PDA

View Full Version : Those of you who want Walker fired, consider this


DumpJerry
07-02-2010, 04:45 PM
Rudy Jaramillo was touted by the local media as the biggest offseason pickup the Cubs made this year. He was touted as a God among Gods of hitting coaches. The Rangers had great offense with him guiding their bats.

In their past 12 games, the Cubs have been shut out 6 times.

Is it really the Hitting Coach? Naw.

doublem23
07-02-2010, 05:44 PM
Yawn, this is what, the 100th time this point has been brought up? Since the hitting coach is obviously a non-factor, we may as well just be ahead of the curve and axe the position completely. At least that gets rid of Walker.

DumpJerry
07-02-2010, 05:49 PM
Yawn, this is what, the 100th time this point has been brought up? Since the hitting coach is obviously a non-factor, we may as well just be ahead of the curve and axe the position completely. At least that gets rid of Walker.
Frees up money to sign Labron.

LoveYourSuit
07-02-2010, 05:53 PM
:threadrules:

JB98
07-02-2010, 06:29 PM
How do we know Jaramillo isn't the reason the Cubs suck? Maybe he has stopped working hard now that the Cubs threw millions of dollars at him. Maybe he's the wrong choice for this group of players.

BringHomeDaBacon
07-02-2010, 06:49 PM
I don't see how this has anything at all to do with Greg Walker.

Pablo_Honey
07-02-2010, 06:53 PM
I don't see how this has anything at all to do with Greg Walker.
People were calling for Walker to be fired and replaced by Jaramillo last offseason, stating Walker has absolutey no positive effect on the team and even has screwed up the offense. The lack of offense from the Cubs could be used as one of the evidenced to prove hitting coaches don't do much, if at all, for ball clubs.

Brian26
07-02-2010, 06:55 PM
Yawn, this is what, the 100th time this point has been brought up? Since the hitting coach is obviously a non-factor, we may as well just be ahead of the curve and axe the position completely. At least that gets rid of Walker.

:hawk
"Your WHAT hurts, DoubleM? I think we need to hire three hitting coaches: one for the power hitters, one for the hitters who hit for average, and one for the bench players."

Brian26
07-02-2010, 06:56 PM
How do we know Jaramillo isn't the reason the Cubs suck? Maybe he has stopped working hard now that the Cubs threw millions of dollars at him. Maybe he's the wrong choice for this group of players.

Von Joshua got hosed.

HomeFish
07-02-2010, 07:08 PM
We can't really do much worse.

BringHomeDaBacon
07-02-2010, 07:33 PM
People were calling for Walker to be fired and replaced by Jaramillo last offseason, stating Walker has absolutey no positive effect on the team and even has screwed up the offense. The lack of offense from the Cubs could be used as one of the evidenced to prove hitting coaches don't do much, if at all, for ball clubs.

Or it could be used as evidence that the Cubs, despite a great hitting coach, still suck. Again, I don't see how it has anything to with Greg Walker unless you think that hitting coaches are entitled to lifetime tenure.

TornLabrum
07-02-2010, 09:47 PM
It doesn't have anything to do with the Sox except the greatest hitting coach in the history of baseball can't get the Cubs to hit because...they're just not good hitters and a hitting coach can't make them hit. Maybe that's the case with the Sox. We just don't have any really really good hitters. The good hitters due fine and the bad hitters do what bad hitters always do. Ditto the mediocre hitters. Same as with the Cubs who have the greatest hitting coach in the history of the universe.

So no, it has nothing to do with Greg Walker.

