Rongey is My New Idol

[iamshack]

Well, that's an impressively precise OPS.

Haha, I didn't catch this as I was sort of glossing over things in this thread...but that is hilarious.

 

Definitely a .636-.637 OPS....no chance at .640!

[caulfield12]

It actually changed quite a bit after a 1 for 8 performance the last couple of games.

 

Poor Chris, it was only a one point difference between his career average and 2011 earlier when I check it this week.

 

 

Career .636

2011 .621

 

So he's regressed a bit with the Royals, ha. So much for the Greg Walker ruins all hitters theory.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

Chris Getz is a consistent .636/.637 OPS no matter where he plays.

 

Fields and Anderson? Don't think so.

 

Ryan Sweeney finally ended up losing his starting job in Oakland for a lot of the same reasons he wasn't believed to project as more than a 4th OF in Chicago.

 

Chris Young and Greg Walker don't have anything in common.

 

Even C. Carter has turned out to be a big bust (based on early returns), and the verdict's a bit discouraging on B. Allen.

 

We all know about Jeremy Reed and Michael Morse.

 

Basically, we've simply sucked at developing position prospects since Durham, Ordonez, C-Lee, Crede and Rowand.

 

I suggested in the Catch-All that Sweeney would be starting for quite a few other teams, and I think I'm right. He plays good to great defense at all 3 outfield spots, draws a walk here or there, hits for the tiniest bit of power, and hits for a pretty damn good average. He's not starting in Oakland simply because they have 4 better players than him in Willingham, Crisp, DeJesus, and Matsui. Honestly, if the Sox aren't sold with Viciedo's defense in the outfield or if Quentin decides to take a dump the rest of the way and is non-tendered, I think he'd be a good buy-low candidate to start in either LF or RF next year, and I really don't like Sweeney at all. I think his upside is probably that of about .300/.350/.450 hitter - and I know he's never shown that type of power, but I think it's about the most he can do - and he would be a great 4th outfielder even if he didn't do that.

 

Oh, and Chris Carter a bust? Already? Dude's 24 and has never been given a real shot in the majors. I think he might have a bit of Mark Reynolds syndrome, but he should certainly be able to hang in the majors.

[iamshack]

I suggested in the Catch-All that Sweeney would be starting for quite a few other teams, and I think I'm right. He plays good to great defense at all 3 outfield spots, draws a walk here or there, hits for the tiniest bit of power, and hits for a pretty damn good average. He's not starting in Oakland simply because they have 4 better players than him in Willingham, Crisp, DeJesus, and Matsui. Honestly, if the Sox aren't sold with Viciedo's defense in the outfield or if Quentin decides to take a dump the rest of the way and is non-tendered, I think he'd be a good buy-low candidate to start in either LF or RF next year, and I really don't like Sweeney at all. I think his upside is probably that of about .300/.350/.450 hitter - and I know he's never shown that type of power, but I think it's about the most he can do - and he would be a great 4th outfielder even if he didn't do that.

 

Oh, and Chris Carter a bust? Already? Dude's 24 and has never been given a real shot in the majors. I think he might have a bit of Mark Reynolds syndrome, but he should certainly be able to hang in the majors.

Is Crisp a better defender than Sweeney? Is that why he is the better OF?

[witesoxfan]

Is Crisp a better defender than Sweeney? Is that why he is the better OF?

 

I've always seen that he's generally regarded as a better defensive outfielder, especially in CF, and he's probably a bit better offensively too (though he seems to be a guy that, at least at one time and perhaps still today, was really overrated offensively).

[caulfield12]

I think they're going with Crisp because he's a better top-of-the-order "igniter" and has the veteran track record, but the dude's been injury prone for most of the last five years.

 

Sweeney probably has about the same amount of speed (as Crisp) and is a pretty good athlete in his own right, but he's not the basestealer that Crisp is...and his career OPS is a rather pedestrian .728. Maybe, just maybe, that's good enough for CF, but not for one of the corners, at least in USCF.

 

I guess now the argument is whether you see more upside down the road in a Sweeney, who has a fairly limited ceiling, as you acknowledged (albeit pretty consistent in his numbers) or someone like a Milledge or Viciedo.

 

Many have seen Sweeney as the type of player who's just not quite good enough offensively for KW to believe in him, a little bit of the Aaron Rowand syndrome, where he had to prove himself year after year in order to become the starter. I always liked him more than Reed or Cunningham, but the jury's still out.

Edited April 23, 2011 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

I've always seen that he's generally regarded as a better defensive outfielder, especially in CF, and he's probably a bit better offensively too (though he seems to be a guy that, at least at one time and perhaps still today, was really overrated offensively).

 

 

He developed that reputation with Indians early in his career and is still riding on those coat-tails, to some extent.

 

Because he's one of those "Sox killer" guys, he tends to get overrated just a bit, but he's a legit starter on about 8-10 MLB teams.

