greasywheels121 Posted March 15, 2007 Author Share Posted March 15, 2007 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 10:03 PM) The White Sox lead the majors in spring training home runs with 25, and only the Brewers have scored more runs. Hawk would be proud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 10:03 PM) The White Sox lead the majors in spring training (games played) and home runs with 25, and only the Brewers have scored more runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daa84 Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Felix @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 11:58 AM) A couple of Sox references from the new Peter Gammons post: • Two obscure names? Scouts rave about Tiger lefty Edward Campusano, who had 81 strikeouts in 55 1/3 innings in A-AA last year; White Sox RHP Adam Russell ticking 97-98; and Adenhart, the Angels' right-hander, who may be a factor on that staff before it's over. • The Red Sox were told that Jon Garland is not available. Period. its interesting that the bosox would be interested in garland, given that hes a contact type pitcher...i suppose it represents the fact that alot of stat based organizations are going hard after extreme ground ball pitchers...and garland is set to hit his prime the next couple years. Edited March 15, 2007 by daa84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 More proof of Ozzie Guillen's evil: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Ask Ozzie a question: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/fan_fo...a.jsp?loc=ozzie If enough of us send in questions, hopefully he will answer some good ones, compared to what his favorite drink is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Fireworks Man Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 (edited) Whatever happened to that pitcher (I think his name was Lujan) that the Sox got for Chris Stewart? I think he was in sinle A last year. Was he in ST camp with the Sox this year? What are the Sox' expectations of him for the next couple of years? BTW, anyone know how Stewart has been doing this spring? Is he expected to be in the Majors this year? Edited March 18, 2007 by South Side Fireworks Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ Mar 17, 2007 -> 09:24 PM) Whatever happened to that pitcher (I think his name was Lujan) that the Sox got for Chris Stewart? I think he was in sinle A last year. Was he in ST camp with the Sox this year? What are the Sox' expectations of him for the next couple of years? BTW, anyone know how Stewart has been doing this spring? Is he expected to be in the Majors this year? No, I am pretty sure he hasn't pitched with the mlb club this spring. I would assume that the expectation for him is to make the pen in 2-3 years or be trade bait. And from what I have heard, Chris Stewart is competing for the backup C spot and can possibly get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Fireworks Man Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 17, 2007 -> 08:35 PM) No, I am pretty sure he hasn't pitched with the mlb club this spring. I would assume that the expectation for him is to make the pen in 2-3 years or be trade bait. And from what I have heard, Chris Stewart is competing for the backup C spot and can possibly get it. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 Yeah, Lujan is a mystery at this point. Stewart is solid defensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 12 hours from now I'll be in the air on my way to 'Zona! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnB Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 QUOTE(Brian @ Mar 18, 2007 -> 09:19 AM) 12 hours from now I'll be in the air on my way to 'Zona! I'm leaving tuesday afternoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted March 18, 2007 Share Posted March 18, 2007 QUOTE(SnB @ Mar 18, 2007 -> 10:44 AM) I'm leaving tuesday afternoon No one cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 5th row behind Sox dugout today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 Riding home on the train today I was browsing through the Tribune and thought of a discussion on Soxtalk pertaining to our favorite term, "grinders." An interesting question was raised last week on how to quantify such a term, since its interpretation shifts depending upon the person using it. I believe I have found something relatively easy for quantifying a "grinder." It's just OPS / (AB/SB). The entire goal of such a statistic is providing a players number in relation to "0." Further they are from "0," closer they are to being labeled the quintessential grinder. How I figure is players deemed grinders should possess the following: absence of power, avg. heavy OBP, and -- most importantly -- a sizable amount of SBs. Here are several interesting numbers: -Albert Pujols (2006) - 14 -Miguel Cabrera (2006) - 16 -Darren Erstad (2000) - 40 -Juan Pierre (2004) - 52 -Scott Podsednik (2005) - 81 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 07:12 PM) Riding home on the train today I was browsing through the Tribune and thought of a discussion on Soxtalk pertaining to our favorite term, "grinders." An interesting question was raised last week on how to quantify such a term, since its