Pablo_Honey
07-02-2010, 11:02 PM
Or it could be used as evidence that the Cubs, despite a great hitting coach, still suck. Again, I don't see how it has anything to with Greg Walker unless you think that hitting coaches are entitled to lifetime tenure.
Uh, it has a lot to do with Greg Walker because he's a hitting coach like Jaramillo and a lot of people wanted him replaced by Jaramillo. People were upset when the Cubs signed Jaramillo and disappointed Walker was kept. Yet, Jaramillo hasn't turned the Cubs into one of the best hitting clubs. Sure, the Cubs aren't one of the most talents clubs but aren't hitting coaches supposedly responsible for getting the most out of players? If he couldn't do much with the Cubs, then what the **** could he have done with the Sox? Last time I checked, we had Andruw Jones and Mark Kotsay as our DH for ****'s sake. How the **** is changing our hitting coach gonna help those two washed up has-beens suddenly start performing?

I'm neither for or against keeping Walker because I don't know what exactly he does so I can't say he's not doing his job. Fire him, keep him, I don't give a flying ****. Kenny and Ozzie have the most amount of responsibility over player performance than any other personnel in this organization. Kenny brings in the guys and Ozzie handles them so I don't see how firing Walker can have any serious impact on this team. Maybe it can help Beckham get his groove back. Maybe it can help Jones resurrect his career. Maybe it makes Teahen reach his ceiling. Or maybe nothing happens and we realize Kenny just brought in ****ty talents for the sake of saving money. The bottom line is, people are making a big deal out of a hitting coach's responsibilities even when they aren't even actually clear so there's no need to bitch and moan about Walker still being here.

Ranger
07-03-2010, 12:03 AM
Yawn, this is what, the 100th time this point has been brought up? Since the hitting coach is obviously a non-factor, we may as well just be ahead of the curve and axe the position completely. At least that gets rid of Walker.

Nobody is saying that the position isn't important, because he still has a job to do (mainly making sure hitters get their practice in, because they have a pregame schedule for that sort of stuff and the manager isn't able to handle everything. In some ways, the position is really supervisory). What they're saying, though, is that it's not in his job description to make a bad hitter a good one. It just isn't possible. And they're also saying that the hitting coach simply doesn't have nearly as much influence on the overall offense as people think he does.

How do we know Jaramillo isn't the reason the Cubs suck? Maybe he has stopped working hard now that the Cubs threw millions of dollars at him. Maybe he's the wrong choice for this group of players.

Really? Come on.

Or it could be used as evidence that the Cubs, despite a great hitting coach, still suck. Again, I don't see how it has anything to with Greg Walker unless you think that hitting coaches are entitled to lifetime tenure.

Well you just sort of made the point and you don't realize it. The CUbs can't hit because teh Cubs can't hit. It has nothing to do with the hitting coach. Likewise, it is not Walker's fault either, though everyone loves to blame him.

Sam Spade
07-03-2010, 12:43 AM
Well you just sort of made the point and you don't realize it. The CUbs can't hit because teh Cubs can't hit. It has nothing to do with the hitting coach. Likewise, it is not Walker's fault either, though everyone loves to blame him.
No he didn't. You just didn't understand his point.

Nellie_Fox
07-03-2010, 12:54 AM
The new hot hitting coach in MLB is Clint Hurdle. Of the Texas Rangers. He has "fixed" Josh Hamilton. Got him to get rid of the "toe tap."

Which Jaramillo tried to do, and Hamilton wouldn't.

Maybe it's just that Texas has good hitters? Maybe it's just that sometimes hitters won't listen to the hitting coach?

asindc
07-03-2010, 07:43 AM
Uh, it has a lot to do with Greg Walker because he's a hitting coach like Jaramillo and a lot of people wanted him replaced by Jaramillo. People were upset when the Cubs signed Jaramillo and disappointed Walker was kept. Yet, Jaramillo hasn't turned the Cubs into one of the best hitting clubs. Sure, the Cubs aren't one of the most talents clubs but aren't hitting coaches supposedly responsible for getting the most out of players? If he couldn't do much with the Cubs, then what the **** could he have done with the Sox? Last time I checked, we had Andruw Jones and Mark Kotsay as our DH for ****'s sake. How the **** is changing our hitting coach gonna help those two washed up has-beens suddenly start performing?

I'm neither for or against keeping Walker because I don't know what exactly he does so I can't say he's not doing his job. Fire him, keep him, I don't give a flying ****. Kenny and Ozzie have the most amount of responsibility over player performance than any other personnel in this organization. Kenny brings in the guys and Ozzie handles them so I don't see how firing Walker can have any serious impact on this team. Maybe it can help Beckham get his groove back. Maybe it can help Jones resurrect his career. Maybe it makes Teahen reach his ceiling. Or maybe nothing happens and we realize Kenny just brought in ****ty talents for the sake of saving money. The bottom line is, people are making a big deal out of a hitting coach's responsibilities even when they aren't even actually clear so there's no need to bitch and moan about Walker still being here.

Excellent point.

Bob Roarman
07-03-2010, 07:44 AM
Maybe it's just that at the major league level, there's not a whole lot a batting coach can do but be another voice in the dug out. I've said this numerous times, it's not about the position being worthless, they do have their duties to attend to (and they are of the kind that no one here would know if Walker or Rudy was or wasn't attending to them) it's just not a big impact position. They almost never hurt a team to the point of having him be a scape goat (Walker and countless others) and they never help a team to the point of them being touted as a "great offseason signing" (the Cubs and Rudy). The MINOR league hitting coaches, those are the ones that are important.

SOXSINCE'70
07-03-2010, 08:06 AM
Von Joshua got hosed.

Bring back Ron Jackson and Walt Hriniak!!:D::)

SOXSINCE'70
07-03-2010, 08:09 AM
Maybe it's just that Texas has good hitters? Maybe it's just that sometimes hitters won't listen to the hitting coach?

:hawk
"YYYYYESSSS!!"

Ranger
07-03-2010, 08:42 AM
No he didn't. You just didn't understand his point.

No, I understood it perfectly. He doesn't understand how this has anything to do with Greg Walker, but it has everything to do with Greg Walker. Reason being, most people around here seem to be absolutely positive he should lose his job because they don't think he's doing a good job. However, most of those same people believe Jaramillo is some sort of god, yet his team currently stinks at hitting. Therefore, the conclusion is that maybe it's really not about the hitting coach. If it were, the Cubs would be a great hitting team right now. But nobody is acknowledging that.

Maybe it's just that at the major league level, there's not a whole lot a batting coach can do but be another voice in the dug out. I've said this numerous times, it's not about the position being worthless, they do have their duties to attend to (and they are of the kind that no one here would know if Walker or Rudy was or wasn't attending to them) it's just not a big impact position. They almost never hurt a team to the point of having him be a scape goat (Walker and countless others) and they never help a team to the point of them being touted as a "great offseason signing" (the Cubs and Rudy). The MINOR league hitting coaches, those are the ones that are important.

Yes.

HebrewHammer
07-03-2010, 08:47 AM
Rudy Jaramillo was touted by the local media as the biggest offseason pickup the Cubs made this year. He was touted as a God among Gods of hitting coaches. The Rangers had great offense with him guiding their bats.

In their past 12 games, the Cubs have been shut out 6 times.

Is it really the Hitting Coach? Naw.

The Cubs hype everyone as the next greatest at whatever they happen to be hired for. The Cubs overhyping a coach isn't news.

The problem I have with Walker is the lack of preparation. How many times has a White Sox opponent faced a pitcher for the first time and struggled? He's been in a position for a long time and we've been having the same problems with the offense. I'd like to see a change.

doublem23
07-03-2010, 08:59 AM
The Cubs hype everyone as the next greatest at whatever they happen to be hired for. The Cubs overhyping a coach isn't news.

The problem I have with Walker is the lack of preparation. How many times has a White Sox opponent faced a pitcher for the first time and struggled? He's been in a position for a long time and we've been having the same problems with the offense. I'd like to see a change.

