Putting This One Right Where It Belongs -- On Kenny Williams

[29thandPoplar]

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ May 30, 2007 -> 09:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In the AL Central catch everything thread, benchwarmerJim posted an extended article in which Guillen further discussed his frustrations. In particular, the quote about blaming different divisions of the team cited Kenny Williams. Whatever publication you used conveniently left that out.

 

I honestly don't care how much he calls out the team if he refrains from citing individuals on the team. It was "embarrassing" (as he said in the other article), and many people need to held accountable. No sugercoating needed.

 

Here was the quote where he referenced Williams:

 

"If we have to shake up this ballclub, we will -- at least [general manager] Kenny [Williams] will," Guillen added. "Everybody that's part of this organization, I don't think they should be happy about what happened right now. Not because we got swept by this ballclub. It's because of the way we've played all year long."

[caulfield12]

If you go to the front page of the Tribune right now, there's a poll question, would the White Sox be better off without Ozzie?

 

43.5% said yes.

 

I find this funny, since the Cubs have an even worse record in a much weaker division, yet there are no polls about firing Piniella that I've seen.

[hitlesswonder]

If you go to the front page of the Tribune right now, there's a poll question, would the White Sox be better off without Ozzie?

 

43.5% said yes.

 

I find this funny, since the Cubs have an even worse record in a much weaker division, yet there are no polls about firing Piniella that I've seen.

 

That's because Piniella is a much better manager.

[caulfield12]

That's because Piniella is a much better manager.

 

 

Before he went to the D-Rays, yes....but I think he's lost some of the edge from his time in broadcasting and undergoing the Tampa Bay Torture took something out of him, it's hard to put a finger on it, exactly.

 

The Sun-Times had a pretty good (and critical) story today about the Cubs' future under Piniella's guidance.

Edited May 31, 2007 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

Judging from Ozzie's comments after today's game, he has come to the realization this team needs to be changed to win. Its time for KW to admit he was wrong this winter, swallow his pride and either make some really bold moves in an attempt to catch up this season or start selling off pieces that aren't going to be around in 2008.

[GreenSox]

CF is a HUGE improvement from last year. He is actually one of the best hitters on our team this year. That is not saying much, but it's true.

It certainly is not a defensive improvement. And it looks like more of an offensive improvement than it really is because everyone else is hitting so miserably. So we take Erstad and his zero power and .310 OBP, instead of taking a risk on a young player. That's a poor decision, imo, because Erstad is so mediocre that is easily worth the risk to play a young player. As it is, Anderson improved in 2006, outplayed Erstad in the spring - but he isn't an ozzie-style player that hacks away at every pitch.

And it doesn't even have to be Anderson - play Sweeney, play Fields, play Owens...someone with potential. It sure beats the guaranteed mediocrity of erstad.

[Whitewashed in '05]

Judging from Ozzie's comments after today's game, he has come to the realization this team needs to be changed to win. Its time for KW to admit he was wrong this winter, swallow his pride and either make some really bold moves in an attempt to catch up this season or start selling off pieces that aren't going to be around in 2008.

Yup, he made it a point to include the second half of last season carrying over now.

 

I am patiently waiting on KW to respond. Is he still traveling with our minor league teams?

[caulfield12]

It certainly is not a defensive improvement. And it looks like more of an offensive improvement than it really is because everyone else is hitting so miserably. So we take Erstad and his zero power and .310 OBP, instead of taking a risk on a young player. That's a poor decision, imo, because Erstad is so mediocre that is easily worth the risk to play a young player. As it is, Anderson improved in 2006, outplayed Erstad in the spring - but he isn't an ozzie-style player that hacks away at every pitch.

And it doesn't even have to be Anderson - play Sweeney, play Fields, play Owens...someone with potential. It sure beats the guaranteed mediocrity of erstad.

 

 

If we had Darin Erstad or a 700+ OPS Brian Anderson this year, we'd be virtually in the same position we now find ourselves in...probably worse, because we'd be without a leadoff hitter.

 

.313/.354/754 OPS is not something that even the biggest BA supporter would project for this year...and he certainly wouldn't be capable of putting those numbers up as the #1 hitter in the line-up.

 

There are lots of fingers to point, but blaming Erstad for our .500 record is about as far removed from reality as it gets. You can fault OG/KW for not playing Sweeney or Anderson everyday and failing to develop them for 2008, but that dilemma of development versus contention has ALWAYS been an issue with the Sox, for seemingly the last 15 years.

