PDA

View Full Version : Is it possible...


PorkChopExpress
05-14-2008, 08:58 AM
...that there has been too much emphasis put on "team chemistry," and having a loose clubhouse and such? I mean, maybe team chemistry is no the right term here because I know that team chemistry is important, but are these guys paying just too much attention to their facial hairs, the dirty 30's v. the hardcore 24's, and other off-the-field antics, rather than focusing on their game? Should some of these veterans that we are essentially keeping around for their veteran presence at this point step up and tell these guys to quit with the shenanigans and focus on baseball? I mean, we hear about the brotherhood, and the family-feel that exists on this team, and have for a few years, but where are the results from that after 2005?

doublem23
05-14-2008, 09:07 AM
There's no magic formula to figure out, nobody, with the exception of TCQ is hitting the ball at all right now. None of them. The Sox are 4-8 in May and are averaging 3.4 R/G. And those 4 wins account for over 60% of that offensive output (25 runs in 4 wins, 16 runs in 8 losses).

Since none of us have any real access into what happens with the Sox on a daily basis, there's no point in arguing about anyone's focus, since none of us really know for sure. How do we know that everyone struggling isn't working their tail off right now, and the guys that are hitting aren't thinking about baseball the moment the game is over?

spiffie
05-14-2008, 10:18 AM
There's no magic formula to figure out, nobody, with the exception of TCQ is hitting the ball at all right now. None of them. The Sox are 4-8 in May and are averaging 3.4 R/G. And those 4 wins account for over 60% of that offensive output (25 runs in 4 wins, 16 runs in 8 losses).

Since none of us have any real access into what happens with the Sox on a daily basis, there's no point in arguing about anyone's focus, since none of us really know for sure. How do we know that everyone struggling isn't working their tail off right now, and the guys that are hitting aren't thinking about baseball the moment the game is over?
This does point out though how nebulous the whole idea of "Chemistry" is. When the Sox were hitting well, Nick Swisher was bringing something vital to the team with his antics, and it was reflecting on the field. When no one is hitting, suddenly all the keeping people loose and having swagger in the world isn't doing a damn thing. It is funny how the same group of guys seem to only have winning chemistry when winning.

Optipessimism
05-14-2008, 10:18 AM
There's nothing wrong with wanting a loose clubhouse and bringing players of good character, so long as they're good baseball players. Swisher, Cabrera, Quentin, Linebrink, and Dotel are all good baseball players, at least most of the time. The team just needs to hit the damn ball.

Believe It!
05-14-2008, 11:07 AM
...that there has been too much emphasis put on "team chemistry," and having a loose clubhouse and such? I mean, maybe team chemistry is no the right term here because I know that team chemistry is important, but are these guys paying just too much attention to their facial hairs, the dirty 30's v. the hardcore 24's, and other off-the-field antics, rather than focusing on their game? Should some of these veterans that we are essentially keeping around for their veteran presence at this point step up and tell these guys to quit with the shenanigans and focus on baseball? I mean, we hear about the brotherhood, and the family-feel that exists on this team, and have for a few years, but where are the results from that after 2005?

Dude, I don't know about your post, but I just had to tell you, Big Trouble in Little China, is one of my all-time favs. Great screen name!

Sorry back to business

Jurr
05-14-2008, 11:10 AM
The '05 team didn't have a bunch of "chemistry" guys. It had a bunch of players with something to prove. They didn't have fat contracts. They didn't have Hall of Fame numbers to reach. They just wanted to prove that they could win. They did.

soxfan13
05-14-2008, 11:17 AM
I think anybody that wants to argue and say that team chemistry is bull****, has a very good case if they use the Oakland teams of the early 70's as an example. Those ****ers hated each other.

jdm2662
05-14-2008, 11:22 AM
The great Dennis Rodman about chemistry:

"Chemistry is just a class you take in high school or college."

rdwj
05-14-2008, 11:30 AM
The '05 team didn't have a bunch of "chemistry" guys.

They absolutely did. The other things you said are also true, but the chemistry on that team was strong from the word go. The team we have now has some similarities, but I think we have some horses that just can't run anymore.

