2005 White Sox Thread - Page 3

tim_uwrf · 04-19-2005, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eriqjaffe

Well, you're right after one game. It's going to be El Duque vs. Radke tonight...hopefully Hernandez can bounce back from his shaky start last time...

And hopefully Carl Everett will continue to freaking crush the ball.

Predictions. Carl Everett hits a homerun in the first inning. Then, after the first inning, the Twins come back and win. Radke gets the win with all his runs against coming in the first inning.

JDOldSchool · 04-19-2005, 04:51 PM

Anybody else amused that when the White Sox win this year it is almost always because of the home run (and excellent pitching, but I'm speaking offensively). When they lose it's because of guys getting caught stealing with two outs in the ninth. What exactly is "smart ball" anyway?

Great Greg Couch article from a few days ago.

tim_uwrf · 04-19-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Anybody else amused that when the White Sox win this year it is almost always because of the home run (and excellent pitching, but I'm speaking offensively). When they lose it's because of guys getting caught stealing with two outs in the ninth. What exactly is "smart ball" anyway?

Great Greg Couch article from a few days ago.

It is funny, especially since all the talk was that Chicago was going to be a different team and play more small ball.

eriqjaffe · 04-19-2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

What exactly is "smart ball" anyway?

I'll let my Ozzie Guillen Impersonation tell you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozzie Guillen

De ball is bery, bery small when it goes flying out of the park like dat, chuknow?

The Sox, of course, are not playing small ball much right now. Small ball involves OBP, moving runners up, sacrificing, stealing bases. Y'know, the sort of stuff the Sox don't do.

Urth · 04-19-2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim_uwrf

It is funny, especially since all the talk was that Chicago was going to be a different team and play more small ball.

Well, to be honest, the season is still young. And though the last two games were won with the long ball, there have been plenty of 2-1 and 1-0 games ( well, 3...) where there were no taters. And the losses seem to be coming via falling behind early, or bullpen implosions. Have we really lost that many games in the 9th, because of a would-be base stealer getting gunned?

I think it's a little early for any real judgements to be made, but having said that I like the product so far. So far the Sox remind me of the anonymous Patriots, who get the job done without a lot of distracting fanfare. What impresses me most is the attitude on the team that winning all of the series so far this year isn't enough, that the players seem genuinely irritated that they haven't swept anyone yet. Well, maybe tonight a short series sweep is in order.

JDOldSchool · 04-19-2005, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eriqjaffe

Small ball involves OBP, moving runners up, sacrificing, stealing bases. Y'know, the sort of stuff the Sox don't do.

Small ball doesn't involve OBP. That's why I hate it. But this brings up a good point: What IS small ball? I remember a game last year when the Sox won because of a few doubles and people were trumpeting the wonders of small ball.

To me, small ball is working real hard to score the least amount of runs possible.

Urth · 04-19-2005, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim_uwrf

Predictions. Carl Everett hits a homerun in the first inning. Then, after the first inning, the Twins come back and win. Radke gets the win with all his runs against coming in the first inning.

This is why they *play* the games

So, when's the last year that the Hose actually won the season series vs the Twinkies?

JDOldSchool · 04-19-2005, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urth

So, when's the last year that the Hose actually won the season series vs the Twinkies?

Not sure, but last year the White Sox won 9 of the first 12 (including a sweep at the Hump Bubble). They then lost 7 straight to the Twins.

Let's not get too excited yet. For a guy to give up 10 hits, walk one, and strike out three in 6 innings and to allow 0 runs is some of the luckiest pitching I've seen.

tim_uwrf · 04-20-2005, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Let's not get too excited yet. For a guy to give up 10 hits, walk one, and strike out three in 6 innings and to allow 0 runs is some of the luckiest pitching I've seen.

It was an unbelievably crazy game. For how many times the Twins had runners on second/third, it is amazing they failed to score against the SP. They scored one lucky run in the ninth, but they couldn't do anything. With the Tigers coming up, hopefully the Twins can work their magic against the Tigers.

All these hits, and no runs is really starting to get on my nervous though

. Good series, you did well. SEE YOU IN AUGUST!!

eriqjaffe · 04-20-2005, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim_uwrf

SEE YOU FROM 10 1/2 GAMES BACK IN AUGUST!!

