Kurkjian on the AL Central

[greg775]

This guy, to me is the face of our team, hopefully for years to come. 70 or 100 win season, I'm content with the manager.

 

It would be interesting to know what Mark, Thome, AJ, Dye and Paulie truly think of Oz. I would think if those guys told the truth you'd get a good read on what kind of a guy he is to play for. They seem to be pretty standup stud guys.

Oz got his way in getting rid of some of the deadweight he disliked. He has a lot of power but it all comes down to wins. I could see KW wanting to can him if we are horrible this year, but he always will have Jerry in his corner.

The question is, has he reached LaRussa status? Where how the team fares does not matter in terms of him keeping his job. Or would a horrid first half get him axed?

[Jordan4life_2007]

While I agree a leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to leadoff once a game, you want guys who have a tendancy to get on base more than average hitting in front of your better hitters who can drive them in, and they usually are in the middle of the line-up. I will still be in shock if KW doesn't acquire a real leadoff hitter.

 

Can you define who a "real leadoff" hitter would be? And how does Kenny go about acquiring this "real leadoff" hitter?

[Dick Allen]

Can you define who a "real leadoff" hitter would be? And how does Kenny go about acquiring this "real leadoff" hitter?

A real leadoff hitter is a guy like Roberts, or not that I'm advocating it, a guy like Pods when he was in Milwaukee. Someone who has spent time leading off in the major leagues and has been successful. He goes about it by either paying them some money if a free agent or trading players, supposedly he is now loaded with talent both major league and minor league according to this board. Not some guy like Swisher or Cabrera or Erstad. Guys who either have never led off, or really aren't equipped to do so, or are way past the time they would have be effective in that role. Not a guy like Getz. Jerry Owens is a fake leadoff man, and unfortunately it looks like I will be shocked and he will be leading off opening day. I hope Hudson is still being considered.

[MO2005]

In front of Q, Thome, and presumably Dye and Konerko and Fields (that's what, 150+ home runs out of those 5 potentially?) I have actually very little urge to see anyone giving up an out deliberately with the bunt. We've seen what that does before...you get your leadoff man on, then the #2 guy bunts him to 2nd, they walk the 3rd place hitter and it sets up the potential to end the inning on a DP if you get the ground ball.

 

Exactly when you have Thome..Dye..or Konerko up..especially Konerko.i mean geez I couldn't tell you how many times I saw him ground into a DP the last two years..

 

I mean in all honesty for the Sox to compete this year they are going to need a crapload of quentin's and ramirez's from last year from these younger guys..Jerry Owens is not and will not be the answer..quote me on it now! I mean what worries me is let's say these guys have a terrible spring..then what? I mean Beckham needs I'd say another year..Brian Anderson is not the answer in center..Wise is more fit for a utility or giving a guy a day off..Betemit has always been a utility guy his whole career..Fields I am definitely not looking forward to with the potential of striking out 200 times..Frustrating!

[Ozzie Ball]

this is also where I think speed is essential. Even if a guy gets on base at a good rate, will it take 3 consecutive hits to score him? This is a problem that results in "lack of hitting in the clutch." If this same player can score from first on a double, this team will have a more diverse and effective offense.

 

It doesn't need to be the leadoff hitter but one of the players in the 1 or 2 position needs to have speed, because once it's JD, Thome and Konerko come up, it will take a HR or three hits to score them.

I've always thought speed was overrated and no way see it as being essential in any spot in the lineup, I'd take a player with a high OBP and no speed over a player with a low OBP and lots of speed any day. Lineup construction is interesting to think about though and just recently I finished reading Tom Tango (and others') The Book and there's a chapter devoted to lineup construction, from their research they came to the conclusion that the optimal lineup would be set out as follows:

 

1. Your best three hitters hit in the 1, 2 and 4 holes with your best hitter batting 4th, second best hitter batting 2nd and third best hitter (or a hitter with high OBP) batting 1st.

