Interesting Sun Times article

[greasywheels121]

The Sox' answer to this column.

 

http://whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/ar...t=.jsp&c_id=cws

 

Fundamentals have Sox winning early

Positive results will ultimately quiet skeptics

By Scott Merkin / MLB.com

 

CHICAGO -- In the White Sox clubhouse, on the bulletin board next to where third-base coach Joey Cora writes out the team's starting lineup for each game played at U.S. Cellular Field, a column from Sunday's Sun-Times had been taped up on the wall.

 

The article focused on one man's opinion that the White Sox's switch to "small ball" was just another South Side reincarnation, following the birth of the exciting "Ozzie ball" last year, and that it really just translated into the team not hitting as many home runs as it did in 2004 or 2003. The overall message didn't seem to bother manager Ozzie Guillen and his charges, but the article's insinuation that the White Sox were trying to hide shortcomings by manufacturing a new theme set off the outspoken leader.

 

"I could care less what the fans or media think about our team because if we win, we're going to bring people to the ballpark," a demonstrative Guillen said before Sunday's 5-4 loss to Seattle. "The thing that bugged me is that we are not trying to sell any products in Chicago. That's the way we're going to play.

 

"I'm not lying. I think we are going to be better. What I don't like is why we are so negative about something we are trying to get done. We have a pretty good squad here, and I believe we are going to win a lot of games the way we did [saturday] because that's what we built the team around -- pitching and defense.

 

"If they don't like the way we're going to win or lose, that's up to them," Guillen added.

 

There's really no reason to name the style of baseball played by the White Sox, but "smart ball" seems to be the latest description. A look at the whole body of work through 12 games needs to be taken in order to gain the right perspective, but maybe the change should be listed as "much better pitching, defense and fundamentals."

 

This team already has won games with a well-placed bunt or with a hitter going the opposite way to move a runner into scoring position or, more than anything else, with vastly improved mound work. The White Sox entered 2004 with a starting staff made up of the steady Mark Buehrle, a quickly fading Esteban Loaiza, a developing but erratic Jon Garland, a left-hander in Scott Schoeneweis who was converted from a reliever to a starter and a question mark the size of the Grand Canyon at the fifth spot that lasted the entire campaign. That list doesn't even address some of the bullpen problems.

 

By adding Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez, Dustin Hermanson and Luis Vizcaino, not to mention the 2004 acquisitions of Freddy Garcia and Jose Contreras, the White Sox reduced the pressure on the offense to always hit its way to victories and immediately became a better team. But the drive from this year's group appears to be an even bigger alteration.

 

As evidenced by their frustration during the series finale against Seattle, winning two out of three simply doesn't satisfy this team. Granted, if those results were carried out during the course of a 162-game season, the White Sox would finish 108-54 and secure their first postseason bid since 2000.

 

But winning the first two and losing the finale, as the White Sox have done four times in 2005, isn't quite good enough.

 

"We come out every game and play hard," said White Sox reliever Cliff Politte, who threw two scoreless innings Sunday. "We wanted to win and take the sweep, and that's a little frustrating. But we won the series and gave it everything we could."

 

"Our biggest change is not that we don't have guys to hit home runs," added center fielder Aaron Rowand, who had one hit and one run scored Sunday. "Guys are having fun together, coming together and pulling for each other. We just aren't hitting the ball the way we are capable."

 

Guillen addressed the attitude adjustment during his pregame talk, and after answering questions about Frank Thomas' future role in this new alignment, briefly pointed to Thomas as "a big part of the bad attitude" from the past because he was team leader. The White Sox manager quickly backpedaled and mentioned that the other players who have been with the team for a few years also were part of the issue, and ultimately said that he should take the blame for the problem.

 

On Saturday, Thomas seemed excited to rejoin this team and ready to play any role provided. Truth be told, the White Sox need the infusion of a healthy Thomas' power and batting eye in the middle of the order for a group that entered Sunday with a .275 on-base percentage -- lowest in all of baseball.

 

"Frank is committed to doing what it takes to win," said Rowand of his friend and teammate. "He's a gamer and will go out there to compete every day. Hopefully, we get the big guy back soon."

 

It remains to be seen how this new style plays out over the course of a season or if this crew can avoid key injuries -- a major part of the team's undoing in 2004. The article that raised those questions was torn in half on the bulletin board after Sunday's loss. But the team's commitment hasn't been shaken.

 

"If (the columnist) wants to call it small ball, whatever, it's working," Rowand said. "If he doesn't want to buy into it, fine. We aren't worried about what he thinks about our team. We are worried about what we are trying to do on a daily basis."

