Just what BA wanted to hear...

[Jordan4life_2007]

I still don't understand how some of the masses can blindly follow and truly think that Pods/Erstad/Dye in the outfield gives this team its best chance to win. Maybe after they see that AWESOME positioning Pods uses...aka play on the track for every hitter, his limp noodle throwing prowess, and running in mud speed he possesses now, perhaps the truth will ring in?

 

No, probably not...'tis more fun to blindly follow and believe in the ability of a guy who had one good season ever in LF, and a guy who hasn't played CF in years for CF..

 

WTG Oz! Shoulda just reassigned BA the first day of ST, we all knew it was going to happen anyways. No reason to put the best defensive players on the field or anything. Oh, thats right, as you said yesterday, with Uribe and Erstad up the middle, we're "alot better defensively". Yeah, ok.

 

Don't look at me. I want Pods/Anderson/Dye. If they're that infatuated with Erstad, use him as a true 4th outfielder.

[witesoxfan]

His career record says otherwise.

 

Seriously. One season below .500 in his entire managerial career, and he managed for 17 years. Career winning percentage of .583. The guy knew how to manage, so it seems as though the quote is true.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 17, 2007 -> 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I never noticed this, but it's ironic that you have that Earl Weaver quote in your sig yet are a Podsednik lover, seeing that Pods contributes to absolutely none of those.

I just thought of the EXACT same thing 30 seconds before I saw your post.

 

Which signing was more pointless; Erstad or Pods?

[Y2HH]

His career record says otherwise.

 

Ozzie's career record says otherwise, too. So what. With good pitching, you don't need to sit on 3 run homers, because they may never come...then again, Weaver also preached fundamentals -- which in that era of the game consisted of base stealing and bunting properly, too. I personally think he tacked on the 3-run homer thing as a joke...because it makes me laugh.

[CWSGuy406]

Ozzie's career record says otherwise, too. So what. With good pitching, you don't need to sit on 3 run homers, because they may never come...then again, Weaver also preached fundamentals -- which in that era of the game consisted of base stealing and bunting properly , too. I personally think he tacked on the 3-run homer thing as a joke...because it makes me laugh.

 

And which of these does Podsednik do well, again? He's an average base stealer with a ~69% success rate the past two seasons, and that doesn't take into account pick-offs. So he's really not helping the Sox over the long run. And Podsednik isn't a very good bunter, too, which is funny -- fast guys who can do nothing but hit a bunch of singles and run fast are supposed to be the best bunters. There's several guys on the Sox who I'd rather have put down a bunt than Pods -- that's pretty pathetic.

 

Oh, and lemme know when Ozzie gets past year ten. Just a bit of a difference 500 games to 2500 games...

Edited March 17, 2007 by CWSGuy406

[jackie hayes]

Except Weaver hated to bunt, and never called for a SB. If he had a player he thought could steal, he would give them a sign saying they had the green light IF they wanted to go.

Yeah, if there's one thing Weaver didn't mean by "fundamentals", it's smallball. Something tells me he wasn't a fan of those -- what did he call them?, oh yeah -- "fleas on the f'n bases, getting picked off, trying to steal, getting thrown out, taking runs away from you". Just a hunch.

 

Incidentally,he was an excellent gardener.

[mr_genius]

Except Weaver hated to bunt, and never called for a SB. If he had a player he thought could steal, he would give them a sign saying they had the green light IF they wanted to go.

 

He would only bunt if it was for the winning run, and you are playing for that one run to win.

 

His "Fundamentals" more went back fielding, and making sure all his players knew where they had to be, where to throw it, and how to catch it.

 

The 3 run homer talk wasn't a joke. He wanted a team based on OBP and power. He didn't care if you didn't have any speed at the top of the order, if you could get on in front of guys like Boog Powell, Lee May, Eddie Murry, Don Baylor, you are helping your team alot more than stealing a few bags.

well, let's hire Earl Weaver! he'll make Brian Anderson team captain!

