SoxFan1 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 If we wanted outr worst hitter batting 9th we wouldnt have Olivo there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 So why not get the same effect with Harris hitting 9th? You only lose the first inning. Your 9th hitter should be a table setter too, not your worst hitter. Your 9 hitter will get less plate apperances than anyone on the team, your 1 hitter will get the most. It's not just the first inning you lose, it's about 144 plate appearances by harris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Your 9 hitter will get less plate apperances than anyone on the team, your 1 hitter will get the most. It's not just the first inning you lose, it's about 144 plate appearances by harris So we need an extra 144 plate appearances from Willie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 So why not get the same effect with Harris hitting 9th? You only lose the first inning. Your 9th hitter should be a table setter too, not your worst hitter. you are onto something there..........as i recall in the past couple of seasons when they moved frank around the lineup i remember him doing fairly well in the 2 and 4 spots....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hotsoxchick1 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 So we need an extra 144 plate appearances from Willie? good gosh no........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 So we need an extra 144 plate appearances from Willie? Well, that's something you need to decide. My point is that you just don't "lose the first inning". You lose a lot of at bats. Otherwise, you'd have your leadoff hitters batting 9th all over the league. There's a reason they don't. And, i think the first inning is one of the better innings to score runs in. I'd rather take my chances getting Willie on and running around and getting on the board in the first than having his other 3 at bats produce something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Well, that's something you need to decide. My point is that you just don't "lose the first inning". You lose a lot of at bats. Otherwise, you'd have your leadoff hitters batting 9th all over the league. There's a reason they don't. And, i think the first inning is one of the better innings to score runs in. I'd rather take my chances getting Willie on and running around and getting on the board in the first than having his other 3 at bats produce something. The first inning is the best inning to score runs, you have your best hitters hitting. There is a reason Frank has 85 or so first inning homers. He bats in the first every game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Well, that's something you need to decide. My point is that you just don't "lose the first inning". You lose a lot of at bats. Otherwise, you'd have your leadoff hitters batting 9th all over the league. There's a reason they don't. And, i think the first inning is one of the better innings to score runs in. I'd rather take my chances getting Willie on and running around and getting on the board in the first than having his other 3 at bats produce something. Let's try this again........ I never said you have your best leadoff hitter batting 9th. You have a leadoff-type hitter who has a solid OBP batting 9th to help set the table. The Sox have not shown they have a great leadoff hitter all year, so why not bump Jiminez up and try something different? Runs are often created from the bottom of the order up. If we were talking Rickey Henderson followed by Willie Randolph, I wouldn't touch the 1-2 combination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Well.. ummm... don't forget to factor in the s***ty offense. Yes, Mark has smelled like a tuna sitting in 90 degree weather for a week a few times. But the run support so far has sucked. The 3rd is because of offense, but 7th in walks and 33rd in ERA is his fault, not the offenses... You for some reason don't think that having a ton of pressure on you to throw the perfect pitch inning after inning would finally get to someone? If you are constantly in tight games or are trailing, and you want to keep your team in the game, it is hard to win. The pressure will eventually get to you and it will ruin your confidence. Remember how it seemed like Foulke would always get rocked last year? That's the kind of s*** that happens when you lose your confidence. Him having a higher ERA, a higher BB total, and a higher loss total can all be contributed to having a lack in offensive support behind you, though only the loss total can be directly linked to the lack of offense. Pitchers are human, just like you and me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Well.. ummm... don't forget to factor in the s***ty offense. Yes, Mark has smelled like a tuna sitting in 90 degree weather for a week a few times. But the run support so far has sucked. The 3rd is because of offense, but 7th in walks and 33rd in ERA is his fault, not the offenses... You for some reason don't think that having a ton of pressure on you to throw the perfect pitch inning after inning would finally get to someone? If you are constantly in tight games or are trailing, and you want to keep your team in the game, it is hard to win. The pressure will eventually get to you and it will ruin your confidence. Remember how it seemed like Foulke would always get rocked last year? That's the kind of s*** that happens when you lose your confidence. Him having a higher ERA, a higher BB total, and a higher loss total can all be contributed to having a lack in offensive support behind you, though only the loss total can be directly linked to the lack of offense. Pitchers are human, just like you and me. I don't know about the lack of offense, but definately the 12 unearned runs and the extra pitches associated