[3E8]

I think the central point of Couches column was that we were sold "smallball" as an improvement when the reality is is that it was merely a cover for costcutting.

Hasn't our team salary risen the past few years?

[greg775]

Good column, good rebuttal.

Interesting topic.

I won't complain, how could anybody complain as we've won all 4 series?

But it will be interesting to see if and when some of our guys start hitting.

It seems the columnist doesn't think our starting pitching will be this good all the way through?

I prefer to think it's for real. If our pitching's for real, we should be in the hunt all year.

But it would be nice to see Dye, Joe, Timo, Rowand start hitting.

[Wise Master Buehrle]

QUOTE(Wedge @ Apr 17, 2005 -> 10:33 AM)

I disagree.  The offense does not look like last years.  Yes, we use the HR to score some runs, but we are not solely dependent on it for runs like we were last year.  I can't remember baserunning being this strong last year.  I don't remember taking advantage of throwing errors and passed balls this much last year.  I don't remember generating pressure that led to those things last year.

 

Yes, we use the HR to score runs.  Every team is going to do that.  It's the only hit in the game that ALWAYS scores you some runs.  We do have a number of power hitters in our line-up.  They are going to hit HRs.  It's just natural.  Smartball isn't smallball.  If it was, they'd call it the same thing.  Smart ball is knowing what it takes to score those runs that we need.  If a pitcher grooves a pitch to Konerko (a la yesterday), then f*** yes I want him to try and nail it out of the park.  What I don't want to see is Paulie using that same long swing to try to hit it out of the park every time.  Smartball is saying to yourself, "we're down by 1 and we have men on 2nd and 3rd with 2 outs.  I just have to try to knock a single to get the lead" and then doing what it takes to get that hit.

 

Smartball is knowing that the advantage on the basepaths is in the runner's favor.  It is understanding the time old principle that the time it takes for a perfect throw from the catcher to second with a perfect tag takes exactly the same amount of time as a good runner to have a lead and to slide into base and taking advantage because catcher and second baseman have to execute perfectly to get the out.

 

Are we going to be an offensive juggernaught this year?  No, but I expect us to be a team that understands the game situation at every at-bat, pitch, relay throw, and baserunning maneuver.  We're going to see an intelligent, hard-working, tough team that knows its strength is its starting pitchers and is going to do everything it can to give that pitching a lead and then expect it to hold it.  THAT is smart ball.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

THREAD.PWNED....BAD.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

If we're going to use, "Well, our number two hitter is still getting adjusted to America" as an excuse, maybe he shouldn't be hitting in the two spot...

 

 

he seems to be doing just fine to me.

[zygoat]

Did he just criticize us for not being able to hit like Ichiro?  wow.

 

I see his points and agree to an extent, our OBP is absolutely miserable and some "big"ball has earned us a couple of the wins.  Although we are leading the league in sac flies, which is an element of smartball.  We're probably up the list on sac bunts too, although i'm not sure.  We are manufacturing runs with a lineup that has a low obp, there has to be something said for that.

 

they can say all they want about us playing smartball or lack there-of all i care about is the big W that our record shows and us beating the twins this year for the division

 

anyone can critize and do whatever they want

[southsider2k5]

Hasn't our team salary risen the past few years?

 

Almost $25 million in two years, including going from $65 million to $75 million in 2004 to 2005.

[upnorthsox]

Almost $25 million in two years, including going from $65 million to $75 million in 2004 to 2005.

 

Not sure where that $75 mil is coming from but adding up salaries brings the payroll at a little over $67 mil including Davis.

 

And 3 yrs ago it was around $66 mil.

[southsider2k5]

Not sure where that $75 mil is coming from but adding up salaries brings the payroll at a little over $67 mil including Davis.

 

And 3 yrs ago it was around $66 mil.

 

The USA today salary survey had the Sox at $75 million. Quibble with them.

 

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/sa...lts.aspx?team=4

Edited April 18, 2005 by southsider2k5

[ISF]

We coulda been at 75 mil, but we needed to trade Carlos for the groin and Vizcaino because we didn't want to spend that much money.

[Wedge]

THREAD.PWNED....BAD.

 

Meaning? I'm not "cool" any more.

[The Critic]

I heard DeFalco and Silvercub talking to Broooth Levine this morning. They asked him what he thought of Couch's article and he says something like "he must be a smart baseball guy to judge the offense on the one game he's seen this year".

I thought it was funny.