Paulwny
05-14-2008, 11:50 AM
I think anybody that wants to argue and say that team chemistry is bull****, has a very good case if they use the Oakland teams of the early 70's as an example. Those ****ers hated each other.

Yep, the 'Fighting A's".
The "A's" showed that chemistry has nothing to do with players liking each other.
It's having speed players who can get on base for the heavy hitters who follow them in the line-up, heavy hitters who can drive in runs, having good to great "D", good to great starting pitchers, a reliable bull pen and a great closer.
Chemistry in sports is having a WELL BALANCED TEAM.

102605
05-14-2008, 11:52 AM
Just hit the ball.

Lip Man 1
05-14-2008, 12:39 PM
I have never read or heard a lot about the A's teams of the 1970's "hating" each other but it is a well reported fact that the A's were united in their hatred of owner Charlie Finley and that was one thing that drove them.

Lip

alohafri
05-14-2008, 12:54 PM
I have never read or heard a lot about the A's teams of the 1970's "hating" each other but it is a well reported fact that the A's were united in their hatred of owner Charlie Finley and that was one thing that drove them.

Lip

The 78 Yankees were also at each other's throats. Same common enemy though...George.

Paulwny
05-14-2008, 01:02 PM
I have never read or heard a lot about the A's teams of the 1970's "hating" each other but it is a well reported fact that the A's were united in their hatred of owner Charlie Finley and that was one thing that drove them.

Lip

The 78 Yankees were also at each other's throats. Same common enemy though...George.


Yep, many players mad at the front office, but the A's also fought in the club house.
Read Rollie Fingers' quote at the end of the article. http://www.baseball-almanac.com/ws/yr1974ws.shtml

RockJock07
05-14-2008, 03:20 PM
The '05 team didn't have a bunch of "chemistry" guys. It had a bunch of players with something to prove. They didn't have fat contracts. They didn't have Hall of Fame numbers to reach. They just wanted to prove that they could win. They did.

2005 wasn't about chemistry as much as it was about the fact that everytime a team screwed up, the sox nailed them to the walls. The 2005 white sox displayed some of the best fundamental, good baseball a team has ever played, at least in my lifetime.

I've watch the dvd's tons of times, Houston played really well for the most part, and when they did make a mistake (Qualls, Lidge, Biggio) the sox made them pay. I think as the seasons pass we talk about how close the 05 sox were but the fact is they played out of their minds in the playoffs.

areilly
05-14-2008, 04:01 PM
Sign me up in the camp that doesn't put too much stock in the witchcraft and voodoo of putting chemistry first. Whether or not guys who get paid more in a year than most people will make in a lifetime get along with their co-workers means considerably less to me, consumer spending his entertainment dollar on baseball, than whether or not they win, or at least play respectably.

TDog
05-14-2008, 04:13 PM
I have never read or heard a lot about the A's teams of the 1970's "hating" each other but it is a well reported fact that the A's were united in their hatred of owner Charlie Finley and that was one thing that drove them.

Lip


Harry Caray talked sometimes about the A's players hating each other and fighting with each other. I've heard some other references to that, but I don't know if they are based on hearing what I heard. Harry Caray only broadcast for the A's in 1971 when they started their string of five straight division titles but were still a year away from beginning their string of three straight World Series championships.

I'm guessing that in addition ot being united in their hatred of Charlie Finley, the A's were united in their hatred of Harry Caray. What they had was great pitching, starters that went deep into ballgames and often finished them with a bullpen that didn't have to warm up every day and that could get the starters out of trouble at the end. Having position players like Reggie Jackson, Joe Rudi and Bert Campaneris didn't hurt either.

That was before free agency. Actually, it was the dissolution of the reserve clause and free agency that broke up the A's. Charlie Finley didn't even try, probably because he had no interest in paying his employees realistic wages, but I suppose it's possible that the players hating each other could have caused a mass exodus of talent as well.

The 1919 White Sox were a great team with players that hated each other. Actually, there were cliques of players that hated each other -- the college boys vs. the blue collar players, with their best hitter unable to read or write and being held in contempt by their second best hitter. That team, with a couple of exceptions, seemed united in its hatred of the owner.