2. Your fourth and fifth best hitter bat 3rd and 5th, with the fourth best hitter batting 5th and the fifth best hitter batting 3rd.

3. The rest of your hitters bat, in order from best to worst, in the 6-9 holes.

 

So based on that our optimal lineup last season would have been:

 

1. Konerko

2. Thome

3. Alexei

4. Quentin

5. Dye

6. Crede (when healthy)

7. Swisher

8. A.J.

9. Cabrera

9b. Uribe (when Crede wasn't healthy, moving everyone else up one spot).

 

Obviously this lineup would go against all conventional thinking and I'm not saying this is how I would construct my lineup but it is interesting to think about.

[Dick Allen]

I've always thought speed was overrated and no way see it as being essential in any spot in the lineup, I'd take a player with a high OBP and no speed over a player with a low OBP and lots of speed any day. Lineup construction is interesting to think about though and just recently I finished reading Tom Tango (and others') The Book and there's a chapter devoted to lineup construction, from their research they came to the conclusion that the optimal lineup would be set out as follows:

 

1. Your best three hitters hit in the 1, 2 and 4 holes with your best hitter batting 4th, second best hitter batting 2nd and third best hitter (or a hitter with high OBP) batting 1st.

2. Your fourth and fifth best hitter bat 3rd and 5th, with the fourth best hitter batting 5th and the fifth best hitter batting 3rd.

3. The rest of your hitters bat, in order from best to worst, in the 6-9 holes.

 

So based on that our optimal lineup last season would have been:

 

1. Konerko

2. Thome

3. Alexei

4. Quentin

5. Dye

6. Crede (when healthy)

7. Swisher

8. A.J.

9. Cabrera

9b. Uribe (when Crede wasn't healthy, moving everyone else up one spot).

 

Obviously this lineup would go against all conventional thinking and I'm not saying this is how I would construct my lineup but it is interesting to think about.

I think SB are overrated and speed is underrated although not at the expense of BA and OBP. As we have seen the last couple of years not being able to advance an extra base on a hit or a flyball has cost the White Sox a lot of runs and probably several wins.

Edited January 27, 2009 by Dick Allen

[Balta1701]

A real leadoff hitter is a guy like Roberts, or not that I'm advocating it, a guy like Pods when he was in Milwaukee. Someone who has spent time leading off in the major leagues and has been successful. He goes about it by either paying them some money if a free agent or trading players, supposedly he is now loaded with talent both major league and minor league according to this board. Not some guy like Swisher or Cabrera or Erstad. Guys who either have never led off, or really aren't equipped to do so, or are way past the time they would have be effective in that role. Not a guy like Getz. Jerry Owens is a fake leadoff man, and unfortunately it looks like I will be shocked and he will be leading off opening day. I hope Hudson is still being considered.

In 2004, the year before we traded for him, his 2nd full big league season, Scott Podsednik hit .244 with a .313 OBP. He had great steal #'s, stole 70, but only had an OPS+ of 75. If he's not injured, Jerry Owens ought to be able to put up equal (SB) or better (OBP, BA) numbers in most categories other than the couple HR's Podsednik hit that year. Pods had a great 2003 but as a "Proven leadoff hitter" or whatever we're looking for, he was brutal in 2004.

[Dick Allen]

In 2004, the year before we traded for him, his 2nd full big league season, Scott Podsednik hit .244 with a .313 OBP. He had great steal #'s, stole 70, but only had an OPS+ of 75. If he's not injured, Jerry Owens ought to be able to put up equal (SB) or better (OBP, BA) numbers in most categories other than the couple HR's Podsednik hit that year. Pods had a great 2003 but as a "Proven leadoff hitter" or whatever we're looking for, he was brutal in 2004.

As much as I really didn't like Pods, Owens won't match Pods bad 2004. First off, he may be entering the period where he gets nagging leg injuries. He hits with no power. He will never steal 70 bases. He's below average in CF and his numbers in 2007 are based on a .340 BA in September of that year, and even then hit .267 with a .324 OBP. Juan Uribe hit .309 that same month with a .358 OBP and an .884 OBP.

