Jump to content

It's The Last One!!!!! Game Thread 9-2-09


ChiSox_Sonix

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:21 AM)
I think most people go to polar opposites when they talk about lineup construction. The reaction to our issues with offense is that we need to abandon power hitters completely. its really about a balanced lineup. You need a power core in the middle of the lineup to provide high OBP, power, and the ability to drive in runs wrapped around with more pure hitters. Guys who can make solid contact, don't strike out and can hit doubles are the pure hitters that can augment your lineup. Having 9 guys who swing for the fences is dumb, as is having 9 singles hitters.

I agree 100%, that's why I'm shocked that the Twins have said they're going to stay the path with the type of players they develop when moving into their new park. Now, having M & M in the middle of the line-up obviously help, but they are going to lose an advantage IMO.

 

Just so I'm being clear, I agree with you SSI. It has to be a mix, I just go crazy when posters focus so much on the myth of 2005 "small/Ozzie ball".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 461
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:21 AM)
I think most people go to polar opposites when they talk about lineup construction. The reaction to our issues with offense is that we need to abandon power hitters completely. its really about a balanced lineup. You need a power core in the middle of the lineup to provide high OBP, power, and the ability to drive in runs wrapped around with more pure hitters. Guys who can make solid contact, don't strike out and can hit doubles are the pure hitters that can augment your lineup. Having 9 guys who swing for the fences is dumb, as is having 9 singles hitters.

 

Agreed, the problem with out lineup the past few years was missing a couple guys like Beckham who are going to hit line drives to put around the heart of the order of Dye, Thome, and Konerko (except for this year where the entire team just stopped hitting). But people would always complain about those guys rather than the fact our 1+2 hitters have done a terrible job getting on base or that the bottom of the order was a disaster. With a few exceptions, every good lineup is built around sluggers in the middle of the order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:24 AM)
Worked just fine in 2005. And worked in 2006 from an offensive standpoint, it was just too bad the pitching staff sucked. Softball team s*** got us to the playoffs last year.

I think 05' was more of a balanced line up though. They didn't have to wait on the 3 run shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:28 AM)
I think 05' was more of a balanced line up though. They didn't have to wait on the 3 run shot.

that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:29 AM)
that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far

That's a great point as well... the pitching was so good then... not so much now. You can't get away with the waiting on the 3 run homers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:23 AM)
come on Oz, you're 7 back and in third place. Why not throw out a lineup like..

 

1. Pods-LF

2. Beckham- SS

3. Quentin- RF

4. Konerko- 1B

5. Dye- DH

6. Ramirez- 2B

7. Rios- CF

8. Flowers- C

9. Fields- 3B

 

 

Come on now, that would make sense. Why would Ozzie do anything that makes sense?!?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:29 AM)
that was one of those years that with the pitching the White Sox had they really could of had any type of line-up and went far

 

Pitching and timely HRs won the White Sox the WS that year. The Ozzie Ball myth really needs to end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (EvilJester99 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 11:33 AM)
That's a great point as well... the pitching was so good then... not so much now. You can't get away with the waiting on the 3 run homers.

I will echo an ealier post that stresses defense. The sox are 2nd or 3rd in the AL in ERA last time I looked. The SP has been very good lately and the pen not so much. I will give the pen a little excuse that they have had zero margin for error since the offense has failed to give them any breathing room, but again, the pen needs improvement.

 

As I've said since they got Peavy, coming into ST with Floyd/Peavy/MB/Danks as their top 4 gives them a great base to start with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd think the law of averages would give us one win in the dome. It's ridiculous that we are probably going down again today. The Twinks have charged past us in the standings. We're as far behind them now as we were Detroit when this road disaster started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anybody see Stoney in the beginning of the WGN broadcast say "hopefully the sox offense can come alive today" followed by a smirk like as to say yeah right,anyone see it?classic :lolhitting

Edited by MexSoxFan#1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:16 PM)
T-Bolt, I don't mean to make an example of you, but you just happen to be the latest one to make a remark like this, so I want to just point something out.

 

There is a position in the middle of these two extremes. Just by going away from the "softball-type hitting, wait for the three-run homer approach" does not mean you go to the "smallball/smartball/ozzieball method of throwing away outs by attempting only to move runners over by sacrificing all the time. There IS a happy medium. And real baseball teams actually play within that medium.

I just think it’s irrational to think that we’d get any better if we steal and bunt more. There’s no reason not to play to the park, the Cell is a home-run hitting park, our hitters job needs to be to get On-base, so we can knock them in. The idea isn’t to advance someone to second in exchange for an out, it’s to drive him in by hitting the s*** out of the ball. I keep hearing about how it takes 4 singles to knock our old core in, but there’s also an equal opportunity for four straight bombs, a double, a single, anything. I’m an Earl Weaver kind of guy, we need to maximize run scoring opportunities, spazzing out on the bases and giving away outs isn’t the way to do that. Ideally, we have faster base runners that can score on singles, but an equal ideal is that these guys can hit bombs and play good as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 12:16 PM)
I just think it’s irrational to think that we’d get any better if we steal and bunt more. There’s no reason not to play to the park, the Cell is a home-run hitting park, our hitters job needs to be to get On-base, so we can knock them in. The idea isn’t to advance someone to second in exchange for an out, it’s to drive him in by hitting the s*** out of the ball. I keep hearing about how it takes 4 singles to knock our old core in, but there’s also an equal opportunity for four straight bombs, a double, a single, anything. I’m an Earl Weaver kind of guy, we need to maximize run scoring opportunities, spazzing out on the bases and giving away outs isn’t the way to do that. Ideally, we have faster base runners that can score on singles, but an equal ideal is that these guys can hit bombs and play good as well.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm trying to point out that there are alternatives to the Earl Weaver approach that do not include stealing and bunting all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...