typewritermender Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 Hey guys--first post. Is anyone else concerned with the fact that we have (on my count) 6 new hitters between opening day '09 & '10? Actually 7 if you count Becks, which I won't for the sake of argument. Our lineup will be radically different, and whether you think it's better or worse on paper, these kinds of changes rarely pan out (unless you're the yankees and going out and getting proven all-stars...and even then it often doesn't work). On any given day 2/3 of our lineup could be unfamiliar with the team, the players, the fans, the stadium, etc... I'm worried about chemistry--and if we go out and get a DH? That's another one. When this kind of veteran hole-plugging happens it makes me think that management has had their heads up their arses for the last year & weren't preparing themselves for the offseason. A team like the White Sox should be able to go out and get 1 or 2 key guys to plug into the lineup, along with 1 or 2 promotions from the farm system, and slowly evolve the team over time. I like fluidity in my on-field evolution. Forget the fact the most of the players we got are gigantic IFs! (and i don't mean infielders) Pitching staff doesn't concern me as much--pitchers come & go all the time (esp. relievers) and for whatever reason don't seem to have the same effect on team chemistry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Hello and welcome The team chemistry could change for sure.I think that issue is an important one, but you have to believe all are professionals and will gell by opening day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 This is one of the last things to worry about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 With the way our offense was last season, I think 4-5 new hitters was definitely needed. Whether they'll prove to be better hitters than the players we had last season remains to be seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Baseball moves fast, considering a lot of guys your counting began playing with the team last year, i don't think it's much of a worry. And even if they were brand new, I don't think it would be much of a worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANS Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 we changed quite a bit going into 2005 and that worked out well. I agree with DBAHO we needed a change to the lineup from last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 To put it a simple way...we've changed 5-6 hitters from one of the worst offenses in the AL. That's kinda what you need to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 As anti-clutch as we were last year, good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeynach Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Im not that worried, chemistry comes from winning and/or being a hardcore gamer. The sox roster needed this turnover, we were full of old, slow, lift and pull hitters who constantly clogged the bases and stranded runners. Our pitching staff deserves better, they deserve a team that is much more dynamic so that even when he face a tough pitcher we have a good chance to win. This is just part of the game, sometimes some offseasons require a larger degree of new faces than others, but make no mistake, this is a move in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Considering the reports that have been coming out of the clubhouse the past couple years, new chemistry is something that we need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 I really liked JD and JT and the veteran leadership that they brought to the clubhouse. That said, both are declining and were overpaid. In addition to the benefit of removing their inconsistent bats (famous for fading down the stretch) from the middle of the lineup, I think that the '06-'09 roster was getting a bit stale. I don't ever want to think that any of these guys stopped trying (after all, they're professionals), but it sure appeared that way back in August. At the very least, I think that a sense of complacency set in. Sometimes, a change of scenery brings about a better attitude in the workplace. Agreed that clubhouse chemistry is important, but that tends to work itself out if you have the right type of players. Kenny goes out of his way to bring in good character people. And we still have Mark, Paulie, and A.J., so I'm not that worried about chemistry or leadership next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakes Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Pierre, Teahan, and possibly a dh/outfielder are the only regulars that are brand new to the team. Bench players are turned over nearly every year. Carlos and Alexei are going into their third full season with the White Sox, while Beckham and Rios were only there for partial seasons, I don't think anyone is worried about Beckham, and Rios has been in the league quite a while now. As most do, I would really like to see another bat added, but I feel better about this lineup already than I did going into the start of the season last year. Fields, Getz, Anderson/Wise, and Alexei at a new position were in our starting lineup. That is really scary to think about(not to mention Colon and Contreras rounding out the back end of the rotation). As others have mentioned, this was a really bad offense, and change needed to happen. Only time will tell if these are the right changes, and management is counting on bounce back years for certain players, but I like where they're at. Even if another bat is not acquired, we haven't lost any prospects of value this offseason, and something can be done in season. But to address the original question, no I don't think too many changes took place. There may be more in store. AJ, Konerko, Quentin, Alexei, Beckham, and Rios all finished the year with the team. It's really not that drastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwolf68 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (shakes @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 10:20 AM) Even if another bat is not acquired, we haven't lost any prospects of value this offseason, and something can be done in season. I don't agree with this. Jon Link and John Ely have some decent potential and we gave them both away in the Pierre deal. Ely was nearly dominant in AA last year and Link also showed real promise (though he's an older 'prospect' so his upside probably isn't as high). Ely is the guy I hated losing...he lead league in strikeouts and was a big winner, at only 23 years old he was certainly one to factor into the Sox future. That said, I do like Pierre in LF. His numbers were solid last year, he can get on base, run and catch the ball. He'll help. As is the case with Sox prospects, we can never get too comfortable with them. I expect Hudson will be gone within the next year or so. Edited December 23, 2009 by kwolf68 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 In the day of FA and the fact that the Sox had some contracts ending the change doesn't bug me, in fact it was needed. I'm not sure what the overall numbers were for the year, but they had a month or so stretch near the end of the year where their RISP avg. was about .220. Know I can be a bit of a stat guy that wants to look at more than one stat, but if they hit around the league average in that stretch they are in the thick of the race at the end of the year with Det and Min. A shakeup was needed. I really think they need one more power bat considering they play 81 games in the Cell, but we will see what happens, and with the first 4 in the rotation they have and considering the division they play in, they should have a chance most nights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakes Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 09:25 AM) I don't agree with this. Jon Link and John Ely have some decent potential and we gave them both away in the Pierre deal. Ely was nearly dominant in AA last year and Link also showed real promise (though he's an older 'prospect' so his upside probably isn't as high). Ely is the guy I hated losing...he lead league in strikeouts and was a big winner, at only 23 years old he was certainly one to factor into the Sox future. That said, I do like Pierre in LF. His numbers were solid last year, he can get on base, run and catch the ball. He'll help. As is the case with Sox prospects, we can never get too comfortable with them. I expect Hudson will be gone within the next year or so. Ely had a good season, but this will probably be the highpoint of his career. He has very average stuff, he generally pitches in the mid 80's with a change up as his best pitch, and no real breaking pitch to speak of. He was another safe, low ceiling, advance throught the system fast, college pitcher, just like Broadway and McCullough. He is nothing more than a throw in to a deal. Nothing would ever be centered around him, and losing him is really an afterthought. He has more value to the Dodgers, than he ever could with the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwolf68 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) I realize Ely doesn't have electric stuff, but does Mark Buehrle? Not to compare the two, but what I understand is Ely was really studying hard to be a solid pitcher, his work ethic and devotion to his craft was turning him into a pretty damn good prospect. NO, he was never gonna be a front of the rotation starter, but just looking at raw stuff sometimes doesn't tell the tale. I mean...a guy with 'average' stuff that struck out the numbers he did while also giving up a paltry number of home runs makes you wanna keep tabs on this guy. It's over and done with, he's gone...probably won't be a huge loss, but I still think the character of the young man, his ability to grow, and work ethic, combined with a great understanding of how to pitch may find him pitching in the majors one day. Oh yea, Ely also grew up a Sox fan... Edited December 23, 2009 by kwolf68 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottyDo Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 12:47 PM) I realize Ely doesn't have electric stuff, but does Mark Buehrle? Not to compare the two, but what I understand is Ely was really studying hard to be a solid pitcher, his work ethic and devotion to his craft was turning him into a pretty damn good prospect. NO, he was never gonna be a front of the rotation starter, but just looking at raw stuff sometimes doesn't tell the tale. I mean...a guy with 'average' stuff that struck out the numbers he did while also giving up a paltry number of home runs makes you wanna keep tabs on this guy. It's over and done with, he's gone...probably won't be a huge loss, but I still think the character of the young man, his ability to grow, and work ethic, combined with a great understanding of how to pitch may find him pitching in the majors one day. Oh yea, Ely also grew up a Sox fan... Ely went to my high school (Homewood-Flossmoor). Good guy. I have no talent for baseball but one of my best friends hit a ground rule double off him in a summer league in high school. For that reason alone, I hope he makes it in the bigs! Just disappointed it won't be with us. /hijack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 10:25 AM) I don't agree with this. Jon Link and John Ely have some decent potential and we gave them both away in the Pierre deal. Ely was nearly dominant in AA last year and Link also showed real promise (though he's an older 'prospect' so his upside probably isn't as high). We have a half dozen Jon Links in our organization, and we have a couple of guys ahead or just behind Ely. Meanwhile, we don't have a Juan Pierre. Math works for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 03:47 PM) I realize Ely doesn't have electric stuff, but does Mark Buehrle? Not to compare the two, but what I understand is Ely was really studying hard to be a solid pitcher, his work ethic and devotion to his craft was turning him into a pretty damn good prospect. NO, he was never gonna be a front of the rotation starter, but just looking at raw stuff sometimes doesn't tell the tale. I mean...a guy with 'average' stuff that struck out the numbers he did while also giving up a paltry number of home runs makes you wanna keep tabs on this guy. It's over and done with, he's gone...probably won't be a huge loss, but I still think the character of the young man, his ability to grow, and work ethic, combined with a great understanding of how to pitch may find him pitching in the majors one day. Oh yea, Ely also grew up a Sox fan... Mark Buehrle was an anomoly, but people always bring him up. We've had 40 "mark buerhle's" come through our system since 2001. Josh Stewart ? = Mark Buerhle! I doubt Ely turns into anything special. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeynach Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) Ely went to my high school (Homewood-Flossmoor). Good guy. I have no talent for baseball but one of my best friends hit a ground rule double off him in a summer league in high school. For that reason alone, I hope he makes it in the bigs! Just disappointed it won't be with us. /hijack Me too, I went to HF, though Ely graduated a few years after me, prolly closer to my little sisters age. Sad to see the local guy go, but hey its part of the business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 10:38 AM) We have a half dozen Jon Links in our organization, and we have a couple of guys ahead or just behind Ely. Meanwhile, we don't have a Juan Pierre. Math works for me. I wish that were still the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 25, 2009 Share Posted December 25, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 23, 2009 -> 12:23 PM) Mark Buehrle was an anomoly, but people always bring him up. We've had 40 "mark buerhle's" come through our system since 2001. Josh Stewart ? = Mark Buerhle! I doubt Ely turns into anything special. Thank you. I obviously have no personal connection to John Ely. Even with that, I can go on and assume he's a swell guy. But his absolute maximum ceiling is that of a 5th starter. Just because he was our best pitching prospect (not counting Hudson) doesn't mean he was a legitimate prospect. I doubt he'd make a top 10 pitching prospects list for any other organization outside of maybe the Cardinals, Brewers or Astros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Princess Dye Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 The way i've calculated it we've added 15 doubles and 12 HR to our infield's offense. Factoring in Teahen over Getz, plus the rest of the year of Gordon over Fields. 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.