Fixed that for you.

Sox pitching has been very lucky the last two games. The Twins left, what, 22 runners on base over the two games? Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

dougaiton · 04-20-2005, 11:18 AM

I'd just like to say thank you to Ozzie Guillen, who has seen the light and realised that Timo Perez is a natural 5-spot hitter.

batted balls · 04-20-2005, 11:20 AM

In the words of Hawk Harrelson, Shingo Tikatsu should be GONE! Ozzie can't keep trotting him out there in save situations. The league has clearly caught onto this slowball artist. His velocity is down and he's getting hit like he was Billy Koch. Hopefully, Ozzie will start to use Hermanson or Marte as the stopper. What do you guys think?

tim_uwrf · 04-20-2005, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eriqjaffe

Fixed that for you.

Sox pitching has been very lucky the last two games. The Twins left, what, 22 runners on base over the two games? Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

AHAHA...in your dreams. I'm not sure how many they left on as I haven't seen a boxscore in a few days. 22 seems like a good number, but I do know they hit into like 5 or 6 double plays, and 2 of them where yesterday with bases loaded and (i think) guy on first and third.

eriqjaffe · 04-20-2005, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim_uwrf

I'm not sure how many they left on as I haven't seen a boxscore in a few days. 22 seems like a good number, but I do know they hit into like 5 or 6 double plays, and 2 of them where yesterday with bases loaded and (i think) guy on first and third.

After double-checking the box scores, 22 it is. 10 on Monday and 12 last night.

If the Twins had the clutch intagibles of a Glanville or a Gload, those games would have been very different.

eriqjaffe · 04-20-2005, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougaiton

I'd just like to say thank you to Ozzie Guillen, who has seen the light and realised that Timo Perez is a natural 5-spot hitter.

He is the all-time HR leader amongst players named Timo.

Urth · 04-20-2005, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Not sure, but last year the White Sox won 9 of the first 12 (including a sweep at the Hump Bubble). They then lost 7 straight to the Twins.

Let's not get too excited yet. For a guy to give up 10 hits, walk one, and strike out three in 6 innings and to allow 0 runs is some of the luckiest pitching I've seen.

You got that right. I picked up El-Dookie for my fantasy team when Prior went on the DL ( yeah, I'm reduced to rooting for the Drubs every 5th day. Oh, the humanity... ) and kept him, figuring I'll just dump him once he hits the wall in mid-July. While the win is nice, the ratio ain't. Neither are the Ks. Hmm, I wonder if Eaton is still available?

eriqjaffe · 04-21-2005, 10:21 AM

OK, that's it. Jose Contreras should be the #5 starter, salary be damned, and Garland should be moved to #3 or #4.

Garland's 3 wins place him 2 shy of the entire win total for all the Sox fifth starters all of last year. Heck, he's on a pace to win more games than all the fifth starters the Sox have trotted out over the past two seasons combined. He'll probably best that win total by June.

What a difference that makes, eh?

Unoriginal Name · 04-21-2005, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eriqjaffe

OK, that's it. Jose Contreras should be the #5 starter, salary be damned, and Garland should be moved to #3 or #4.

Garland's 3 wins place him 2 shy of the entire win total for all the Sox fifth starters all of last year. Heck, he's on a pace to win more games than all the fifth starters the Sox have trotted out over the past two seasons combined. He'll probably best that win total by June.

What a difference that makes, eh?

I realize that last night was a blowout 9-1, but is Jon Garland throwing better or is it that he's got more favorable matchups since being #5 he'll be going up against the bottom of most other teams rotations?

eriqjaffe · 04-21-2005, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unoriginal Name

I realize that last night was a blowout 9-1, but is Jon Garland throwing better or is it that he's got more favorable matchups since being #5 he'll be going up against the bottom of most other teams rotations?

