ESPN Report: Kenny Looking at Scott Linebrink

[Felix]

I cannot recall him not getting to any balls he should have lately either.

It's fashionable to bash on Pods.

[iamshack]

How about the ones he gets to that they fall out of his glove. Remember any of those?

 

Not in the past 20 games or so, no.

 

It's fashionable to bash on Pods.

 

No s***. It's called Group Theory and peer pressure.

 

A few people say it, and sooner or later it's snowballed and everyone is making it much worse than it actually is.

[That funky motion]

52 AB, and considering he has a .280/.359/.399 line on the year, which is better than his line last year, the criticism of his offense is foolish. Criticize his defense all you want, but he hasn't hurt our offense.

Well when you talk about his offence you have to include his SB's He is clearly not as good as last year and I don't remember him taking so many called third strikes. I could deal with him last year when his D was so so, but he is downright bad in the field this year. When you are putting Mack as replacement late in games,you are bad!

[Frank the Tank 35]

I don't know if anyone pointed this out in a seperate discussion, but Baseball America chose its minor league all-star teams here: http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/news/261917.html

 

They picked Fields as their top choice at 3B. Unless KW were intent on keeping him in the team's longterm future plans, now would be the best time to extract maximum value for him.

[Felix]

Well when you talk about his offence you have to include his SB's He is clearly not as good as last year and I don't remember him taking so many called third strikes.

Who cares about his stolen bases? If he attempts to steal, he's hurting the team more than he helps it, considering he has Iguchi (.343/.390/.507 with runners on), Thome, Konerko, and Dye up after him.

 

I also assume you don't remember him walking as much as he is this year, meaning a higher OBP, which comes with the called third strikes.

 

When you are putting Mack as replacement late in games,you are bad!

Mackowiak is a very good defensive corner outfielder, he's just horrible in CF. Sorry.

[iamshack]

Well when you talk about his offence you have to include his SB's He is clearly not as good as last year and I don't remember him taking so many called third strikes. I could deal with him last year when his D was so so, but he is downright bad in the field this year. When you are putting Mack as replacement late in games,you are bad!

 

Mack has been coming out of a lot more games recently than coming into late.

 

The increase in called third strikes is due to him looking at more pitches and trying to draw more walks (on pace for 71 as opposed to 47 last year).

 

He has not had a stellar year on the basepaths by any estimation, but he started out horrendously (I believe he was 8-13) and has been better since.

 

I know no one seems to believe me, and anecdotal evidence seems to hold no water here, but I honestly believe he has been better since Ozzie's tonguelashing in the media.

[That funky motion]

Who cares about his stolen bases? If he attempts to steal, he's hurting the team more than he helps it, considering he has Iguchi (.343/.390/.507 with runners on), Thome, Konerko, and Dye up after him.

 

I also assume you don't remember him walking as much as he is this year, meaning a higher OBP, which comes with the called third strikes.

Mackowiak is a very good defensive corner outfielder, he's just horrible in CF. Sorry.

I do and so should you! He is not the player he was last year. Even if he get soooo many more walks, he is stuck on first. Last year he would steal 2 bases and then before you knew it we were leading 1 to 0. I dont see him hitting the ball the other way this year as often.

 

Mack is not VERY good in any OF position.

[iamshack]

I do and so should you! He is not the player he was last year. Even if he get soooo many more walks, he is stuck on first. Last year he would steal 2 bases and then before you knew it we were leading 1 to 0. I dont see him hitting the ball the other way this year as often.

 

Mack is not VERY good in any OF position.

 

Once again, Podsednik is doing a fantastic job of scoring when he does get on base.

He has scored 65 of the 130 times he has reached base safely, or 50% of the time. The only other leadoff man who is at 50% or better is Jose Reyes.

 

Even the great Kevin Youkilis, of the vaunted Boston Red Sox is not close to that. He has scored only 39.6 % of the time he gets on base.

[Felix]

I do and so should you! He is not the player he was last year. Even if he get soooo many more walks, he is stuck on first. Last year he would steal 2 bases and then before you knew it we were leading 1 to 0. I dont see him hitting the ball the other way this year as often.