[DBAHO]

I don't have the time to do it now, but I'd like to see the difference in the numbers b/w the bullpen up to this date in 2005, and the bullpen up to this date this year, and see what the run differential is, and how much of a difference that has made to our overall record, especially in those tight games.

[caulfield12]

Yup, he made it a point to include the second half of last season carrying over now.

 

I am patiently waiting on KW to respond. Is he still traveling with our minor league teams?

 

 

I would assume he's doing something draft-related...he usually doesn't get involved with looking at other teams' minor leaguers until after that's over.

 

Of course, he's probably also looking at De Los Santos and ANY relievers that MIGHT be able to help, since Day looks overmatched and Aardsma might be ticketed for AAA soon.

 

That leaves Bukvich, Vazquez...but neither one of those guys are long-term fixes, certainly not Bukvich. We might catch lightning in a bottle for 2-3 months, that's the extent of it.

[caulfield12]

I don't have the time to do it now, but I'd like to see the difference in the numbers b/w the bullpen up to this date in 2005, and the bullpen up to this date this year, and see what the run differential is, and how much of a difference that has made to our overall record, especially in those tight games.

 

Interestingly, we have 19 blown saves in 2005, which was the American League average that year.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggreg...amp;season=2005

 

I do know the Twins only lost 3 games all last year that they were leading after the 7th inning. We've already lost NINE games this season with leads in the 6th inning or later.

 

We're also now 9th or 10th in the AL for overall team ERA at 4.52, barely an improvement on last year.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(GreenSox @ May 30, 2007 -> 10:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It certainly is not a defensive improvement. And it looks like more of an offensive improvement than it really is because everyone else is hitting so miserably. So we take Erstad and his zero power and .310 OBP, instead of taking a risk on a young player. That's a poor decision, imo, because Erstad is so mediocre that is easily worth the risk to play a young player. As it is, Anderson improved in 2006, outplayed Erstad in the spring - but he isn't an ozzie-style player that hacks away at every pitch.

And it doesn't even have to be Anderson - play Sweeney, play Fields, play Owens...someone with potential. It sure beats the guaranteed mediocrity of erstad.

Anderson is such a bad player I can't believe anyone can still back him. Erstad outplayed him during the REGULAR season both hitting and defensively. Erstad is much better than Anderson. He may be mediocre, but Anderson is awful. Sweeney is not ready yet and he should be in the minors getting more at bats and getting ready to be a major league player. There is no need to rush him. Fields and Owens can't play CF so those comparisons are ridiculous. Should we trade Crede and play Fields? Possibly. Owens has the potential to be what? A less productive Scooty P? I think I will pass and keep playing Mack or Terrero in LF. Owens has the potential to be mediocre and that is as high as his ceiling goes.

I find it strange that some here want to play the younger players just for the hell of it. They must be better than what we already have on the field right? WRONG! They could be a lot worse. Even if they are the same in talent they will make young player mistakes and lose more games for you that way. It could get a lot worse if you start playing all these younger players. A LOT worse.

Edited May 31, 2007 by southsideirish

[caulfield12]

Anderson is such a bad player I can't believe anyone can still back him. Erstad outplayed him during the REGULAR season both hitting and defensively. Erstad is much better than Anderson. He may be mediocre, but Anderson is awful. Sweeney is not ready yet and he should be in the minors getting more at bats and getting ready to be a major league player. There is no need to rush him. Fields and Owens can't play CF so those comparisons are ridiculous. Should we trade Crede and play Fields? Possibly. Owens has the potential to be what? A less productive Scooty P? I think I will pass and keep playing Mack or Terrero in LF. Owens has the potential to be mediocre and that is as high as his ceiling goes.

 

 

In a month or two, we will have nothing to lose playing Owens for 45-60 games, because if he CAN do the job, that's going to save the $7-12 million that KW would have to spend to get a prototypical table-setter leadoff man (Pierre/Roberts, etc.) The only other option is to 1) Leave Erstad as leadoff hitter OR 2) find a leadoff hitter at SS or 2B, in which case we're going to pay through the teeth for an experienced player (like a Rollins) or we're going to take a flier on a plateaued player, such as Castillo, who doesn't really fit into the future and would be more of a stopgap.

 

We're pretty sure that Sweeney will definitely be a starter in 2008, but we have no idea about Anderson, Owens or Fields at the major league level.

[Steff]

In a month or two, we will have nothing to lose...

 

 

Sweet.