Too many Sacs?

[TLAK]

With four today, the Sox now lead the AL with 23 sacrifices in 24 games.

 

The four sacs came after doubles and produced 2 runs, but they also gave Toronto two easy outs against Uribe and Olivo. I won't beef about Maggs and Willies sacs because they were going for hits.

 

I have to question the first one in particular. First inning and Uribe is hitting about .400, man on 2B, the Oz traded a chance for a big inning for a single run. It may work regularly in the NL, but it will come back to get you over time against AL powerhouses like the Jays. You rarely beat them with only 3 runs, but Ozzies hot right now and got away with it.

 

I don't think you can constantly give away outs in this league.

 

At least by posting this after a good win, I can't be accused of front running.

[YASNY]

The four sacs came after doubles and produced 2 runs

 

How many did we win by?

[WSoxShuf]

No f***in way, this is how you win games

 

 

If your man gets a double move him over.

 

It is alot better than having our players going up and slugging fly balls and stranding players.

[Heads22]

How many times did we fail to score an RISP with less than two outs last year? I think we coulda won a lot more last year with small ball like this.

[Be Good]

No f***in way, this is how you win games

 

 

If your man gets a double move him over.

 

It is alot better than having our players going up and slugging fly balls and stranding players.

Exactly, this is why we have done better in closer games.

[Fotop]

I wholeheartedly agree with you Tlak.

 

Bunting after a leadoff double in the 1st Inning is questionable, and I think a bad call. In fact if anyone leads off with a double I'm not really a big fan of bunting unless it's a late and close game situation.

 

I think Ozzie is really forcing his agenda for the time being. Bunting whenever possible, leaving SPs in for long times, etc. I know most of you will bite back with "well what's our record?" "today's game was a one run game." etc. But that's not what we're pointing out here, and those arguments don't really hold much water in my mind.

 

Baseball is a game of adjustments and situations. The outcome of a game is a result of too many variables, however in specific situations there are good calls to make and bad calls to make. Personally I don't think bunting in every situation that may seem ok for a bunt is good AL baseball, nor good baseball for this team.

 

We are not the Marlins. We don't have two prototypical leadoff hitters at the top of our order. We play in the AL and lead the league in HRs, we have a couple of guys with speed on our team but most of the team is average to below average speed. Frankly, this isn't the right personnel for this type of baseball to be used CONSTANTLY. I understand every once in awhile, but it's almost as we're becoming the most predictable club in the majors.

 

People can flame me all they want, I just believe that this type of play can burn us in the long run unless we switch it up and let our hitters do the hitting from time to time. Our pitching is not strong enough to hold 1 run leads every night and ultimately if you play not to lose you can get into trouble.

 

That's just my two cents.

[TLAK]

How many did we win by?

I just felt was too early in the game to sacrifice a hitter of Uribe's quality. It's not like tied in the 9th where you get a run and go home.

 

Uribe may have doubled himself and kept the line moving. Batista was there to be had early but I think giving him those outs let him off the hook.

 

Garland threw great but had he pitched to his ERA we would have lost.

 

Would'a should'a could'a ... I still enjoyed seeing the win.

[YASNY]

Fotop. I see, and somewhat agree with, your point. However, we played for too many years waiting for the big inning and have not been successful. I think Ozzie is trying to instill a brand of baseball that has been missing from the south side for a long time. I really think he'll achieve a happy medium in this area. So that's it's enough to keep the opposition off balance. As he goes through the AL this year, I really believe he'll make adjustments in his game.

[TLAK]

We are not the Marlins.

I doubt if even the Marlins sacrifice much in the 1st. I have no way to find out, but I doubt it.

[Chisoxfn]

I think its a good idea. Runs and Homers and big innings come, but you got to make sure you get runs when you should. If Uribe and these players were really good at hitting the ball to the right side of the infield to get the runner over to 3rd, I'd say just let them hit, but I go no problem with the bunts.

 

The Sox ended up with 5 hits today and if they didn't bunt, they would of lost this game. Plus, I don't really think the bunt prevents a big inning. I don't want to see the team play for the big inning, rather just play good fundemental baseball and I believe bunting and putting pressure on defenses, moving guys over, making pitchers have to be perfect (pulling the infielders in) can just as well lead to a big inning.

 

Plus on Uribe's sac, it was damn near a hit, Batista made a great throw, it could of just as well been thrown away.

 

I also got a feeling Ozzie is forcing the point early to make sure his players understand he is serious about this.

[Fotop]

That's the way I feel to YASNY, I think because it's early he's just trying to plant the seeds of small ball into this team. This is great, as long as he doesn't force it ALL YEAR. If he does, this team will lack that "killer instinct" and will be unable to put away opponents and we'll all lose 10 years from our lives watching these games .

 

I really feel we could use one of those 10-2 blowout type of games, and who knows if uribe gets a chance to hit today in the first, he could have helped knock out batista early (the guy pitched the whole game). Which is another point, by allowing a team "free" outs, pitch counts get lower and starters get to settle in and stay in games longer. This could be disastorous against upper-tier pitching.

 

I say we show our teeth and start rolling teams, how about Baltimore and their bandbox and ragtag rotation? Sounds good to me.

[greasywheels121]

You can never say we have attempted too many Sacrifice bunts and flys. This is how you win games. You have to do the small things to get the big results. Ozzie's the man!

[WSoxShuf]

You can never say we have attempted too many Sacrifice bunts and flys.  This is how you win games.  You have to do the small things to get the big results.  Ozzie's the man!

I don't think we are used to this style of ball.

 

But if Uribe, and harris can get it started for our guys, im all for it.