[Balta1701]

As much as I really didn't like Pods, Owens won't match Pods bad 2004. First off, he may be entering the period where he gets nagging leg injuries. He hits with no power. He will never steal 70 bases. He's below average in CF and his numbers in 2007 are based on a .340 BA in September of that year, and even then hit .267 with a .324 OBP. Juan Uribe hit .309 that same month with a .358 OBP and an .884 OBP.

If he gets to the nagging leg injury point then I'll totally agree with you. I can't speak to that. But I think he'll certainly better Pods's 2004 batting number except for the HR category if you give him the whole season and he does stay healthy. On the latter part, no idea.

[Jordan4life_2007]

A real leadoff hitter is a guy like Roberts, or not that I'm advocating it, a guy like Pods when he was in Milwaukee. Someone who has spent time leading off in the major leagues and has been successful. He goes about it by either paying them some money if a free agent or trading players, supposedly he is now loaded with talent both major league and minor league according to this board. Not some guy like Swisher or Cabrera or Erstad. Guys who either have never led off, or really aren't equipped to do so, or are way past the time they would have be effective in that role. Not a guy like Getz. Jerry Owens is a fake leadoff man, and unfortunately it looks like I will be shocked and he will be leading off opening day. I hope Hudson is still being considered.

 

It takes two to make a trade. Kenny, along with the Cubs and other teams, have been after Roberts for a couple years now. It's quite clear the O's have no real desire to move him. At least not without getting a heck of a package in return (you don't want to trade Gavin Floyd, do you?). And he's a FA after this year anyway. Making a trade even more difficult. Orlando Hudson would be nice. Although a big risk with his injury history. But there's a reason he's still out there. He probably wants more years/money than ANY team is willing to give him. Besides that, there's flat nothing left in FA that remotely makes sense for the Sox as far as leadoff hitters go.

 

As much as I really didn't like Pods, Owens won't match Pods bad 2004. First off, he may be entering the period where he gets nagging leg injuries. He hits with no power. He will never steal 70 bases. He's below average in CF and his numbers in 2007 are based on a .340 BA in September of that year, and even then hit .267 with a .324 OBP. Juan Uribe hit .309 that same month with a .358 OBP and an .884 OBP.

 

Hey, it's something. Of course, every Sox fan will dismiss it because they simply don't want Jerry Owens on the team under any circumstance. And that's fine. But it doesn't mean anything. Unless something unexpected happens, Owens will be the guy. All you can do is hope that he's healthy and that he can justify the team's obvious faith (blind or not) in his abilities.

[Dick Allen]

If he gets to the nagging leg injury point then I'll totally agree with you. I can't speak to that. But I think he'll certainly better Pods's 2004 batting number except for the HR category if you give him the whole season and he does stay healthy. On the latter part, no idea.

On Aug. 31,2007, Jerry Owens was hitting .239 with a .296 OBP with zero power. He then shined, like Juan Uribe shined in Sept. 07. He isn't very good.

[RockRaines]

Speed is overrated if the player in question isnt that good. If you have your choice between a leadoff hitter with a .350 OBP with speed and one without, you ALWAYS take the one with speed.

[NorthSideSox72]

Random question... who is the best FA left available who can play CF at least competently?

 

[Kyyle23]

Depends on your opinion of Andruw Jones

[Dick Allen]

Random question... who is the best FA left available who can play CF at least competently?

There has been a lot of talk about Orlando Hudson as a CF. Steve Stone mentioned it months ago. I've seen him linked to the Yankees as a CF as well. I would prefer someone who has spent time out there though.

[Melissa1334]

In Swisher's case I think it has less to do with Ozzie not being able to manage him as KW working some vision out. OC, yeah, possibly. I liked both of these guys on the team, but as much as I may have liked Swish the ballplayer before he came here, if it was Ozzie that took part in sending him out of here (and I don't think so), then I'm more comfortable with it than with KW just cutting him loose to stock the farm.