And yet this year, he's scoring many more runs than he did last year, mostly because of the offense behind him. He sure is stuck on first base.. always staying there and such. Why risk getting caught stealing if the guys behind you are going to score you?

 

Mack is not VERY good in any OF position.

Let me rephrase. Compared to his defense in CF, Mack is very good at the corner outfielders. He has a strong arm, and has had a few good defensive years (in limited time) at those positions. Over the course of his career, he's basically been an average corner defender.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Felix

[gojimthome]

Once again, Podsednik is doing a fantastic job of scoring when he does get on base.

He has scored 65 of the 130 times he has reached base safely, or 50% of the time. The only other leadoff man who is at 50% or better is Jose Reyes.

 

Even the great Kevin Youkilis, of the vaunted Boston Red Sox is not close to that. He has scored only 39.6 % of the time he gets on base.

 

Yeah, that's relevent...OR NOT.

 

How the hell does it matter? He has no control over it. That's like saying Javy is the best pitcher on our staff because the offense scores the most runs when he pitches.

[Balta1701]

Yeah, that's relevent...OR NOT.

 

How the hell does it matter? He has no control over it. That's like saying Javy is the best pitcher on our staff because the offense scores the most runs when he pitches.

It worked for Black Jack in the early 90's.

[VAfan]

I don't know if anyone pointed this out in a seperate discussion, but Baseball America chose its minor league all-star teams here: http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/minors/news/261917.html

 

They picked Fields as their top choice at 3B. Unless KW were intent on keeping him in the team's longterm future plans, now would be the best time to extract maximum value for him.

 

I never understand this "logic." If Josh Fields is BA's choice for the top AAA 3B, then unless they've completely overrated him, his value is only going to increase in the future as he makes it to the major leagues and gains experience.

 

Take Francisco Liriano as an extreme example. He once was traded, along with Joe Nathan and Boof Bonser for 1 year of service from AJ Pierzynski. Now that he's in the majors, he's probably the most valuable pitcher in all of baseball.

 

The White Sox are going to need to develop some players from within if they are going to keep their payroll within acceptable bounds. Fields is likely to be one of those players (even if he'll never be better than Joe Crede is now).

[Rowand44]

Yeah, that's relevent...OR NOT.

 

How the hell does it matter? He has no control over it. That's like saying Javy is the best pitcher on our staff because the offense scores the most runs when he pitches.

No, it's a bit different. While Scotty definitely can credit the offense for some of his runs, his speed will also play a factor into it. It makes sense that when he gets on base, he'll score a lot.

[iamshack]

Yeah, that's relevent...OR NOT.

 

How the hell does it matter? He has no control over it. That's like saying Javy is the best pitcher on our staff because the offense scores the most runs when he pitches.

 

Well, I disagree with you.

 

He certainly has control over it to some degree.

 

I won't deny that it depends on the people behind you driving you in.

 

But explain this to me....If Youkilis has Loretta, Ortiz, and Ramirez batting behind him, why is he scoring less than 40% of the time while Pods is scoring 50% of the time? The Greek God of Walks has reached base 154 times, compared to Scottie's 130 times. Yet Youkilis's slow ass has still scored 4 less runs than Scottie.

 

Abreu, who has been on base 173 times, has scored 5 less runs than Scottie, only 35% of the time.

Edited July 18, 2006 by iamshack

[Guest JimH]

I never understand this "logic." If Josh Fields is BA's choice for the top AAA 3B, then unless they've completely overrated him, his value is only going to increase in the future as he makes it to the major leagues and gains experience.

 

Take Francisco Liriano as an extreme example. He once was traded, along with Joe Nathan and Boof Bonser for 1 year of service from AJ Pierzynski. Now that he's in the majors, he's probably the most valuable pitcher in all of baseball.

 

The White Sox are going to need to develop some players from within if they are going to keep their payroll within acceptable bounds. Fields is likely to be one of those players (even if he'll never be better than Joe Crede is now).

 

All of this logic you present is extremely tempered by the White Sox doing everything they can to win a 2nd World Series. They are going for it. That means leave no stone unturned. Doesn't mean be reckless, but it does mean if your management team identifies a key piece and the price is Josh Fields, then so be it. Sounds harsh but KW is not timid, he'll do what he has to do. Priority One, win a World Series in 2006. Everything else takes a back seat.

