weird debacle with the knee surgery in Austria, I thought it was a forgone conclusion that Kenny wouldn't sign a guy recovering from a major injury to a massive contract and that Maggs would hit the FA market and sign with the highest bidder. I was a lot angrier about Carlos Lee being dealt. Detroit had Maggs in his best year (2007), but he's hit below his career OPS otherwise. Predictably, they over-paid for him and I'm glad that Kenny spent that money elsewhere. On a personal level, I'm fine with not having a guy who lied to the Sox front office and has since done TV spots for Hugo Chavez while sporting a bad Euro-trash haircut on my team.

It's an outright crime that Comcast in OR doesn't offer WGN. Almost makes me want to switch to DirecTV.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Mar 31, 2010 -> 06:50 PM) It's pretty likely that Dan Hudson's going to finish the year out in the rotation I agree with this. My feeling is that Freddy's going to either get demoted to long relief or DFA'd by the ASB. That said, I'm wondering how Hudson would hold up down the stretch if he does indeed eventually become the #5. He's only 23 and only threw 147 innings in the minors last year. If there's roster space, keeping Freddy around to spot-start for Hudson in September might be a good idea.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 30, 2010 -> 05:36 AM) Its hard to fathom how many things would have to go wrong for this to be a sub-.500 team. It's certainly not difficult to fathom Quentin, Jones, and Putz all missing significant time with injuries. It's also not difficult to fathom Rios playing another season below his career average and PK having a down year due to age and/or nagging injuries. If those five things happen, you're likely looking at a mediocre 80-win team. This team is solid on paper, but there seems (to me, at least) to be less margin for error than the average 25-man roster. QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Mar 29, 2010 -> 01:25 PM) Now that I've mulled it over more I'm changing my number to 85. Our offense is usually pretty anemic in April and we struggle to win consistently down the stretch to close out a season. Logically, I agree with this. But my gut tells me that they either win 90 games and take the Central, or will bomb after the ASB and fail to win 80 games. This will be a repeat of either '08 or '09: a solid division-winner or a weak third-place squad. And I imagine that this will mostly depend on the health of Quentin and Putz, and how well Rios rebounds from last year.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Mar 23, 2010 -> 10:06 PM) He may be controversial, but I think he's still "their guy." There are really only two ways I see Ozzie leaving this organization: either he randomly becomes completely incompetent (not going to happen) or he leaves on his own free will. I don't believe that Ozzie is going to have this job for as long as he likes. He's a solid manager, but he's not Bobby Cox or Tony LaRussa. I agree that Ozzie's long-standing ties to the organization will allow him to stay longer than somebody without that background. And, of course, winning a WS in his second year helps tremendously. But I don't believe that the Sox are married to Ozzie or anything close to it.

If the Sox play .500 ball for the next two seasons, I'd imagine that Ozzie is gone in December of 2011. Not so much because of his head-scratching lineups, but mainly because controversial figures who draw negative attention to their employers tend to not hang around indefinitely when their teams under-perform year after year.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 23, 2010 -> 02:55 PM) 1) That production can very easily be made up for in CF with Rios's bat, at 2B with Beckham's bat, and possibly at SS with Ramirez's bat. Those are all generally regarded with defense as the priority. Sure, you want offense from your offensive positions, but above anything you want a good lineup, and that is something the Sox can put out there. Agreed with this. Kenny knew what he was going to get out of Pierre and has basically conceded LF as far as offensive production goes. Pierre will lead off and will most likely put up a .335-ish OBP. That's obviously below-average for a leadoff hitter, but Ozzie will stick with him and there's not much that we can do about it. This team has $95M invested elsewhere and it's highly unlikely that Kenny will even think of upgrading the leadoff spot via a trade until this team shows that it can be competitive. In a best-case scenario, he might try to swing a deal for Crawford in July, relegating Pierre to the bench.

QUOTE (flavum @ Mar 23, 2010 -> 03:19 PM) I couldn't stand watching Pods get picked off. I'll take Juan. That and the fact that Pierre is a much better bet to stay healthy than Scotty "Groin Injury" Pods.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Mar 18, 2010 -> 04:27 PM) The Rios acquisition just looks like he was targeted to be the #5 hitter. A guy thats got mid 20 HR pop, can drive in 85+ runs, hit for extra base hits, and when doing performing normally will hit .280-.285. That seems like a perfect hitter behind CQ and Konerko to me to provide consistent run production. The key word is consistent, something that hes got trouble with. In his two best years, Rios would've had a good enough OBP to be legit leadoff guy, though I completely agree that his slugging ability makes him a better fit to hit somewhere other than leadoff. If Beckham develops as expected, we might see Rios hit 2nd with Beckham moving to 3rd and Quentin to 4th. But for now, I agree that he's a middle-of-the-lineup guy. QUOTE (qwerty @ Mar 18, 2010 -> 05:39 PM) Nate silver, the creator of PECOTA and and main man behind the scenes at baseball prospectus has a different view. This article and the ones below has to be read in it's entirety to grasp them. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story...rs/ortiz/060405 I would never argue in favor of some sort of "clutchness" statistic. However, it seems pretty obvious to me that some players (and people, in general) perform better in high-pressure situations than others. Michael Jordan and Javy Vazquez are good examples of these two extremes.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 04:07 PM) He's a very good LB but is getting "white guy" fan attention. I'd say that it has a lot less to do with the color of his skin than the position that he plays and the city where he plays it. The Bears literally invented the middle linebacker position and put two of them in the HOF. Being the captain of the defense also contributes to the extra attention. If Urlacher played strong safety, he'd be Gary Fencik. Since there are only 19 total linebackers in Canton, my guess is that Urlacher will end up on the outside looking in. Especially considering that he much more-closely resembles Zach Thomas than Ray Lewis.