 

just messin with you guys

 

[Y2HH]

All I know is that Ozzie's small/smart/big ball combination brought us a title. Nothing more need be said.

 

I don't like Earl Weavers strategy, no matter how successful it may have been for him...I just don't like it. And I think the league has adjusted to that...look at the Yankees...they are a team built on power after power -- and they've won ZIP since constructing it...even in the years they HAD pitching.

 

I think in todays game, you have to adjust to the given situation -- which I agree, Oz doesn't always do -- but it's a little more complex than sitting on the 3 run HR. Especially considering the surroundings. Perhaps sitting on 3 run HR's in No-Homerica Park isn't a very good idea, while it may work at Sox park...you have to adjust, constantly, in the modern game...

 

At least, in my opinion you do.

 

The 3 run HR worked how well for us before KW reconstructed our team in 05?

 

Oh, that's right...it didn't. At all.

[The Ginger Kid]

If Brian Anderson can have some ridiculous hyperbolic fan club then why can't Podsednik?

 

I agree.

 

Meetings every Wednesday night in my basement, followed by re-runs of Oprah. Can someone bring the Fiddle Faddle?

 

 

And Balta, do you think Brian Anderson is a better CF than a healthy Darin Erstad? Do you also think he'll perform better at the plate than a healthy Darin Erstad?

[witesoxfan]

All I know is that Ozzie's small/smart/big ball combination brought us a title. Nothing more need be said.

 

I don't like Earl Weavers strategy, no matter how successful it may have been for him...I just don't like it. And I think the league has adjusted to that...look at the Yankees...they are a team built on power after power -- and they've won ZIP since constructing it...even in the years they HAD pitching.

 

I think in todays game, you have to adjust to the given situation -- which I agree, Oz doesn't always do -- but it's a little more complex than sitting on the 3 run HR. Especially considering the surroundings. Perhaps sitting on 3 run HR's in No-Homerica Park isn't a very good idea, while it may work at Sox park...you have to adjust, constantly, in the modern game...

 

At least, in my opinion you do.

 

The 3 run HR worked how well for us before KW reconstructed our team in 05?

 

Oh, that's right...it didn't. At all.

 

The 2005 White Sox team WAS a team that relied upon the 3 run homer. How else are you going to explain the 200 homers they hit?

 

That team didn't f'ing win because of the s***ty offense. That team won because they put up a 3.61 team ERA. Last year, they put up 4.61. Why do you think the team wasn't nearly as good last year?

 

Look at the numbers dude, sometimes they do tell the entire story.

[Balta1701]

And Balta, do you think Brian Anderson is a better CF than a healthy Darin Erstad? Do you also think he'll perform better at the plate than a healthy Darin Erstad?

Yes. I think Brian Anderson is a MUCH better defensive CF than even a healthy Darin Erstad. It's the same argument you make between Aaron Rowand and Anderson...all 3 of them presumably get quite good jumps on the ball (otherwise Erstad never would have won those GG's), but after that first step...Anderson is pretty much a track star, and the other guys don't have nearly the closing speed he has. And I haven't seen many people get jumps on a ball as good as Anderson, either.

 

Offensively...excluding 2000 (6 years ago and Erstad's career year, numbers he's never come close to matching) and 2006 (erstad's worst year, last year, where he missed most of the year injured)...Darin Erstad has been an .277 average hitter and has averaged a .695 OPS or so. Post All-Star break last year...Brian Anderson hit .257 with a .694 OPS. I think that at the very worst, Anderson would put up numbers offensively equal to what Erstad would give you, and depending on his development, could and should be significantly better.

[Y2HH]

We won in 05 because of pitching, and doing what the situation dictated.

 

We didn't win the last game of the world series with long balls. We won it doing the right thing at the right time. That team had a way of finding ways to win, and they did it any way they could, with or without the HR.