I'd say it's that he's throwing better:

Here's the line on his three starts so far:

Code:

DATE 	OPP 	RESULT 	IP 	H 	R 	ER 	HR 	BB 	SO 	GB 	FB 	BF 	#Pit 	GSc 	Dec. 	Rel. 	ERA*
4/9 	@MIN 	W 8-5 	6.0 	10 	3 	3 	1 	0 	1 	13 	7 	26 	84 	41 	W(1-0) 	-- 	4.50
4/15 	SEA 	W 6-4 	7.0 	2 	2 	2 	0 	2 	3 	11 	6 	24 	87 	66 	W(2-0) 	-- 	3.46
4/20 	@DET 	W 9-1 	8.0 	5 	1 	1 	0 	2 	4 	15 	6 	30 	96 	70 	W(3-0) 	-- 	2.57

All three of the runs in his first start were scored on one three-run homer. Other than that one at-bat, he has a 1.29 ERA, and his last two outings have been dominant - he carried a perfect game into the 7th against Seattle, and shut the Tigers down completely.

Compare that to Contreras:

Code:

DATE 	OPP 	RESULT 	IP 	H 	R 	ER 	HR 	BB 	SO 	GB 	FB 	BF 	#Pit 	GSc 	Dec. 	Rel. 	ERA*
4/7 	CLE 	L 5-11 	6.0 	4 	1 	1 	0 	2 	4 	14 	3 	25 	96 	62 	-- 	-- 	1.50
4/13 	@CLE 	W 5-4 	6.2 	5 	4 	4 	1 	5 	3 	4 	11 	29 	104 	46 	-- 	-- 	3.55
4/18 	MIN 	W 5-4 	4.2 	6 	3 	2 	0 	4 	2 	8 	6 	24 	104 	40 	-- 	-- 	3.64

Jose threw 104 pitches in 4 2/3 innings in his last start...Garland has yet to throw 100 pitches in a game.

Simply put, Garland is (and has been throughout his career) more consistent than Contreras. I think the Sox put a bit too much pressure on him earlier in his career, and he still pitched at about league average (at a relatively young age, mind you - Garland's only 25). Contreras is just too iffy. Sure, he has terriffic stuff, but you never know if you're going to get a 2-hitter or a 7-walker.

MogulChamp · 04-21-2005, 01:46 PM

Yes Garland has been throwing a lot better. The only problem I have with him is that he needs a way to finish guys off. Perfect example was the Minnesota game on 4/9. He was ahead of every batter, like 0-2, 1-2 ahead. And he let a lot of them get away. I was very upset when he was extended for 1 year, I know the year is still young but so far I am very surprised at his performance.

04-20-2005, 11:18 AM	#51
dougaiton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Location: Posts: 3,414	I'd just like to say thank you to Ozzie Guillen, who has seen the light and realised that Timo Perez is a natural 5-spot hitter. __________________ tThis shower of clowns My park-adjusted, historically split Born in '69 league file! (also at Joe's wonderful site +BBSC)

04-20-2005, 11:20 AM	#52
batted balls All Star Starter Join Date: May 2003 Location: White Sox Country Posts: 1,323	Shingo: English for Shin Gone In the words of Hawk Harrelson, Shingo Tikatsu should be GONE! Ozzie can't keep trotting him out there in save situations. The league has clearly caught onto this slowball artist. His velocity is down and he's getting hit like he was Billy Koch. Hopefully, Ozzie will start to use Hermanson or Marte as the stopper. What do you guys think?

04-21-2005, 10:21 AM	#57
eriqjaffe Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Location: Under The Christmas Fish Posts: 7,647	OK, that's it. Jose Contreras should be the #5 starter, salary be damned, and Garland should be moved to #3 or #4. Garland's 3 wins place him 2 shy of the entire win total for all the Sox fifth starters all of last year. Heck, he's on a pace to win more games than all the fifth starters the Sox have trotted out over the past two seasons combined. He'll probably best that win total by June. What a difference that makes, eh? __________________

04-19-2005, 04:51 PM	#42
JDOldSchool Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 4,023	Anybody else amused that when the White Sox win this year it is almost always because of the home run (and excellent pitching, but I'm speaking offensively). When they lose it's because of guys getting caught stealing with two outs in the ninth. What exactly is "smart ball" anyway? Great Greg Couch article from a few days ago.

04-21-2005, 01:46 PM	#60
MogulChamp All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 656	Yes Garland has been throwing a lot better. The only problem I have with him is that he needs a way to finish guys off. Perfect example was the Minnesota game on 4/9. He was ahead of every batter, like 0-2, 1-2 ahead. And he let a lot of them get away. I was very upset when he was extended for 1 year, I know the year is still young but so far I am very surprised at his performance.