with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxplosion Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 I think Marks done great things in the past. But he hasnt now. This is his third season and hes already struggling. Frank didnt have a huge slump like this in his third year. And in 98, and all the other years where people have bashed on Frank, those years were actually decent. One year he lacked average but had power (and that lack at .265 wasnt too bad), then he lacked power and had average and so on. But he always brought something to the table, except in 2001 when he was out with that injury. But for Mark, this is a lot earlier in his career and this slump is a lot worse. Im still holding out hope that he will recover either this year, or next year, somewhat like Frank did in 2000. But right now hes not doing well and we should just realize that and not try to rationalize. Mark hasnt had much support, but he hasnt pitched very good at all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Mark will be better than OK...unless he is hurt, which is not completely out of question. He needs his cutter, curve and change to supplement. I am glad he got away from a arm-ruining slider, but those 3 pitches are crucial. Watching Cubbies sit on his 86 fastball sucked. Burly has too much talent to fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxplosion Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Buehrles stuff isnt that good. The man just knows how to pitch. He knows what to throw, and when and where to throw it. Thats why I think hell be good... ...again. He just needs to get his mind off St Louis and in the game and hell be fine. However, since he already seems to want to leave, I dont think hes going to be a career Southsider. I just dont see it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Buehrles stuff isnt that good. The man just knows how to pitch One of these days you will grow up and will realize that "talent" and "ability" are closely related...very much so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 I dont think hes going to be a career Southsider. You're not the only one. Then again, how many players stay with the same team their whole career? In the 50s, 60s, and 70s, it was a little more common, but it didn't happen all the time. Now-a-days, I can only think of one player off the top of my head that has played for the same team for over 10 years, and that is the only team he has played for....yeah, Frank Thomas. I personally believe that Buehrle will stay with the Sox and his career with the Sox will be atleast 10 years, and possibly even more. I don't think he will stay with the Sox his whole career. I personally think he'll leave when he is in his 30s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Well, that's something you need to decide. My point is that you just don't "lose the first inning". You lose a lot of at bats. Otherwise, you'd have your leadoff hitters batting 9th all over the league. There's a reason they don't. And, i think the first inning is one of the better innings to score runs in. I'd rather take my chances getting Willie on and running around and getting on the board in the first than having his other 3 at bats produce something. Let's try this again........ I never said you have your best leadoff hitter batting 9th. You have a leadoff-type hitter who has a solid OBP batting 9th to help set the table. The Sox have not shown they have a great leadoff hitter all year, so why not bump Jiminez up and try something different? Runs are often created from the bottom of the order up. If we were talking Rickey Henderson followed by Willie Randolph, I wouldn't touch the 1-2 combination. My point was that you just don't lose the first inning order...you lose Willie's at bats for the long run. That's all. I understand what you are saying, however i disagree with it. I mean, why not bat jimenez 8, harris 9 and thomas 1 if you are so in favor of this? You don't need to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sec159row2 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 ROZNER SOUNDS LIKE A BOOB TRYING TO SELL NEWSPAPERS!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 You're not the only one. Then again, how many players stay with the same team their whole career? In the 50s, 60s, and 70s, it was a little more common, but it didn't happen all the time. Now-a-days, I can only think of one player off the top of my head that has played for the same team for over 10 years, and that is the only team he has played for....yeah, Frank Thomas. I personally believe that Buehrle will stay with the Sox and his career with the Sox will be atleast 10 years, and possibly even more. I don't think he will stay with the Sox his whole career. I personally think he'll leave when he is in his 30s. I think he is lucky if he makes it through the last year of his arbit before we deal him. He has told us there is no way he is signing past that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxplosion Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 One of these days you will grow up and will realize that "talent" and "ability" are closely related...very much so. Of course brando, his stuff is good enough but its more his know how that makes him a great pitcher... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxplosion Posted June 26, 2003 Share Posted June 26, 2003 There are a couple more that I can think of wsf. Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell have played for Houston their entire careers, starting in 88 and 91. Edgar Martinez started his career in Seattle in 87. And of course, Thomas started here in 90. Those are the only ones I can find with careers that have lasted 10+ years on the same team. And I dont think Buehrle will make it that far. When he comes up for free agency in 2006, I reckon hes gone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.