 

Yes, the Sox hit a lot of HR's (and have for a while), aided by our bandbox ballpark...but you have to win it inning by inning -- not always swinging for the fence, no matter what park you play in. I just don't buy into sitting on HR's as your only way of winning ballgames. And no, I also don't buy into smartball/smallball -- 05 was a combination of everything at the same time to achieve success, not only Hrs.

Edited March 18, 2007 by Y2HH

[Dick Allen]

We won in 05 because of pitching, and doing what the situation dictated.

 

We didn't win the last game of the world series with long balls. We won it doing the right thing at the right time. That team had a way of finding ways to win, and they did it any way they could, with or without the HR.

 

Yes, the Sox hit a lot of HR's (and have for a while), aided by our bandbox ballpark...but you have to win it inning by inning -- not always swinging for the fence, no matter what park you play in. I just don't buy into sitting on HR's as your only way of winning ballgames. And no, I also don't buy into smartball/smallball -- 05 was a combination of everything at the same time to achieve success, not only Hrs.

At the point of the season last year when the White Sox hit their 200th homer, I think that was the team total in 2005, their team runs scored was almost identical, like with 5 or 6 to the amount of runs they had scored with 200 homers in 2005.

[CWSGuy406]

We didn't win the last game of the world series with long balls. We won it doing the right thing at the right time. That team had a way of finding ways to win, and they did it any way they could, with or without the HR.

 

Nice -- pick one of the post season game where we didn't hit a homer.

 

Because the rest of our wins, the home run was the reason our offense scored runs. Yep -- every single one of them except the for game two of the ALCS.

 

And even in Game 4 of the WS, our offense was bad. One run in nine innings against Backe wasn't good. But Garcia was better than Backe so we won.

 

That's okay... if you want to believe that the reason the Sox score runs is because of magic pixie dust and bunts, go ahead. Just know that the stats show that you're completely wrong.

Edited March 18, 2007 by CWSGuy406

[witesoxfan]

every single one of them except the for game two of the ALCS.

 

And that ball was 5 feet from leaving the yard too

[Y2HH]

The last game of the 2005 season was a great example of the lackluster O that season. The lineup was shutdown by Brandon "Cy Young" Backe. They couldn't scratch out a run until the 8th.

 

If you combined the 2005 pitching staff, with the 2006 offense(what you call the HR happy offense), I would bet my season tickets that the Sox would at least have made it back to the Series.

 

Sure it's nice to have a balanced lineup, but the HR has not been the Sox problem, and rarely is ever the problem for a team. It always goes back to the pitching.

 

That we can agree on. I just believe that using any one dimensional offensive approach weakens your game. Don't get me wrong, I like the HR as much as the next person -- but I also like being able to scratch out runs when the HRs aren't coming.

 

But yes, winning lives and dies with pitching.

 

I find the quote from Weaver funny, that's why I use it. I don't care how you score the runs...just score more than the opponent and you're good to go.

 

Nice -- pick one of the post season game where we didn't hit a homer.

 

Because the rest of our wins, the home run was the reason our offense scored runs. Yep -- every single one of them except the for game two of the ALCS.

 

And even in Game 4 of the WS, our offense was bad. One run in nine innings against Backe wasn't good. But Garcia was better than Backe so we won.

 

That's okay... if you want to believe that the reason the Sox score runs is because of magic pixie dust and bunts, go ahead. Just know that the stats show that you're completely wrong.

 

There were other games during the season where we didn't have game tieing or winning HR's and it was nice to win those games, too. It was merely an example that when HRs aren't happening -- there ARE other ways to score. We were able to do them all that year.

[Y2HH]

All of this said -- perhaps I will have to re-evaulate my opinion of Weaver's "strategery". History says it worked...I just find myself thinking that it doesn't matter how you score runs, whether it be by the long ball or the small ball approach, just so long as you can do it when the situation dictates and with the personal you have available.

[witesoxfan]

All of this said -- perhaps I will have to re-evaulate my opinion of Weaver's "strategery". History says it worked...I just find myself thinking that it doesn't matter how you score runs, whether it be by the long ball or the small ball approach, just so long as you can do it when the situation dictates and with the personal you have available.

 

Precisely. If you need 1 run, there's a man on base, and it's late in the game, the hitter should not be thinking longball. That is about the only time small-ball should be played, atleast in the AL.

 

In the NL, it's late in the game and when the pitcher is up, just because they suck at hitting most of the time.

 

The problem with smallball is that it's very ineffecient when it comes to scoring runs. Weaver's philosophy, and Moneyball's philosophy as well, is to score runs as effeciently as possible. Smallball - bunting, stealing, hitting to the right side, sac flies - is the most ineffecient way of scoring runs there is. However, it's generally a consistent way of scoring runs. The 3-run homer is effecient, but inconsistent. That's why having the ability to do both - not necessarily always executing smallball - is great for an offense. That's what Weaver did. Only do it when necessity calls.

[fathom]

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

 

See ya Brian. Considering Ozzie said he'd only make the roster if he's a full-time starter, I hope Anderson is looking for an apartment in Charlotte.

[Kalapse]

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

 

See ya Brian. Considering Ozzie said he'd only make the roster if he's a full-time starter, I hope Anderson is looking for an apartment in Charlotte.

w00t worst 1-2 punch in baseball. Worst 1-2-3 when facing the likes of Dennys Reyes. Should be a fun first month.

[The Ginger Kid]

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

 

See ya Brian. Considering Ozzie said he'd only make the roster if he's a full-time starter, I hope Anderson is looking for an apartment in Charlotte.

 

Not so fast, Fathom...

 

Anderson's chances got a bit slimmer Friday, when Guillen said left fielder Scott Podsednik likely will not open the season on the disabled list. Whether Guillen takes 11 or 12 pitchers will help decide Anderson's fate.

 

This is another decision that likely will go down to the wire.

 

''It all depends on Brian,'' Guillen said. ''It's a tough decision, but it's fun because I know I have the players. The only good thing is I don't have to ask Kenny Williams, 'We have to go get somebody on the market to fit the role.' We have plenty of guys here to do that.''

 

The other question is whether a platoon would be a negative for Anderson at this stage of his career.

 

''We don't know,'' Guillen said. ''I would like to see him play every day. But there are a lot of people who will [have input on the decision]. If we think Brian can help us doing that, we are going to keep him. It's all about winning this year. I might not be here next year. I'm going to go with the best to win this year.

 

''When we got Erstad, we know we have a center fielder on the ballclub. It's up to Brian to perform. If I tell you right now that Erstad is going to be our center fielder, I would be lying because we don't know yet. We are trying to figure it out. It's an issue, but it's a fun one because you have the people around that you can count on.''

[Kalapse]

On a side not though for the 31% of the time that Scott Podsednik is standing on 1B next year you bet your f***ing ass that your going to see one hell of a bunt. Thome/Kong/Dye will of course follow that up with a 450 foot blast making the sacrifice pointless and moot. Welcome to sLmOaNlGl ball!

[The Ginger Kid]

Worst 1-2-3 when facing the likes of Dennys Reyes.

 

 

overrated pothead who had one good season

[Kalapse]

Not so fast, Fathom...

So there is a very small chance that Anderson could be kept on the roster to platoon against lefties? Even though he hits lefties at an even lower rate than he hits righties? Oh fun.

 

I can't wait until May when all this bulls*** is moot thanks to the disabled list.

 

overrated pothead who had one good season

And yet he'll still dominate the 1-2-3 of the Sox because of the arm he throws with. If Danny Graves picked up a ball tomorrow with his left hand he'd have a job in the bigs as a Sox killer.

[The Ginger Kid]

I can't wait until May when all this bulls*** is moot thanks to the disabled list.

 

If not sooner. There's still two weeks of spring training.

 

Pods went 0 for 7 in a minor league game today.

 

The fan club is currently on hiatus.