interpretation shifts depending upon the person using it. I believe I have found something relatively easy for quantifying a "grinder." It's just OPS / (AB/SB). The entire goal of such a statistic is providing a players number in relation to "0." Further they are from "0," closer they are to being labeled the quintessential grinder. How I figure is players deemed grinders should possess the following: absence of power, avg. heavy OBP, and -- most importantly -- a sizable amount of SBs. Here are several interesting numbers: -Albert Pujols (2006) - 14 -Miguel Cabrera (2006) - 16 -Darren Erstad (2000) - 40 -Juan Pierre (2004) - 52 -Scott Podsednik (2005) - 81 Eric Byrnes was a 35 last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 06:26 PM) Eric Byrnes was a 35 last year Yeah, it has obvious flaws. In no grinder system should Byrnes have the same rating as Carlos Beltran. It'd be interesting though if Soxtalk actually put together something for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 07:33 PM) Yeah, it has obvious flaws. In no grinder system should Byrnes have the same rating as Carlos Beltran. It'd be interesting though if Soxtalk actually put together something for this. I have my insanely boring Art History class for an hour and a half tomorrow morning, I usually watch movies on my laptop during the class but I'll instead try to put together some sort of Grinder Index. I'm thinking it could end up being the next QB Rating. I'm determined to get this done. The Sox seem to be the home of the grinders so why shouldn't a Sox fan be the one to come up with the statistic that quantifies that which the Sox preach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 (OPS/(AB/SB))*GLC (good looking catches) + INF 1Bs I figure Beltran is good enough defensively that he won't have to have a million amazing looking catches, whereas Byrnes and Erstad will be diving all over the place because of hustle points. And then there is the bust your ass down to 1B, that play is grinder through and through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 06:23 PM) (OPS/(AB/SB))*GLC (good looking catches) + INF 1Bs Is Ichiro a grinder? Because IIRC he often destroys that category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 08:34 PM) Is Ichiro a grinder? Because IIRC he often destroys that category. of course he is. So is Luis Castillo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 06:56 PM) of course he is. So is Luis Castillo I always thought that being a "Grinder" involved being a guy who doesn't have the greatest natural talent. Otherwise, why isn't Thome a grinder? How many guys are there in baseball who run as hard to first as him? He just also hits the ball really really hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 09:02 PM) I always thought that being a "Grinder" involved being a guy who doesn't have the greatest natural talent. Otherwise, why isn't Thome a grinder? How many guys are there in baseball who run as hard to first as him? He just also hits the ball really really hard. maybe my formula sucks and Thome would be a grinder if he werent so damn good. or maybe he is a grinder and that's why KW brought him in here, and instead of being a non-grinder, he's just a grinder who is actually good at baseball? i am putting way too much thought into this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 09:02 PM) I always thought that being a "Grinder" involved being a guy who doesn't have the greatest natural talent. Otherwise, why isn't Thome a grinder? How many guys are there in baseball who run as hard to first as him? He just also hits the ball really really hard. A grinder -- to me anyways -- has always been someone with lesser natural talent than his peers and more often than not lesser production than them as well but they make the absolute most of the talent and opportunities afforded to them. These players are prone to dumb injuries, pointless diving catches, insane hustle, jacked up play and poor statistical output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 07:34 PM) Is Ichiro a grinder? Because IIRC he often destroys that category. QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 07:56 PM) of course he is. So is Luis Castillo WRONG! I think when Kalapse comes out with his final formula you will see that you need to be a little white guy to be a grinder. Castillo and Ichiro end in vowels. Sounds foreign to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 20, 2007 Share Posted March 20, 2007 QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 12:19 AM) WRONG! I think when Kalapse comes out with his final formula you will see that you need to be a little white guy to be a grinder. Castillo and Ichiro end in vowels. Sounds foreign to me. Well you've already given away a good portion of my rough formula. A major factor in the final result is derived from the amount of melanin in the player's skin, the less melanin the more grinding said player tends to do. A few other factors being taken into consideration are BMI, number of vowels in the player's name and the language they speak. A player like Ryan Howard for example (melanin & BMI overload) would score out very poorly in the Grinder Index© Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts