PDA

View Full Version : Where does Alexei bat?


35th and Shields
10-21-2008, 06:50 PM
The main reason that I started this thread is to see where people want to have Alexei in the batting order for 09. Assuming we don't make any major moves in acquiring both a leadoff hitter and someone for the two spot, I would love to see Alexei in one of the two roles.

First off, Alexei is probably one of the best all around hitters on our team. He doesn't take a lot of pitches and can be impatient and the plate but he has definitely shown to be a true hitter with the ability to bunt. Tampa intentionally walked Alexei a couple of times in the playoffs to get to AJ but If we put Alexei near the top of the order they won't walk him if he has TCQ right behind him.

Eddo144
10-21-2008, 07:01 PM
The main reason that I started this thread is to see where people want to have Alexei in the batting order for 09. Assuming we don't make any major moves in acquiring both a leadoff hitter and someone for the two spot, I would love to see Alexei in one of the two roles.

First off, Alexei is probably one of the best all around hitters on our team. He doesn't take a lot of pitches and can be impatient and the plate but he has definitely shown to be a true hitter with the ability to bunt. Tampa intentionally walked Alexei a couple of times in the playoffs to get to AJ but If we put Alexei near the top of the order they won't walk him if he has TCQ right behind him.
If he's going to hit first or second, he needs to get on base more. He made out 68.3% of the time (the average major leaguer makes out 65.9% of the time). I like him in the middle of the order, where his lower OBP doesn't hurt as much and his power and aggressiveness helps. This is how I would have set the lineup this year, if I were Ozzie:

1) CF Swisher (still got on base at a decent rate)
2) LF Quentin (get him more plate appearances)
3) RF Dye (still one of the two best hitters on the team
4) DH Thome (best pure slugger on the team
5) 2B Ramirez (good power, breaks up slow-footed combo of Dye-Thome-Konerko-Pierzynski)
6) 1B Konerko (good power, but slipping as he gets older)
7) C Pierzynski (best of the remaining hitters)
8) SS Cabrera (not a very good hitter, but decent bat control; hopefully could avoid double plays here)
9) 3B Uribe

When Crede was healthy, I'd slot him 7th and bump AJ and OC down.

Rdy2PlayBall
10-21-2008, 07:05 PM
If he's going to hit first or second, he needs to get on base more. He made out 68.3% of the time (the average major leaguer makes out 65.9% of the time). I like him in the middle of the order, where his lower OBP doesn't hurt as much and his power and aggressiveness helps. This is how I would have set the lineup this year, if I were Ozzie:

1) CF Swisher (still got on base at a decent rate)
2) LF Quentin (get him more plate appearances)
3) RF Dye (still one of the two best hitters on the team
4) DH Thome (best pure slugger on the team
5) 2B Ramirez (good power, breaks up slow-footed combo of Dye-Thome-Konerko-Pierzynski)
6) 1B Konerko (good power, but slipping as he gets older)
7) C Pierzynski (best of the remaining hitters)
8) SS Cabrera (not a very good hitter, but decent bat control; hopefully could avoid double plays here)
9) 3B Uribe

When Crede was healthy, I'd slot him 7th and bump AJ and OC down.I really don't like the Swisher being #1... not really at all. @_@

CashMan
10-21-2008, 07:25 PM
I really don't like the Swisher being #1... not really at all. @_@


Or Uribe playing at all.

oeo
10-21-2008, 07:41 PM
I really don't like the Swisher being #1... not really at all. @_@

Or Uribe playing at all.

He said that's how he would have set it up last year. And really, before any actual moves are made, that's what we have to work with. Although Uribe is a free agent, if we want him back, he'll likely come back here.

Alexei's a run producer. He drove in what, 75 runs this year? He was easily our best hitter with RISP, and RISP with two outs. Keep him in the 6 or 7 spot. Hopefully he works on his base stealing this offseason, and then we can really have a different dynamic down there.

Lip Man 1
10-21-2008, 07:46 PM
You can't say anything yet because you don't know who the Sox may get. If the comments are true and Kenny can trade for Figgins and sign Hudson for 1-2 in the order then I'd expect Ramirez down in the order.

Lip

35th and Shields
10-21-2008, 07:47 PM
He said that's how he would have set it up last year. And really, before any actual moves are made, that's what we have to work with. Although Uribe is a free agent, if we want him back, he'll likely come back here.

Alexei's a run producer. He drove in what, 75 runs this year? He was easily our best hitter with RISP, and RISP with two outs. Keep him in the 6 or 7 spot. Hopefully he works on his base stealing this offseason, and then we can really have a different dynamic down there.

The concern that I would have over this is that no one is protecting probably or second or third best hitter if he hits that low. I wouldn't have a problem moving into the 4th or 5th spot but if he continues to play like he did last year I would expect to see his number of walks go way up if hits 7th. Not that it would be a bad thing but he can do way more damage with his bat and I think we would be much better off utilizing it higher up in the order.

oeo
10-21-2008, 07:55 PM
The concern that I would have over this is that no one is protecting probably or second or third best hitter if he hits that low. I wouldn't have a problem moving into the 4th or 5th spot but if he continues to play like he did last year I would expect to see his number of walks go way up if hits 7th. Not that it would be a bad thing but he can do way more damage with his bat and I think we would be much better off utilizing it higher up in the order.

Are you kidding? We'll have Swisher and AJ down there. Plenty of protection.

And if anything, like you said, he'll earn more walks if they decide to pitch around him. Alexei isn't Juan Uribe. Also, "protection" wasn't a problem this year.

turners56
10-21-2008, 08:26 PM
If he's going to hit first or second, he needs to get on base more. He made out 68.3% of the time (the average major leaguer makes out 65.9% of the time). I like him in the middle of the order, where his lower OBP doesn't hurt as much and his power and aggressiveness helps. This is how I would have set the lineup this year, if I were Ozzie:

1) CF Swisher (still got on base at a decent rate)
2) LF Quentin (get him more plate appearances)
3) RF Dye (still one of the two best hitters on the team
4) DH Thome (best pure slugger on the team
5) 2B Ramirez (good power, breaks up slow-footed combo of Dye-Thome-Konerko-Pierzynski)
6) 1B Konerko (good power, but slipping as he gets older)
7) C Pierzynski (best of the remaining hitters)
8) SS Cabrera (not a very good hitter, but decent bat control; hopefully could avoid double plays here)
9) 3B Uribe

When Crede was healthy, I'd slot him 7th and bump AJ and OC down.

The Swisher at leadoff experiment didn't work too well. Not only did he suck at leadoff, I have a feeling it also affected his performance later on.

35th and Shields
10-21-2008, 08:42 PM
Are you kidding? We'll have Swisher and AJ down there. Plenty of protection.

And if anything, he'll earn more walks if they decide to pitch around him. Alexei isn't Juan Uribe.

If you can believe it I don't think of Swisher and as good protection. We saw in the playoffs when the rays walked him to get to aj. People are starting to realize that he can play ball. The only reason I'm bringing this up is that I think Alexei would be giving us more production higher in the order in place of Thome or Konerko. Not knocking either of them but they should both move down a spot for Alexei. At this stage in his career he can do more with the bat and has decent speed.

SoxNation05
10-21-2008, 09:42 PM
Honestly I wouldn't mind him hitting 3.

1. 3B Figgins
2. 2B Hudson
3. SS Ramirez
4. LF Quentin
5. DH Thome
6. 1B Konerko
7. C Pierzysnki
8. RF Swisher
9. CF Anderson

Although I don't want Anderson starting.

turners56
10-21-2008, 10:34 PM
Honestly I wouldn't mind him hitting 3.

1. 3B Figgins
2. 2B Hudson
3. SS Ramirez
4. LF Quentin
5. DH Thome
6. 1B Konerko
7. C Pierzysnki
8. RF Swisher
9. CF Anderson

Although I don't want Anderson starting.

Very interesting idea. I've always dreamed of the day our third hitter would be bunting to move the runners over to second and third. And then Quentin can knock them both in with a single or better yet, knock them and himself in with a dinger. The problem is, how do we get Hudson and Figgins?

And another thing. I know some of you think that the third spot is reserved for the best hitter and that you should never give that out away, but I have an interesting proposition. Alexei Ramirez hit .290 last year. He made outs 68% of the time. If you had men on first and second with nobody out (and this was a HUGE problem this year) and Ramirez was up to bat...would you bunt with him or hit with him?

The possibility of him laying down a quality bunt would be much higher than the percentage he had of getting a hit or getting on base. Plus, if you had Quentin to back him up, the possibility of scoring will sky rocket. If Quentin singles, two runs score. If Ramirez just makes an out, you get one run on a Quentin single. Quentin would have to double in order to score both runners and it has to be a well placed double at that. If Quentin pops out deep enough, it's a run. If Quentin grounds out to anywhere but 3rd, you get a run. So basically, you raise your chance of scoring at least 20-30%, if not more.

october23sp
10-21-2008, 10:54 PM
I've read like over 100 times on this board and its the Figgins and Hudson almost gurantees. Where do we get the facts that we will even have a slim chance at getting them? I mean it would be awesome but i dont think we will get either.

ode to veeck
10-21-2008, 11:00 PM
I like him 3rd in front of CQ

Daver
10-21-2008, 11:00 PM
In Chicago.

What do I win?

ode to veeck
10-21-2008, 11:13 PM
In Chicago.

What do I win?

LOL, a six pack of Buckhorn, if anyone can find it anymore

Konerko05
10-21-2008, 11:27 PM
Very interesting idea. I've always dreamed of the day our third hitter would be bunting to move the runners over to second and third. And then Quentin can knock them both in with a single or better yet, knock them and himself in with a dinger. The problem is, how do we get Hudson and Figgins?

And another thing. I know some of you think that the third spot is reserved for the best hitter and that you should never give that out away, but I have an interesting proposition. Alexei Ramirez hit .290 last year. He made outs 68% of the time. If you had men on first and second with nobody out (and this was a HUGE problem this year) and Ramirez was up to bat...would you bunt with him or hit with him?

The possibility of him laying down a quality bunt would be much higher than the percentage he had of getting a hit or getting on base. Plus, if you had Quentin to back him up, the possibility of scoring will sky rocket. If Quentin singles, two runs score. If Ramirez just makes an out, you get one run on a Quentin single. Quentin would have to double in order to score both runners and it has to be a well placed double at that. If Quentin pops out deep enough, it's a run. If Quentin grounds out to anywhere but 3rd, you get a run. So basically, you raise your chance of scoring at least 20-30%, if not more.

Our #3 hitter sacrifice bunting with 2 men on and no outs?

:puking:

whitesox901
10-22-2008, 02:48 AM
I bat him 5th after tcq and thome

Frater Perdurabo
10-22-2008, 06:54 AM
Honestly I wouldn't mind him hitting 3.

1. 3B Figgins
2. 2B Hudson
3. SS Ramirez
4. LF Quentin
5. DH Thome
6. 1B Konerko
7. C Pierzysnki
8. RF Swisher
9. CF Anderson

Although I don't want Anderson starting.

What have you done with Jermaine Dye? :o:

turners56
10-22-2008, 08:09 AM
Our #3 hitter sacrifice bunting with 2 men on and no outs?

:puking:
And yet, I remember almost 10 times that that happened last year and absolutely nothing happened because we had failed to move the runners over.

Craig Grebeck
10-22-2008, 08:12 AM
And yet, I remember almost 10 times that that happened last year and absolutely nothing happened because we had failed to move the runners over.
No. You don't give up outs when it isn't necessary.

Eddo144
10-22-2008, 10:55 AM
And another thing. I know some of you think that the third spot is reserved for the best hitter and that you should never give that out away, but I have an interesting proposition. Alexei Ramirez hit .290 last year. He made outs 68% of the time. If you had men on first and second with nobody out (and this was a HUGE problem this year) and Ramirez was up to bat...would you bunt with him or hit with him?

The possibility of him laying down a quality bunt would be much higher than the percentage he had of getting a hit or getting on base. Plus, if you had Quentin to back him up, the possibility of scoring will sky rocket. If Quentin singles, two runs score. If Ramirez just makes an out, you get one run on a Quentin single. Quentin would have to double in order to score both runners and it has to be a well placed double at that. If Quentin pops out deep enough, it's a run. If Quentin grounds out to anywhere but 3rd, you get a run. So basically, you raise your chance of scoring at least 20-30%, if not more.
If you play for one run, you'll wind up scoring only one run. When you have two on and nobody out, with your 3-4-5 hitters coming up, you should be playing for a big inning.

Bunting is useful in the late innings of a one-run game. Any other time, you're giving up 1/27 of your life for the possibility of scoring a single run. The only time a good hitter like Alexei should be bunting is if there's no one out, ninth inning, runners on first and second (or just second), down by one run or tied. Even then, it still might be better to have him swing away.

turners56
10-22-2008, 04:09 PM
If you play for one run, you'll wind up scoring only one run. When you have two on and nobody out, with your 3-4-5 hitters coming up, you should be playing for a big inning.

Bunting is useful in the late innings of a one-run game. Any other time, you're giving up 1/27 of your life for the possibility of scoring a single run. The only time a good hitter like Alexei should be bunting is if there's no one out, ninth inning, runners on first and second (or just second), down by one run or tied. Even then, it still might be better to have him swing away.

I understand. But just how many BIG first innings did the White Sox have last year? And he doesn't have to be bunting for an out. He can try to bunt for a hit. You can catch the other team off-guard. And better yet, it installs to the 3rd baseman or the first baseman's mind to play up, giving Alexei a better possibility of getting a hit if he swings away. There aren't THAT many situations that the bunt should be done. But I'm just saying. If there's a tough pitcher out there (like Cliff Lee, and this did happen against him last year where OC and AJ reached and they never even moved) and you somehow get the first two on. You might as well try and bunt the two runners into scoring position where you don't even need a hit to get a run.

Remember what the Sox had back in 05 when Pods would get on, steal second, and we'd get him in without the benefit of a hit at times? That's one of the reasons we had a 37 game streak where we had a lead and why we were so succesful to start the season that year.

I understand the fact that 5 runs is better than 2 runs, but the possibility of getting those 5 runs is much more remote, especially against a good pitcher. Plus, wouldn't you rather have 2 runs rather than none? If you can touch up a good shut-down pitcher in the first inning with two runs, that not only gives your offense confidence, but it also builds the pitcher's as well. It brings a better comfort level to the whole team.

Eddo144
10-22-2008, 04:41 PM
I understand. But just how many BIG first innings did the White Sox have last year?
That's irrelevant, we often didn't have Alexei hitting in the first inning.

And he doesn't have to be bunting for an out. He can try to bunt for a hit.
Do you honestly think Alexei is more likely to get a bunt single than a regular hit?

You can catch the other team off-guard. And better yet, it installs to the 3rd baseman or the first baseman's mind to play up, giving Alexei a better possibility of getting a hit if he swings away. There aren't THAT many situations that the bunt should be done. But I'm just saying. If there's a tough pitcher out there (like Cliff Lee, and this did happen against him last year where OC and AJ reached and they never even moved) and you somehow get the first two on. You might as well try and bunt the two runners into scoring position where you don't even need a hit to get a run.
Getting the first two men on is probably a decent indicator that the "tough pitcher out there" doesn't have his best stuff on that particular day. Once they're on, your new goal should be to score more than one run, not put yourself in a position to not have to get a hit to score a run. That's fraidy-cat baseball.