You can bring up the same points over and over and over again and it won't matter because there's apparently no blaming anybody for anything. It's not Kenny's fault for bringing in bad players, leaving huge holes in our lineup, or signing bad players to inexplicable contracts. It's not Ozzie's fault for shuffling the lineup around like he's Jerry Manuel, Jr., or playing ridiculous R/L splits, or bringing terrible pitchers into high pressure situations. It's not the players fault for being awful because they're trying super, duper, really hard. It's not Walker's fault because he's obviously got the poshest job in America, where people are quick to pat him on the back when the going is good and quick to alleviate the heat when the going's not.

Everybody who looked at this roster and saw the giant holes in the roster, the utter lack of trade-worthy pieces in the minors, and all the other problems facing the Sox are obviously just inferior fans; whiners who, for some reason or another, should be more content to just sit like a bump on a log, mindlessly watching the game without ever trying to understand what they're seeing. Obviously baseball is supposed to be a game for simpletons who are only allowed to react.

So whatever, don't try and critique Greg Walker's terribleness, because that obviously makes you a lesser fan than the rest, who can't come up with a better defense for the guy than, "well, he really doesn't do anything."

Coops4Aces
07-03-2010, 10:14 AM
You can bring up the same points over and over and over again and it won't matter because there's apparently no blaming anybody for anything. It's not Kenny's fault for bringing in bad players, leaving huge holes in our lineup, or signing bad players to inexplicable contracts. It's not Ozzie's fault for shuffling the lineup around like he's Jerry Manuel, Jr., or playing ridiculous R/L splits, or bringing terrible pitchers into high pressure situations. It's not the players fault for being awful because they're trying super, duper, really hard. It's not Walker's fault because he's obviously got the poshest job in America, where people are quick to pat him on the back when the going is good and quick to alleviate the heat when the going's not.

Everybody who looked at this roster and saw the giant holes in the roster, the utter lack of trade-worthy pieces in the minors, and all the other problems facing the Sox are obviously just inferior fans; whiners who, for some reason or another, should be more content to just sit like a bump on a log, mindlessly watching the game without ever trying to understand what they're seeing. Obviously baseball is supposed to be a game for simpletons who are only allowed to react.

So whatever, don't try and critique Greg Walker's terribleness, because that obviously makes you a lesser fan than the rest, who can't come up with a better defense for the guy than, "well, he really doesn't do anything."

:clap:

The argument that he doesn't really do anything that important is the icing on the cake of the ridiculous pro-Walker stance.

captain54
07-03-2010, 10:52 AM
However, most of those same people believe Jaramillo is some sort of god, yet his team currently stinks at hitting. Therefore, the conclusion is that maybe it's really not about the hitting coach. If it were, the Cubs would be a great hitting team right now. But nobody is acknowledging that.


Yes.

Before everyone gets all delirious about how terrible of a hitting team the Cubs are, consider these stats:


BA WS, .251 Cubs, .253
RUNS WS 340 Cubs 314
HITS WS 651 Cubs 679
OBP WS .323 Cubs .319
SLG% WS .401 Cubs .392

Also, consider the WS have the DH, so theorectically, should have better offensive stats across the board than the Cubs.

So in fairness, if you claim than Jaramillo isn't helping the Cubs, then you have to say neither is Greg Walker helping the White Sox.

FielderJones
07-03-2010, 11:27 AM
:clap:

The argument that he doesn't really do anything that important is the icing on the cake of the ridiculous pro-Walker stance.

:rolleyes:

The argument that any hitting coach makes or breaks the batting success of a team is the icing on the cake of the ridiculous anti-Walker stance.

Coops4Aces
07-03-2010, 11:43 AM
:rolleyes:

The argument that any hitting coach makes or breaks the batting success of a team is the icing on the cake of the ridiculous anti-Walker stance.

No one said that, or at least no one with half a brain said that.

asindc
07-03-2010, 11:51 AM
No one said that, or at least no one with half a brain said that.

Then what is all the carping and caterwauling about?

Coops4Aces
07-03-2010, 12:03 PM
Then what is all the carping and caterwauling about?

I feel like we are going in circles lol

A hitting coach is not the end all, be all. But he does have a job to do (and it's more than "making sure hitters get their practice in"). Some people want to argue extremes and it's silly.