[gojimthome]

Well, I disagree with you.

 

He certainly has control over it to some degree.

 

I won't deny that it depends on the people behind you driving you in.

 

But explain this to me....If Youkilis has Loretta, Ortiz, and Ramirez batting behind him, why is he scoring less than 40% of the time while Pods is scoring 50% of the time?

 

It's not complicated, you know:

 

Loretta RISP .286

Ortiz RISP .279

Ramirez RISP .289

 

Iguchi RISP .346

Thome RISP .375

Konerko RISP .366

 

Pods is being made to look good by what's behind him, while Youkilis is not.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Contreras' Crew

[Rowand44]

Well, I disagree with you.

 

He certainly has control over it to some degree.

 

I won't deny that it depends on the people behind you driving you in.

 

But explain this to me....If Youkilis has Loretta, Ortiz, and Ramirez batting behind him, why is he scoring less than 40% of the time while Pods is scoring 50% of the time?

Very interesting stuff there. Pods has played less games and scored more runs than youk with a much lower obp.

[gojimthome]

Very interesting stuff there. Pods has played less games and scored more runs than youk with a much lower obp.

 

Sure. Jump on the Pods lovewagon and give credit to him for the proficiency of the three hitters behind him.

[Rowand44]

Sure. Jump on the Pods lovewagon and give credit to him for the proficiency of the three hitters behind him.

The 3 behind Youk have more combined rbi's than our guys do, so don't make it seem like the guys behind Youk aren't doing their jobs.

[gojimthome]

The 3 behind Youk have more combined rbi's than our guys do, so don't make it seem like the guys behind Youk aren't doing their jobs.

 

Loretta RISP .286

Ortiz RISP .279

Ramirez RISP .289

 

Iguchi RISP .346

Thome RISP .375

Konerko RISP .366

 

 

Argue with it. Go ahead. You're going to make yourself look really stupid.

[iamshack]

Sure. Jump on the Pods lovewagon and give credit to him for the proficiency of the three hitters behind him.

 

I know this isn't very easy quantifiable, so god forbid we actually make an argument that it might exist, but did you ever stop to consider the possibility that maybe Scott's speed on the basepaths distracts the pitcher or helps the hitter at the plate while he is on base?

[gojimthome]

In fact, we can expand that to include with runners on first if you like:

 

Loretta Runners on .299

Ortiz Runners on .295

Ramirez Runners on .290

 

Iguchi Runners on .343

Thome Runners on .368

Konerko Runners on .358

 

Podsednik is looking good because the people behind him are doing well. He doesn't have magic Podsjuice that makes him score more often.

 

 

 

 

I know this isn't very easy quantifiable, so god forbid we actually make an argument that it might exist, but did you ever stop to consider the possibility that maybe Scott's speed on the basepaths distracts the pitcher or helps the hitter at the plate while he is on base?

 

Oh, sure...That amazing Pods caught-stealing speed adds .80-.100 points of BA to everyone behind him. It works wonders for Juan Pierre's support crew, too, right?

[hi8is]

Oh, sure...That amazing Pods caught-stealing speed adds .80-.100 points of BA to everyone behind him. It works wonders for Juan Pierre's support crew, too, right?

did you watch any games last season? pods did do a lot to mess with pitchers last year... meat balls, wild pitches, pitchers walking people.... its not about BA as much as it is him getting in the head of the other team... he did it more often last season but has done it a little this year.

[whitesox61382]

I never understand this "logic." If Josh Fields is BA's choice for the top AAA 3B, then unless they've completely overrated him, his value is only going to increase in the future as he makes it to the major leagues and gains experience.

 

Take Francisco Liriano as an extreme example. He once was traded, along with Joe Nathan and Boof Bonser for 1 year of service from AJ Pierzynski. Now that he's in the majors, he's probably the most valuable pitcher in all of baseball.

 

The White Sox are going to need to develop some players from within if they are going to keep their payroll within acceptable bounds. Fields is likely to be one of those players (even if he'll never be better than Joe Crede is now).