Remember what the Sox had back in 05 when Pods would get on, steal second, and we'd get him in without the benefit of a hit at times? That's one of the reasons we had a 37 game streak where we had a lead and why we were so succesful to start the season that year.
Definitely. But that's irrelevant to the discussion. The key to the beginning of the 2005 season is that Podsednik got on base like a maniac and was stealing bases at a phenomenal clip. Our 3-6 hitters were decidedly less likely to drive him in with hits in 2005 than they will be next year (Everett-Konerko-Dye-Pierzynski vs. Quetin-Dye-Ramirez-Thome). Better hitters coming up gives you less reason to bunt; they are more likely to get a hit to get the job done.

I understand the fact that 5 runs is better than 2 runs, but the possibility of getting those 5 runs is much more remote, especially against a good pitcher. Plus, wouldn't you rather have 2 runs rather than none? If you can touch up a good shut-down pitcher in the first inning with two runs, that not only gives your offense confidence, but it also builds the pitcher's as well. It brings a better comfort level to the whole team.
Of course you'd rather have two runs instead of none. But bunting increases your likelihood of getting one run while decreasing your chance of getting two.

Look at it this way (I'll only detail situations that lead to two runs when you would have bunted)
1) got on somehow
2) ditto

SCENARIO A:
3) bunt
4) sac fly (RBI)
5) hit (RBI)
6) out
RESULT: TWO RUNS

SCENARIO B:
3) bunt
4) hit (2 RBI)
5) out
6) out
RESULT: TWO RUNS

NON-BUNTING SCENARIO A:
If you replace the bunt with an out, the fly ball by the 4th hitter is a regular out as well. The hit by the 5th hitter results in one or two runs, depending on what type of hit it was. RESULT: ONE OR TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with a single, one run scores immediately. Either the next hitter's fly ball scores another (if the runner went from first to third) or the following hitter's hit scores it. That hit could also score the third place hitter if it is an extra-base hit. RESULT: TWO OR THREE RUNS

If you replace the bunt with an extra-base hit, one or two run scores immediatly. The next hitter's fly ball will score the second if he wasn't fast enough to score from first. The following batter's hit should score a third run (the third place hitter). RESULT: THREE RUNS

NON-BUNTING SCENARIO B:
If you relplace the bunt with an out, the hit by the 4th hitter results in one run if a single or two if an extra-base hit. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: ONE OR TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with a single, one run scores immediately. The hit by the 4th hitter scores another. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with an extra base hit, one or two runs score immediately. The hit by the 4th hitter scores the third runner and any other runner ahead of him. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: THREE RUNS

---

For either scenario, if a bunt will ultimately lead to two runs, then not bunting will lead to at least one, but more likely two or three. And that's assuming the team doesn't hit any home runs.

turners56
10-22-2008, 05:23 PM
That's irrelevant, we often didn't have Alexei hitting in the first inning.


Do you honestly think Alexei is more likely to get a bunt single than a regular hit?


Getting the first two men on is probably a decent indicator that the "tough pitcher out there" doesn't have his best stuff on that particular day. Once they're on, your new goal should be to score more than one run, not put yourself in a position to not have to get a hit to score a run. That's fraidy-cat baseball.


Definitely. But that's irrelevant to the discussion. The key to the beginning of the 2005 season is that Podsednik got on base like a maniac and was stealing bases at a phenomenal clip. Our 3-6 hitters were decidedly less likely to drive him in with hits in 2005 than they will be next year (Everett-Konerko-Dye-Pierzynski vs. Quetin-Dye-Ramirez-Thome). Better hitters coming up gives you less reason to bunt; they are more likely to get a hit to get the job done.


Of course you'd rather have two runs instead of none. But bunting increases your likelihood of getting one run while decreasing your chance of getting two.