[YASNY]

You can never say we have attempted too many Sacrifice bunts and flys.  This is how you win games.  You have to do the small things to get the big results.  Ozzie's the man!

You can definitely have too many sacrifice bunts. You only get 27 outs a game and you don't want to give too many of them away.

[greasywheels121]

I don't think we are used to this style of ball.

 

But if Uribe, and harris can get it started for our guys, im all for it.

Yeah this is definitely something new for the White Sox fans, but I'm having fun with it. I think it's more fun winning all these come from behind and one run games. These games are a whole lot more exciting than those 12-8 games.

[WSoxShuf]

You can definitely have too many sacrifice bunts.  You only get 27 outs a game and you don't want to give too many of them away.

unless you get to 3rd with one out of course.

[Fotop]

I understand that everyone is excited about this team, there's no reason not to be. This is not the point.

 

This type of play may also be "fun to watch", however this is not the point here as well.

 

You can never say we have attempted too many Sacrifice bunts and flys. This is how you win games. You have to do the small things to get the big results. Ozzie's the man!

 

This is the point: this is NOT the only way one can achieve victory. I'll continue to stress the point that this team has many station-to-station runners, and at least 20HR potential for two-thirds or more of the lineup. Our lineup is a lineup of hitters, good ones at that. I'd much rather see them try to go opposite field and hit behind a runner to move them over than take a bat out of their hands early in the game. Maybe it's just me, but this makes much more sense.

 

All I am asking is to let the hitters hit from time to time. That's it. Overall, I think it'll provide much more balance for the team and in the end it'll lead to a greater bottom line (more wins).

 

But like I said earlier, Ozzie may just be pushing his agenda early and then adjust and change throughout the season. We don't know what his next move is, I'm just trying to suggest what I think it should be.

[greasywheels121]

Oh I know that's the not the only way to win games. We won 86 games last year without playing one lick of small ball, but you have to be able to do the small things to be a championship team. The homeruns aren't always going to be there.

[Texsox]

We built a team on sluggers, Kong, Thomas, Maggs, Lee, and Valentine to an extent. So a steady diet of small ball will come back and bite us. This early in the season I like Ozzie giving us some shock therapy and bunt bunt bunt. I imagine he'll back off in a few weeks and let some of the guys swing away.

[WSoxShuf]

Oh I know that's the not the only way to win games.  We won 86 games last year without playing one lick of small ball, but you have to be able to do the small things to be a championship team.  The homeruns aren't always going to be there.

[Fotop]

Sure small ball wins championships....in the PLAYOFFS. I hate to beat a dead horse but the A's consistently make the playoffs without ANY small ball. There has to be some merit to the system then if it keeps happening.

 

Am I saying we're the A's? No, we lack the strong SP they have. That's why I think the best way for us to make the playoffs consistently is to hit away with the occasional use of small ball to shake things up and produce runs when the bats are struggling. That's the ideal I think.

[SoxFan1]

I think its a good idea.  Runs and Homers and big innings come, but you got to make sure you get runs when you should.  If Uribe and these players were really good at hitting the ball to the right side of the infield to get the runner over to 3rd, I'd say just let them hit, but I go no problem with the bunts.

 

The Sox ended up with 5 hits today and if they didn't bunt, they would of lost this game.  Plus, I don't really think the bunt prevents a big inning.  I don't want to see the team play for the big inning, rather just play good fundemental baseball and I believe bunting and putting pressure on defenses, moving guys over, making pitchers have to be perfect (pulling the infielders in) can just as well lead to a big inning.

 

Plus on Uribe's sac, it was damn near a hit, Batista made a great throw, it could of just as well been thrown away.

 

I also got a feeling Ozzie is forcing the point early to make sure his players understand he is serious about this.

I agree. Big innings come along but usually in the middle or late part of the game. In the early innings, you have to play smallball and score when you can. Besides, playing smallball gets the players pumped and thinking "Scoring runs like this is easy. Imagine what I can do if I hit!" And that gives players the drive to have those big innings. I have no problem with the sacrafice flys and bunts.

[Wise Master Buehrle]

I haven't seen Maggs, Frank, Lee, PK, or Crede lay down a sac bunt this year. I've seen many where any of those guys hit a single or double and the next guy is hitting. The sac fly in the first inning was the right thing to do. Guaranteed run. Say Maggs was swinging for the fences instead and popped up, Franks up next and does what he does in the first inning. Inning over, and we're still down 1-0.

 

Our guys still have the oppurtunity to have those big innings. They haven't done it yet. We aren't exactly rolling right now.

[The Critic]

It's probably a case of the Sox over-using the sacrifice to try to get it into their heads.

This team has been so reliant on the 3-run bomb that it's going to take some force-feeding of the sac to get them away from old habits. There's nothing wrong with the 3-run shot, but it doesn't win you the WS very often. A good solid mix of situational hitting, power and aggressiveness will get a team DEEP into the postseason.

[The Critic]

Sure small ball wins championships....in the PLAYOFFS. I hate to beat a dead horse but the A's consistently make the playoffs without ANY small ball. There has to be some merit to the system then if it keeps happening.

 

Am I saying we're the A's? No, we lack the strong SP they have. That's why I think the best way for us to make the playoffs consistently is to hit away with the occasional use of small ball to shake things up and produce runs when the bats are struggling. That's the ideal I think.

The problem with the A's style is that it's difficult to change your approach once the playoffs arrive, especially after you've had success with a bombing style.

The A's find this out the hard way every year lately, once the playoffs start.

 

It's an advantage to get the balance of styles figured out in the regular season, so it's in the team's natural mental approach and not something they have to think about on the field. Judging by your post, I think we're saying the same thing basically.