World Series or not, I love Ozzie. I'm 22, and there hasn't been half a Sox manager in my time as a Sox fan than Ozzie is. Sciosia, Torre, Gardenhire, Piniella, Wedge, Martin, LaRussa, Francona, Maddon, Leyland, not the one of them would make me happier despite their accolades or credentials (maybe Martin would come close). This guy, to me is the face of our team, hopefully for years to come. 70 or 100 win season, I'm content with the manager.

someone that thinks 100% about ozzie like i do, thats feels the same

[iamshack]

someone that thinks 100% about ozzie like i do, thats feels the same

 

I'm pretty much on board with those statements too. I love Ozzie.

[ptatc]

I've always thought speed was overrated and no way see it as being essential in any spot in the lineup, I'd take a player with a high OBP and no speed over a player with a low OBP and lots of speed any day. Lineup construction is interesting to think about though and just recently I finished reading Tom Tango (and others') The Book and there's a chapter devoted to lineup construction, from their research they came to the conclusion that the optimal lineup would be set out as follows:

 

1. Your best three hitters hit in the 1, 2 and 4 holes with your best hitter batting 4th, second best hitter batting 2nd and third best hitter (or a hitter with high OBP) batting 1st.

2. Your fourth and fifth best hitter bat 3rd and 5th, with the fourth best hitter batting 5th and the fifth best hitter batting 3rd.

3. The rest of your hitters bat, in order from best to worst, in the 6-9 holes.

 

So based on that our optimal lineup last season would have been:

 

1. Konerko

2. Thome

3. Alexei

4. Quentin

5. Dye

6. Crede (when healthy)

7. Swisher

8. A.J.

9. Cabrera

9b. Uribe (when Crede wasn't healthy, moving everyone else up one spot).

 

Obviously this lineup would go against all conventional thinking and I'm not saying this is how I would construct my lineup but it is interesting to think about.

I would disagree. Speed is important to a lineup. It allows for scroing without extra base hits and getting into scoring position.

 

Of course eveyone would rather the high OBP, that is the first factor in front of the best hitters. But then the speed comes into play. I don't anyone would argur that the OBP is the most important factor. However in front of the best hitters speed plays an important role because getting muultiple hits to score runners is tough to do.

 

[RockRaines]

I would disagree. Speed is important to a lineup. It allows for scroing without extra base hits and getting into scoring position.

 

Of course eveyone would rather the high OBP, that is the first factor in front of the best hitters. But then the speed comes into play. I don't anyone would argur that the OBP is the most important factor. However in front of the best hitters speed plays an important role because getting muultiple hits to score runners is tough to do.

Going from first to third and scoring from second is never overrated IMO. If you have two similar hitters, I take the guy with speed and athleticism every time.

[ptatc]

What I think alot of people fail to realize is that over a season the averages play out and looking at OPS works. This is because they look at averages against all teams and players. Once you get to the playoffs, the dynamic changes. You are going to face only the best pitching staffs and only the best from these staffs. This is where offenses will struggle. A good pitcher may only make a few mistakes. This is where the going from first to third or scoring with fewer hits make the big difference. With the slugging lineup unless the player hits the mistake for a HR the run isn't scored because the slow slugger didn't score from first or second on a hit or from third with less than two outs.

 

This is what Beane found out in Oakland. The OPS with slow guys with great eyes worked against average opponent throughout the year but once they hit the playoffs they got smoked.

 

These concepts are going to come back to the front of baseball with PEDs being phased out and especially the amphetamines. The younger athletes will take the place of aging sluggers and the slugging will go down.

 

I think we're seeing this trend already

[iamshack]

What I think alot of people fail to realize is that over a season the averages play out and looking at OPS works. This is because they look at averages against all teams and players. Once you get to the playoffs, the dynamic changes. You are going to face only the best pitching staffs and only the best from these staffs. This is where offenses will struggle. A good pitcher may only make a few mistakes. This is where the going from first to third or scoring with fewer hits make the big difference. With the slugging lineup unless the player hits the mistake for a HR the run isn't scored because the slow slugger didn't score from first or second on a hit or from third with less than two outs.