Look at it this way (I'll only detail situations that lead to two runs when you would have bunted)
1) got on somehow
2) ditto

SCENARIO A:
3) bunt
4) sac fly (RBI)
5) hit (RBI)
6) out
RESULT: TWO RUNS

SCENARIO B:
3) bunt
4) hit (2 RBI)
5) out
6) out
RESULT: TWO RUNS

NON-BUNTING SCENARIO A:
If you replace the bunt with an out, the fly ball by the 4th hitter is a regular out as well. The hit by the 5th hitter results in one or two runs, depending on what type of hit it was. RESULT: ONE OR TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with a single, one run scores immediately. Either the next hitter's fly ball scores another (if the runner went from first to third) or the following hitter's hit scores it. That hit could also score the third place hitter if it is an extra-base hit. RESULT: TWO OR THREE RUNS

If you replace the bunt with an extra-base hit, one or two run scores immediatly. The next hitter's fly ball will score the second if he wasn't fast enough to score from first. The following batter's hit should score a third run (the third place hitter). RESULT: THREE RUNS

NON-BUNTING SCENARIO B:
If you relplace the bunt with an out, the hit by the 4th hitter results in one run if a single or two if an extra-base hit. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: ONE OR TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with a single, one run scores immediately. The hit by the 4th hitter scores another. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: TWO RUNS

If you replace the bunt with an extra base hit, one or two runs score immediately. The hit by the 4th hitter scores the third runner and any other runner ahead of him. That is all the scoring for the inning. RESULT: THREE RUNS

---

For either scenario, if a bunt will ultimately lead to two runs, then not bunting will lead to at least one, but more likely two or three. And that's assuming the team doesn't hit any home runs.

According to last year's stats with men on first and second, the White Sox hit a total of 11 home runs in those situations in a total of 434 plate appearances. So it's not that likely. The team also hit only .232 in those situations. We bunted in only 4 of these situations, so I assume that those were the times where we had no outs. Out of all the situations this team has hit in with runners in scoring position, this is easily the worst department when it comes to AVG, OBP, and SLG. The team has a .662 OPS in these situations. Compared to an OPS of .869 with men on the corners, a .952 OPS with men on second and third, .831 OPS with a man on second, .817 OPS with a man on third, and a 1.017 OPS with the bases loaded. It was an extreme weakpoint last year.

Alexei Ramirez however, did accel in this situations in limited at bats. A 32 AB sample size is not exactly big enough to judge him correctly, but he did hit .344 in these situations. He never walked, but he did sacrifice once. What's intrigiuing is that his BABip was .400. So that's saying he's been quite lucky in those situations. And if you're wondering, when Alexei bunts, he's at a .444 clip. He's only bunted 13 times overall, he's been succesful bunting for a sacrifice 4 times, gotten a hit 4 times, and failed 5 times. Once again, a small sample size, but he was 8/13, a .615 clip.

Lip Man 1
10-22-2008, 05:35 PM
Reading the last two posts makes my brain hurt.

Lip

Eddo144
10-22-2008, 05:38 PM
According to last year's stats with men on first and second, the White Sox hit a total of 11 home runs in those situations in a total of 434 plate appearances. So it's not that likely. The team also hit only .232 in those situations. We bunted in only 4 of these situations, so I assume that those were the times where we had no outs. Out of all the situations this team has hit in with runners in scoring position, this is easily the worst department when it comes to AVG, OBP, and SLG. The team has a .662 OPS in these situations. Compared to an OPS of .869 with men on the corners, a .952 OPS with men on second and third, .831 OPS with a man on second, .817 OPS with a man on third, and a 1.017 OPS with the bases loaded. It was an extreme weakpoint last year.
Interesting, though do you really think that indicates something to project for the future? That is, do you really think the Sox have hitters that struggle in the oh-so-specific "runners on first and second" situation, but succeed in the "runners on first and third" situation?

Also note that AVG and SLG (though not OBP) will be higher for situations with runner on third base, as normal fly outs will be sacrifice flies, which don't count as an at bat.