TornLabrum
07-03-2010, 12:15 PM
I feel like we are going in circles lol

A hitting coach is not the end all, be all. But he does have a job to do (and it's more than "making sure hitters get their practice in"). Some people want to argue extremes and it's silly.

The hitting coach must also look at video of slumping hitters and offer suggestions for improving the situation. My doctor has suggested to me for years that I lose weight. I haven't done that. Is that my doctor's fault or mine?

Ranger
07-03-2010, 01:46 PM
The Cubs hype everyone as the next greatest at whatever they happen to be hired for. The Cubs overhyping a coach isn't news.

The problem I have with Walker is the lack of preparation. How many times has a White Sox opponent faced a pitcher for the first time and struggled? He's been in a position for a long time and we've been having the same problems with the offense. I'd like to see a change.

Well, lack of preparation is not the problem. These guys couldn't be any better prepared. They know what they're facing every night. It comes down to the types of individuals they have on the team. Hal, makes a good point in the bottom post below.

I feel like we are going in circles lol

A hitting coach is not the end all, be all. But he does have a job to do (and it's more than "making sure hitters get their practice in"). Some people want to argue extremes and it's silly.

Yes, he does have other things to do, but that one you mentioned is pretty much his main duty. Sorry, it doesn't agree with the narrative, but it happens to be true. It's apparent that many fans simply have no idea what the duties of the position truly are.

Like I've said a 1,000 times before, I challenge you to find anyone within the game that believes Walker, or anyone else, could do more than what's being done. Players, coaches, journalists that cover the team (and I don't mean talk show hosts that never go to the park), anyone.

The hitting coach must also look at video of slumping hitters and offer suggestions for improving the situation. My doctor has suggested to me for years that I lose weight. I haven't done that. Is that my doctor's fault or mine?

Some guys simply don't listen to a hitting coach and there's nothing any hitting coach can do about it. Example: Juan Pierre. Doesn't use one, never has used one, and never will. He isn't rude about it, but he apparently respectfully declines the services of a hitting coach. He has his own program and does his own thing. He's been that way on every team he's played on since he's been in the Majors. Every hitting coach he's ever had will tell you the exact same thing.

Now, guess who got some of the blame when Pierre struggled in the first 6 weeks?

JB98
07-03-2010, 02:06 PM
My critiques of Walker have always been more based upon what young hitters do than the veterans.

Paul Konerko has been a productive MLB hitter for over a decade. He doesn't need Greg Walker. When he goes into a slump, he's got enough experience that he should know how to get out of it. If Konerko slumps, it's Konerko's fault, not Walker's. I get that. Ditto a guy like Pierre. Fine. I understand that.

I just have big concerns about what this organization does with younger hitters. I've seen too many guys regress or stall, and this goes far beyond the much-debated Brian Anderson. Josh Fields had 23 HRs in 2007, then went backwards fast. He had a chance to seize a full-time job with the Sox last season, and he was brutal in all aspects of the game.

The organization asked Tyler Flowers to change his approach. He complied and went 3 for 39 with 22 strikeouts or something ridiculous like that. It got so bad that people didn't want to trade Pierzynski when the Sox were struggling, because they didn't think Flowers could do the job defensively OR offensively. Previously, critiques of Flowers were centered on his defense. This is the first season people have wondered aloud whether Flowers will be able to hit, and interestingly, his struggles came after KW and Walk made some "suggestions."

Then, of course, we've got Gordon Beckham, who has been struggling for three months after a very promising rookie year. There are plenty of threads where people are arguing about what the Sox should do with Bacon, but I think we can all agree he's had some issues. Thank goodness he doesn't seem to be taking his hitting problems out to 2B with him.

To some extent, I think the organization has whiffed on identifying offensive talent at times. Jerry Owens can't play this game. That's not Greg Walker's fault. Danny Richar can't play a lick. That's not Greg Walker's fault. But you just have to wonder what's going on when you see former No. 1 draft picks in this organization constantly going splat up against a wall.