 

This is what Beane found out in Oakland. The OPS with slow guys with great eyes worked against average opponent throughout the year but once they hit the playoffs they got smoked.

 

These concepts are going to come back to the front of baseball with PEDs being phased out and especially the amphetamines. The younger athletes will take the place of aging sluggers and the slugging will go down.

 

I think we're seeing this trend already

 

Some real good points in there, Ptatc. I think you nailed the part about Oakland pretty well there.

Edited January 28, 2009 by iamshack

[caulfield12]

What I think alot of people fail to realize is that over a season the averages play out and looking at OPS works. This is because they look at averages against all teams and players. Once you get to the playoffs, the dynamic changes. You are going to face only the best pitching staffs and only the best from these staffs. This is where offenses will struggle. A good pitcher may only make a few mistakes. This is where the going from first to third or scoring with fewer hits make the big difference. With the slugging lineup unless the player hits the mistake for a HR the run isn't scored because the slow slugger didn't score from first or second on a hit or from third with less than two outs.

 

This is what Beane found out in Oakland. The OPS with slow guys with great eyes worked against average opponent throughout the year but once they hit the playoffs they got smoked.

 

These concepts are going to come back to the front of baseball with PEDs being phased out and especially the amphetamines. The younger athletes will take the place of aging sluggers and the slugging will go down.

 

I think we're seeing this trend already

 

 

But that doesn't explain the failure of the Twins as much. Because they were more of a fundamentally-sound team constructed, one would think, to take advantage of that philosophy and executional experience and apply it in playoff situations.

 

Or you could simply argue they overachieved from 2002-2004 (and 2006) and that the talent level of the other playoff teams overwhelmed them in the end.

 

It's not the like the Twins or the Braves (for most of their run) lacked good (or even great) pitching. With the Braves, they were more of a White Sox "slugging" team with lots of all or nothing hitters sprinkled through their line-up like Andruw Jones and Javy Lopez, for example. But the Twins seem to be a difficult team to understand in terms of post-season failure on such a consistent basis.

 

 

[iamshack]

But that doesn't explain the failure of the Twins as much. Because they were more of a fundamentally-sound team constructed, one would think, to take advantage of that philosophy and executional experience and apply it in playoff situations.

 

Or you could simply argue they overachieved from 2002-2004 (and 2006) and that the talent level of the other playoff teams overwhelmed them in the end.

 

It's not the like the Twins or the Braves (for most of their run) lacked good (or even great) pitching. With the Braves, they were more of a White Sox "slugging" team with lots of all or nothing hitters sprinkled through their line-up like Andruw Jones and Javy Lopez, for example. But the Twins seem to be a difficult team to understand in terms of post-season failure on such a consistent basis.

 

The Twins have the biggest home field advantage in baseball, basically. However, in the playoffs, they usually are up against teams with better records and thus are playing more road games than home games. Their postseason failures probably have a lot to do with that fact.

[ptatc]

The Twins have the biggest home field advantage in baseball, basically. However, in the playoffs, they usually are up against teams with better records and thus are playing more road games than home games. Their postseason failures probably have a lot to do with that fact.

 

This somewhat bears out in the fact that the Twins have never won a world series where they didn't have the home field advantage even going back to when they were the Senators.

 

[caulfield12]

The Twins are 1-3 (their lone victory in 2002 against the A's) in playoff series this decade as the visiting team. Of course, when you're playing on the road against the Yankees usually, that's not very easy...at least until the last couple of seasons.

 

They're 0-1 with the homefield advantage, getting swept out of the ALDS by the A's in 2006.

 

I'm not sure what conclusions you can draw from that, other than that Twins/A's were fairly evenly matched and either team could win on the road against the other...AND, that it's almost impossible to beat the Yankees in the playoffs (especially as a visitor, w/o home field adv.) until recently.