Alexei Ramirez however, did accel in this situations in limited at bats. A 32 AB sample size is not exactly big enough to judge him correctly, but he did hit .344 in these situations. He never walked, but he did sacrifice once. What's intrigiuing is that his BABip was .400. So that's saying he's been quite lucky in those situations. And if you're wondering, when Alexei bunts, he's at a .444 clip. He's only bunted 13 times overall, he's been succesful bunting for a sacrifice 4 times, gotten a hit 4 times, and failed 5 times. Once again, a small sample size, but he was 8/13, a .615 clip.
I agree that the sample size is too small to really draw any conclusions. Also, his success in bunting is actually 4/13. Remember, if he attempts to bunt for a hit with runners on first and second but gets thrown out, that will count as a sacrifice, not a standard out. So you need to count sacrifices as well when computing. It's a nitpick, I know, and I'm sorry.

All told though, if Alexei (or any hitter) is good enough to hit third or fourth, I don't want him bunting. I'll save that for my weaker hitters that can't drive in runs and get on base by conventional means. I get the feeling you agree with me, too.

Konerko05
10-22-2008, 07:13 PM
I agree with Everything Eddo said.

Now let's look at it from a different standpoint.

The pitcher starts off the game/inning very shaky. The pitcher's strike zone might even be a little erratic. He allows the first two hitters on base with no outs. The best hitters in the lineup are now coming up to bat.

The opposing pitcher would love to get the #3 hitter to make an out with 1 pitch. Even if the #4 hitter hits a sacrifice fly and the Sox score 1 run, the opposing pitcher might even consider that inning a success. He made it out of a very tough situation only allowing 1 run. It's still early in the game with a very close score. He might have also kept his pitch count at a fairly low rate.

With 2 men on and no outs with your best hitters coming to the plate, you have to go for the kill. I'd much rather take my chances at a big inning. A big inning can change the entire game. Sox will probably get to their bullpen early. The Sox starting pitcher will have a decent lead to work with instead of fighting and clawing for 7 innings. Giving the opponent an out in that situation is only doing them a favor.

If Ramirez is just bunting for a hit, I'd much rather take my chances with him swinging the bat.

Metalthrasher442
10-22-2008, 11:37 PM
1. Chone (3B)
2. Getz (2B)
3. TCQ LF
4. JD RF
5. Thome DH
6. TCM SS
7. Konerko 1B
8. AJ C
9. Swish or BA CF

We need to get a lead off hitter somewhere. Pull for a Pods like in 05 =] Anyway we wont get Chone but who ever we get for lead off whether it be a CF or 3B put him in the 1st spot =]

Eddo144
10-23-2008, 08:28 AM
1. Chone (3B)
2. Getz (2B)
3. TCQ LF
4. JD RF
5. Thome DH
6. TCM SS
7. Konerko 1B
8. AJ C
9. Swish or BA CF

We need to get a lead off hitter somewhere. Pull for a Pods like in 05 =] Anyway we wont get Chone but who ever we get for lead off whether it be a CF or 3B put him in the 1st spot =]
That's all well and good, and I actually like Figgins leading off, but in order for him to be on the White Sox next, Paul Konerko is on the Angels.

HomeFish
10-24-2008, 02:21 AM
I would like to see Alexei demonstrate that he can consistently hit major league pitching over the course of more than just one season before I entertain talk of moving him up in the order.

russ99
10-24-2008, 11:35 AM
With his iffy plate discipline, at this point it would be foolhardy to move Alexei into the 1 or 2 spot, especially if Kenny can acquire players to hit there this offseason, so he should stay in the 6 or 7 spot where he's comfortable and can show steady improvement.

A year or two down the line I could see Alexei in the #3 spot, especially if he can keep improving on his hitting for both average and power and develop into a .315/35/85 hitter. By then, two of Dye, Thome and Konerko could be gone or have further diminished skills, so I see Quentin batting #4 in that scenario.