BadBobbyJenks
07-03-2010, 02:07 PM
Rudy isn't helping the Cubs therefore Greg isn't a problem. Can't argue with that.

SI1020
07-03-2010, 02:36 PM
You can bring up the same points over and over and over again and it won't matter because there's apparently no blaming anybody for anything. It's not Kenny's fault for bringing in bad players, leaving huge holes in our lineup, or signing bad players to inexplicable contracts. It's not Ozzie's fault for shuffling the lineup around like he's Jerry Manuel, Jr., or playing ridiculous R/L splits, or bringing terrible pitchers into high pressure situations. It's not the players fault for being awful because they're trying super, duper, really hard. It's not Walker's fault because he's obviously got the poshest job in America, where people are quick to pat him on the back when the going is good and quick to alleviate the heat when the going's not.

Everybody who looked at this roster and saw the giant holes in the roster, the utter lack of trade-worthy pieces in the minors, and all the other problems facing the Sox are obviously just inferior fans; whiners who, for some reason or another, should be more content to just sit like a bump on a log, mindlessly watching the game without ever trying to understand what they're seeing. Obviously baseball is supposed to be a game for simpletons who are only allowed to react.

So whatever, don't try and critique Greg Walker's terribleness, because that obviously makes you a lesser fan than the rest, who can't come up with a better defense for the guy than, "well, he really doesn't do anything." Home run.

SI1020
07-03-2010, 02:47 PM
My critiques of Walker have always been more based upon what young hitters do than the veterans.

Paul Konerko has been a productive MLB hitter for over a decade. He doesn't need Greg Walker. When he goes into a slump, he's got enough experience that he should know how to get out of it. If Konerko slumps, it's Konerko's fault, not Walker's. I get that. Ditto a guy like Pierre. Fine. I understand that.

I just have big concerns about what this organization does with younger hitters. I've seen too many guys regress or stall, and this goes far beyond the much-debated Brian Anderson. Josh Fields had 23 HRs in 2007, then went backwards fast. He had a chance to seize a full-time job with the Sox last season, and he was brutal in all aspects of the game.

The organization asked Tyler Flowers to change his approach. He complied and went 3 for 39 with 22 strikeouts or something ridiculous like that. It got so bad that people didn't want to trade Pierzynski when the Sox were struggling, because they didn't think Flowers could do the job defensively OR offensively. Previously, critiques of Flowers were centered on his defense. This is the first season people have wondered aloud whether Flowers will be able to hit, and interestingly, his struggles came after KW and Walk made some "suggestions."

Then, of course, we've got Gordon Beckham, who has been struggling for three months after a very promising rookie year. There are plenty of threads where people are arguing about what the Sox should do with Bacon, but I think we can all agree he's had some issues. Thank goodness he doesn't seem to be taking his hitting problems out to 2B with him.

To some extent, I think the organization has whiffed on identifying offensive talent at times. Jerry Owens can't play this game. That's not Greg Walker's fault. Danny Richar can't play a lick. That's not Greg Walker's fault. But you just have to wonder what's going on when you see former No. 1 draft picks in this organization constantly going splat up against a wall. Make it back to back.

Ranger
07-03-2010, 08:06 PM
My critiques of Walker have always been more based upon what young hitters do than the veterans.

Paul Konerko has been a productive MLB hitter for over a decade. He doesn't need Greg Walker. When he goes into a slump, he's got enough experience that he should know how to get out of it. If Konerko slumps, it's Konerko's fault, not Walker's. I get that. Ditto a guy like Pierre. Fine. I understand that.

I just have big concerns about what this organization does with younger hitters. I've seen too many guys regress or stall, and this goes far beyond the much-debated Brian Anderson. Josh Fields had 23 HRs in 2007, then went backwards fast. He had a chance to seize a full-time job with the Sox last season, and he was brutal in all aspects of the game.