 

In some cases you can expect a player to get better as they get older, but that certainly isn't always the case. For example, Joe Borchard put together a great first full season in the minors at AA. At that point, he was considered one of the top prospects in baseball and his value was as high as ever(untouchable according to most Sox fans). According to you, his value should have increased as he reached the majors, but that couldn't have been further from the truth. After his first full season he could have been traded straight up for almost any player in the majors(except for a few dozen superstars), but in the end all the Sox got for him was Thorton and even that was generous. Another example is Brian Anderson. Do you think he has improved his trade value with his performance in the majors at this point? Most prospects struggle when they first reach the majors and their trade value suffers a little, so your "logic" that Fields trade value will increase if they hold onto him and let him play in the majors will probably be incorrect. Prospects are like stocks, you need to sell them high and not get too greedy and wait to long. When you consider that Fields really has no place to play, and the fact that there are two big concerns with him that don't bode well for him in the majors(plate disipline and defense), than I certainly don't have a problem with trading him especially if it helps lead to another WS.

 

As far as your Liriano example, that certainly is an extreme example. Around this time, fans of contenders who don't do their research are always afraid of trading the next big prospect for short-term help(Shilling, Bagwell, Kazmir, ect as other examples), but what they don't know or care to research is the HUNDREDS of other prospects that are traded away and never amount to anything. Every year ESPN comes out with an article that directly talks about this and gives a percentage of prospects traded away that ever amount to everyday players yet alone superstars(I suggest you read it if you are affraid of trading prospects - I was just like you many years back before I read that article), and the number is VERY small to say the least. Besides, proven major league talent is always worth more than unproven minor league talent.

 

I agree that the Sox need to develop so of their own players to help supplement their current players, but I don't think Fields is one of those guys. He plays a position already filled by a young talented player(even if his agent is Boras). Furthermore, I still think Sweeney is a better overall prospect as a corner outfielder. Finally, if you look at my trade purposal, I have the Sox getting two young prospects that fill more important needs(catcher and pitching) while trading from an area of strength(outfield and third base). There is a good chance that if the Sox do trade one of their starters that it will include the young talent that you are looking for.

[RockRaines]

In some cases you can expect a player to get better as they get older, but that certainly isn't always the case. For example, Joe Borchard put together a great first full season in the minors at AA. At that point, he was considered one of the top prospects in baseball and his value was as high as ever(untouchable according to most Sox fans). According to you, his value should have increased as he reached the majors, but that couldn't have been further from the truth. After his first full season he could have been traded straight up for almost any player in the majors(except for a few dozen superstars), but in the end all the Sox got for him was Thorton and even that was generous. Another example is Brian Anderson. Do you think he has improved his trade value with his performance in the majors at this point? Most prospects struggle when they first reach the majors and their trade value suffers a little, so your "logic" that Fields trade value will increase if they hold onto him and let him play in the majors will probably be incorrect. Prospects are like stocks, you need to sell them high and not get too greedy and wait to long. When you consider that Fields really has no place to play, and the fact that there are two big concerns with him that don't bode well for him in the majors(plate disipline and defense), than I certainly don't have a problem with trading him especially if it helps lead to another WS.

 

As far as your Liriano example, that certainly is an extreme example. Around this time, fans of contenders who don't do their research are always afraid of trading the next big prospect for short-term help(Shilling, Bagwell, Kazmir, ect as other examples), but what they don't know or care to research is the HUNDREDS of other prospects that are traded away and never amount to anything. Every year ESPN comes out with an article that directly talks about this and gives a percentage of prospects traded away that ever amount to everyday players yet alone superstars(I suggest you read it if you are affraid of trading prospects - I was just like you many years back before I read that article), and the number is VERY small to say the least. Besides, proven major league talent is always worth more than unproven minor league talent.

 

I agree that the Sox need to develop so of their own players to help supplement their current players, but I don't think Fields is one of those guys. He plays a position already filled by a young talented player(even if his agent is Boras). Furthermore, I still think Sweeney is a better overall prospect as a corner outfielder. Finally, if you look at my trade purposal, I have the Sox getting two young prospects that fill more important needs(catcher and pitching) while trading from an area of strength(outfield and third base). There is a good chance that if the Sox do trade one of their starters that it will include the young talent that you are looking for.

Good argument. But Borchard and BA werent as good as Fields is at this age.