Edited April 23, 2011 by caulfield12

[witesoxfan]

I still think Sweeney has plenty of upside. Part, though obviously not all, of his lack of power comes from playing at the Coliseum...that is a pretty huge park. On top of that, power is something that, to some extent, can be developed or taught, especially as hitters mature.

 

The comparison Cheat over at SSS made early on was to Alex Rios, as their career paths were pretty similar, similar body type, similar minor league numbers. In his rookie year at age 23, Rios hit 1 home run in 460 plate appearances. The next year he hit 10 over the course of the full season. Then it was 17, and then he shot all the way up to 25. Those last two pretty well signify his range of power - anywhere from 17-25 homers. He was 25 when first showed any type of home run power at all.

 

Sweeney is 26 this year...I don't think people realize how young he is still and he does 3 things well that can provide a foundation for hitting for a bit more power.

1) He is disciplined enough that he can draw a few walks.

2) He hits well enough that he can and has hit for a pretty good average.

3) He doesn't strike out a whole hell of a lot.

 

You basically have him swing for the fence a bit more because it would appear that he has never done that. In theory, you sacrifice a bit of average and a few more strikeouts for a little more power. You don't really sacrifice OBP though because he has shown the ability to hit for power, so pitchers will be just a bit more timid with him at the plate and, because he has a good enough eye, he will walk a few more times a year as well which will cancel out a few of those singles.

 

So, instead of a .290/.340/.380 kind of player, you have a .270/.350/.420 type, which is more valuable and probably makes him worth 1 full win more than he normally is (typically about a 2 WAR player). I would gladly take 3 WAR in LF next year no matter how I got it.

Edited April 23, 2011 by witesoxfan

[knightni]

I pray for his sanity after a game like today.

[Ranger]

No offense Rongey, but this isn't fantasy baseball. GMs are forced to look at more than just past production and projections when adding players. Most importantly, they have to look at organizational need. Since a GM is in charge of an organization, it's ultimately his responsibility to have a minor league system that can fill needs on a regular basis. If not, he's forced to go outside the organization to address those holes. That surely will have an impact on his decision making. He may be forced to overpay in free agency to fill a need, ala Scott Linebrink, or he may have to go with a player that is not qualified for the job, ala Dwayne Wise. Clearly, need and market forces play a major role here, and these are directly related to organizational management. KW may not be to blame if Jesse Crain performs much worst than past production suggests, but he is responsible for committing so much money to him. Had there been a decent minor league option, KW may have possibly used those funds to improve the team in another area.

 

I don't play fantasy baseball and I certainly don't believe in putting a real team together like you would a fantasy team. Nobody is more aware than I am that real baseball does not mirror fantasy baseball. I don't have a problem with committing money to relievers that perform consistently, despite the ebb-and-flow nature of bullpens. Sometimes you have to spend to get what you need.

 

 

Tons of baseball statisticians were predicting Politte crashing back to earth after the 2005 due to the percentage of line drives he gave up that turned into outs. Some metrics ruled him the luckiest pitcher of 2005. As for Cotts, the fact that he gave up one home run all 2005 with his high fastball probably indicated that there was luck involved. The 2006 team didn't fade because of the bullpen...it faded cause the starting pitching hit the wall with a few months left. Even with a bad bullpen to start 2006, we were 6 games up on the Wild Card at the ASB.

 

No, you're right. It wasn't just the bullpen, but very few teams win much of anything when their setup guys completely fall apart. We're not talking about minor regression from one year to the next. We're talking total decline. You could have predicted regression, but I'm not sure that degree of regression would have been expected.

 

 

The only question is why he's so stubborn to hold onto this managerial theory that flies in the face of the homers hit in 2005/2006 and even in 2008 with Quentin/Ramirez/Dye/Konerko/Thome, etc.

 

1) Maybe because that's what worked for him personally, and the "dead ball" White Sox playing in Old Comiskey needed to score just a run at a time? Or weren't capable of scoring in bunches.

 

2) His time coaching and playing in the NL at the end of his career with ATL/Cox and the Marlins.

 

3) The fact that it worked so well with Iguchi and Pods for 3-4 months in 2005...but hasn't since?

 

4) His general inability to admit he's wrong since the World Series and adapt to the roster as much as expecting players who aren't capable of bunting or playing fundamental baseball to change for Ozzie? I'm thinking here of players like BA and Josh Fields, to name a couple.

 

As Fathom mentioned, this mindset just doesn't work well in the AL East or AL Central. It certainly does have its place in baseball, with a low payroll team like the Padres or one that's limited offensively, such as the Mariners or A's.

 

There isn't anything wrong with being able to execute "smallball" when it needs to be executed. Bunting isn't ALWAYS the dumbest thing in the world as suggested by statheads. It has its place, even in the AL. Gardenhire, Maddon, Leyland, and Scioscia seem to agree as well, and I'm pretty sure none of those guys are baseball stupid. Contrary to popular perception, Ozzie doesn't do it any more than any other manager in the league does it. He's fairly standard in that regard.

 

[Balta1701]

There isn't anything wrong with being able to execute "smallball" when it needs to be executed. Bunting isn't ALWAYS the dumbest thing in the world as suggested by statheads. It has its place, even in the AL. Gardenhire, Maddon, Leyland, and Scioscia seem to agree as well, and I'm pretty sure none of those guys are baseball stupid. Contrary to popular perception, Ozzie doesn't do it any more than any other manager in the league does it. He's fairly standard in that regard.

Last year, the White Sox had the 2nd most sacrifice bunts of any team in the AL (counting successful ones, not failures). Texas was first with 53, the Sox were 2nd with 50, then there was a gap until we got to KC with 45.

 

In 2009 with a legitimate DH the Sox were in the middle of the AL in sacrifice hits. In 2008, when they made a playoff run, they were towards the bottom of the league.

 

It's possible that we wouldn't be nearly as annoyed with the Sacrifice Bunts if we weren't absolutely dominating the league in another stat...caught stealings. The White Sox had 75 runners CS last year. The #2 team in the AL, the Angels, had 52 runners CS. The White Sox ran into nearly a full game more outs in stolen base attempts than any other team in the AL. And again, when this team was a playoff team in 2008, they ran into 34 CS's.

 

The Sox are once again 1st in the league in CS's and 2nd in the league in Sacrifice Bunts this year. They also, as far as I can tell, lead the league in sacrifice bunt attempts that turn into triple plays.

[greg775]

There isn't anything wrong with being able to execute "smallball" when it needs to be executed. Bunting isn't ALWAYS the dumbest thing in the world as suggested by statheads. It has its place, even in the AL. Gardenhire, Maddon, Leyland, and Scioscia seem to agree as well, and I'm pretty sure none of those guys are baseball stupid. Contrary to popular perception, Ozzie doesn't do it any more than any other manager in the league does it. He's fairly standard in that regard.

 

Exactly. Why don't people realize the bunt sometimes is called for. I'd like to see a study of how many times the Sox mess up bunt situations compared to other teams, however. Included in that would be having two horrible attempts then striking out conventionally as well as popping into triple plays on bunts, etc.

 

This season has a chance to be remembered for 2 things:

Bunting into a triple play and those bullpen implosions that sent our team on this tailspin.

 

Somebody deserves to be fired just for those 2 things sending this team into a downward spiral that buried it.

Edited April 25, 2011 by greg775

[caulfield12]

What I don't understand is why we acquired Juan Pierre in the first place if he was beyond the point he could actually steal a base or two from the 7th inning onward without being bunted over?

 

Isn't the point of Pierre that he would actually be able to steal with a 75-85% success ratio, THEN you have three legitimate shots to drive him instead of just one or two?

 

As for the Twins changing their style of play, of course. They've gone from having a tepid offense and great fundamentals/team speed/defense over the last decade to one that mirrors the White Sox in many ways. And Gardenhire has really struggled managing "non-Twins system" players like Delmon Young, numerous times trying to trade him since he was acquired for a plethora of different reasons. The identity of the Twins was always having less talent but not beating themselves and having one of the best bullpens in the game on a consistent basis, as well as pitchers like Santana, Liriano and Radke who MADE you beat them. That Piranha identity's been lost and they've having a difficult time adjusting both to their ballpark but also their increased payroll and expectations. And perhaps all those playoff failures are weighing on them for the first time.

 

If you look up and down that roster, the only player who fits in the "old Twins" mode is Denard Span, and he strikes out way too much.

 

Remember when they had Koskie, Guzman, Rivas, Mientkiewicz, Stewart, Hunter, Jacque Jones and AJ? Those teams flat out scared you to death with their gloves, speed, execution, fundamentals and you could never, ever beat Hawkins/Guardado/Romero/Rincon/Nathan/Crain (until 2007-2009) down the stretch. You had to bludgeon them to death offensively and hold on for dear life to get a win, usually at USCF.

 

Managers like Scioscia and Maddon manage their teams in the way that's most effective for the players they have...I just think Ozzie is too stubborn sometimes to adapt because he experienced too much success too soon in his managerial career. If you look at someone like Torre or Bobby Cox, the beginning of their managerial careers, their teams were below average to average at best and they got better and better as time went on and they learned on the job. You could say the same thing about LaRussa. It usually takes being fired one or twice before a manager figures it out. Or Francona, look at his career trajectory. He was managing Michael Jordan not so long ago and taking the long bus rides.

 

I really don't see how Tony Pena (the former catcher), Sandy Alomar or even Omar Vizquel could be worse as managers at this point. Yes, we've faced a stretch of very good pitchers, yes Dunn's coming back from an appendectomy, yes the offense was alive for 9 games, etc. But none of that's changing the fundamental nature of momentum of this season, and that's the fear that perhaps this team has forgotten how to win and is scared to watch the bullpen blow another lead in a close game. Hopefully Santos has the cojones to get the job done.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2011 by caulfield12