The organization asked Tyler Flowers to change his approach. He complied and went 3 for 39 with 22 strikeouts or something ridiculous like that. It got so bad that people didn't want to trade Pierzynski when the Sox were struggling, because they didn't think Flowers could do the job defensively OR offensively. Previously, critiques of Flowers were centered on his defense. This is the first season people have wondered aloud whether Flowers will be able to hit, and interestingly, his struggles came after KW and Walk made some "suggestions."

Then, of course, we've got Gordon Beckham, who has been struggling for three months after a very promising rookie year. There are plenty of threads where people are arguing about what the Sox should do with Bacon, but I think we can all agree he's had some issues. Thank goodness he doesn't seem to be taking his hitting problems out to 2B with him.

To some extent, I think the organization has whiffed on identifying offensive talent at times. Jerry Owens can't play this game. That's not Greg Walker's fault. Danny Richar can't play a lick. That's not Greg Walker's fault. But you just have to wonder what's going on when you see former No. 1 draft picks in this organization constantly going splat up against a wall.

Everything you're saying supports the argument that it's more to do with development in the minors as opposed to what happens when they finally get here. To say that Anderson, Fields, etc. can't hit because of Walker, though, isn't accurate. They can't hit at this level because they can't hit at this level. They probably don't have the mental makeup to do it because it appears they don't have the confidence. It's not as if they went elsewhere and flourished. One of them is even trying to make it as a pitcher now. That's not because Greg Walker screwed him up, it's because he just isn't good enough to be a MLB hitter.

The real problem is in the talent itself. Those guys just aren't good enough to do it every day, every year, in this league. Plain and simple.

Daver
07-03-2010, 08:19 PM
The real problem is in the talent itself. Those guys just aren't good enough to do it every day, every year, in this league. Plain and simple.

We'll agree to disagree. The White Sox have a problem developing talent, and they rush any high pick that shows promise through the system to try and capitalize on the investment they have made, without thought about the consequences of rushing them. Don't blame the talent, blame the real cause for failure, I think Brian Anderson would be a much different player if he had been drafted by the Ray's, Marlins, or the Twins, they actually know how to develop talent.

Ranger
07-03-2010, 08:32 PM
We'll agree to disagree. The White Sox have a problem developing talent, and they rush any high pick that shows promise through the system to try and capitalize on the investment they have made, without thought about the consequences of rushing them. Don't blame the talent, blame the real cause for failure, I think Brian Anderson would be a much different player if he had been drafted by the Ray's, Marlins, or the Twins, they actually know how to develop talent.

That's not entirely out of the question, but I think the truth is closer to the idea that they made a lot of "safe" picks for a long time. It's not as if any of these prospects (traded or not) have matured into much. That indicates an absence of talent more than anything. Over the last 10 years, how many former Sox position player prospects do you truly miss? And I mean prospects that have become contributing Major Leaguers.

At any rate, they've made a number of changes over the last 4 years in that department...the effects of which will not manifest for quite some time.

Bob Roarman
07-04-2010, 07:22 AM
Everything you're saying supports the argument that it's more to do with development in the minors as opposed to what happens when they finally get here. To say that Anderson, Fields, etc. can't hit because of Walker, though, isn't accurate. They can't hit at this level because they can't hit at this level. They probably don't have the mental makeup to do it because it appears they don't have the confidence. It's not as if they went elsewhere and flourished. One of them is even trying to make it as a pitcher now. That's not because Greg Walker screwed him up, it's because he just isn't good enough to be a MLB hitter.

The real problem is in the talent itself. Those guys just aren't good enough to do it every day, every year, in this league. Plain and simple.

Yes exactly. People bring up Beckham like it's some golden example. This is what happens in the MLB: You come in, you have a pretty good rookie year, good enough to win ROY. The league takes notice, they adjust to you. Now you have to adjust back and that's the point where Beckham is at right now. It's not easy. This is what causes the "sophomore slump". There's a lot of one hit wonders that kinda just fizzle out as the years go on and later you wonder what happened to what's his name that was on everyone's fantasy team 3 years ago. