Heads22 Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 ESPN.....they will talk to Dunn, and then talk about our closing situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 This was last night, or tonight? If last night, did anyone get to watch it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockren Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 07:44 AM) This was last night, or tonight? If last night, did anyone get to watch it? You didn't miss much. If you saw the press conference it was just a short repeat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 they had time to cover another team... the Russell Martin "Sports Century" must still be in the editing stage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vote4Pedro Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 11:37 AM) they had time to cover another team... the Russell Martin "Sports Century" must still be in the editing stage. haha ESPN is horrible there is no reason to watch them for baseball unless you don't have MLB Network Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 QUOTE (beckham15 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 03:18 PM) haha ESPN is horrible there is no reason to watch them for baseball unless you don't have MLB Network They spent two minutes on last night's sportscenter explaining why Bobby Jenks is better than his numbers last year. It didn't take long for them to love Bobby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 17, 2010 Share Posted December 17, 2010 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 04:13 PM) They spent two minutes on last night's sportscenter explaining why Bobby Jenks is better than his numbers last year. It didn't take long for them to love Bobby. this isn't sour grapes because he isn't here anymore, but he was bad last year, and they can spin it anyway they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) this isn't sour grapes because he isn't here anymore, but he was bad last year, and they can spin it anyway they want. Actually he really wasn't. Lot of bad luck, and most of his damage came in low-mid leverage situations. He was pretty nails in the clutch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 07:12 PM) Actually he really wasn't. Lot of bad luck, and most of his damage came in low-mid leverage situations. He was pretty nails in the clutch. he had a couple of crucial bad outings, we can toss all the numbers around we want to, but if you're the closer for a contending team the timing of blown saves or bad outings comes heavily into play as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHITESOXRANDY Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 He was horrible! He blew 4 saves last year. The Sox will miss him. Believe it or not Thornton, Santos or Sale are gonna blow saves, too. They might blow more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (WHITESOXRANDY @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 11:25 PM) He was horrible! He blew 4 saves last year. The Sox will miss him. Believe it or not Thornton, Santos or Sale are gonna blow saves, too. They might blow more. wow, closers are going to blow saves?!?!!? Not saying Bobby is going to be terrible next year, but he was a closer/reliever that was most effective going 3 outs and no breaks between innings. Will he be missed? who knows, not of the new closer is effective and the bullpen is effective for a cheaper price. He signed with Bos for 2/12, who knows what he would have been looking for here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 I think he'll rebound next year, but it's not as though the Red Sox "bought low". It looks like they paid him assuming he'll bounce back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 his calf was chronically injured and his right arm was numb! have at it, red sox -- enjoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (WHITESOXRANDY @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 11:25 PM) He was horrible! He blew 4 saves last year. The Sox will miss him. Believe it or not Thornton, Santos or Sale are gonna blow saves, too. They might blow more. Remember the game Jenks didn't get anyone out in Minnesota and blew a 3 run lead in the 9th? He didn't get a blown save in the game, just a loss. BS is a great abbreviation for blown save in more ways than one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 07:58 PM) Remember the game Jenks didn't get anyone out in Minnesota and blew a 3 run lead in the 9th? He didn't get a blown save in the game, just a loss. BS is a great abbreviation for blown save in more ways than one. I still contend that Jenks was worse than his numbers last year, and that his inability to stay healthy caused Thornton and Putz to get overused. I wish Jenks the best, and I'm very happy to see the break-up be cordial. A few of us were worried it would get ugly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 07:12 PM) Actually he really wasn't. Lot of bad luck, and most of his damage came in low-mid leverage situations. He was pretty nails in the clutch. In what world is a .306/.364/.449/.813 opponent's line "nails"? On top of the blown saves and outing in Minnesota where he handed a blown save to Santos he also entered 5 tied games and allowed the go ahead run to score 3 times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 01:59 PM) I still contend that Jenks was worse than his numbers last year, and that his inability to stay healthy caused Thornton and Putz to get overused. I wish Jenks the best, and I'm very happy to see the break-up be cordial. A few of us were worried it would get ugly. I think he's been worse than his numbers for a couple of years, in 2009 the majority of his saves he had a 2 or 3 run lead and had to get 3 outs before 2 or 3 runs scored. A lot of guys can rack up a lot of saves if they are usually in those situations, and totally agree his inability to stay healthy is huge. I really think its the reason why KW let him walk. The White Sox have thought most of Jenks' physical problems were the result of poor conditioning. Apparently when he went to Soxfest last year, he had lost some weight and met with KW and Ozzie about it. They were satisfied that he lost it properly but I think both became disgusted when said weight returned as did the injuries. Edited December 18, 2010 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 03:06 PM) I think he's been worse than his numbers for a couple of years, in 2009 the majority of his saves he had a 2 or 3 run lead and had to get 3 outs before 2 or 3 runs scored. A lot of guys can rack up a lot of saves if they are usually in those situations, and totally agree his inability to stay healthy is huge. I really think its the reason why KW let him walk. The White Sox have thought most of Jenks' physical problems were the result of poor conditioning. Apparently when he went to Soxfest last year, he had lost some weight and met with KW and Ozzie about it. They were satisfied that he lost it properly but I think both became disgusted when said weight returned as did the injuries. I wonder how he passed the Red Sox physical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 18, 2010 Share Posted December 18, 2010 QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 02:15 PM) I wonder how he passed the Red Sox physical. I doubt it was a very strenough physical. Maybe he's dropped a few pounds since we last saw him. His ankle and back may be better, same with his elbow. Once he starts pitching again and gains access to the postgame spreads, that's when things start heading south. Maybe the change of teams will do him good. He has plenty of ability, and when he's on the mound, he's very competitive. He just hasn't prepared as well as he should have the past couple of years, and part of his prep should be to get himself in a little better shape. He doesn't have to be a marathon runner, but taking some pressure off some of his body parts could make him a lot of money. I just find it odd that someone with so much talent is employed in a profession where his is using his body and can make so much money if he just keeps himself in somewhat decent condition, and he doesn't appear to really have any desire to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeFabregas Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) he also entered 5 tied games and left with the lead only twice. How many tied games are closers supposed to leave with the lead with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 FWIW, Jenks still hasn't taken his physical yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) In what world is a .306/.364/.449/.813 opponent's line "nails"? On top of the blown saves and outing in Minnesota where he handed a blown save to Santos he also entered 5 tied games and left with the lead only twice. According to fangraphs, here are his numbers in low, medium, and high leverage situations.... low - 3.80 K/BB, .271 AVG, 1.30 WHIP, 2.54 xFIP med-2.13 K/BB, .311 AVG, 1.88 WHIP, 3.78 xFIP high-5.00 K/BB, .227 AVG, 1.09 WHIP, 1.90 xFIP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 QUOTE (JorgeFabregas @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 11:07 PM) How many tied games are closers supposed to leave with the lead with? Good call, worded that wrong. He entered 5 tied games and allowed the go ahead run in 3 of those. I can't think of a good way to word that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JorgeFabregas Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 Ok. Thanks for clearing that up. He gave up the go-ahead run three times seems like a nice way of putting it. Or he only held the other team scoreless twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 18, 2010 -> 11:22 PM) According to fangraphs, here are his numbers in low, medium, and high leverage situations.... low - 3.80 K/BB, .271 AVG, 1.30 WHIP, 2.54 xFIP med-2.13 K/BB, .311 AVG, 1.88 WHIP, 3.78 xFIP high-5.00 K/BB, .227 AVG, 1.09 WHIP, 1.90 xFIP Well considering there was a game against Cleveland that became a low, medium, and then high leverage game all because of him, I don't think you can put much stock into that. Far more relevant for Jenks is his -.24 WPA added last year. Closers shouldn't hurt your overall chances at winning games, should they? I would also say that it depends on how FGs defines their lo/md/hi leverage situations, because according to B-R, his WHIP was a hell of a lot higher than that. 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.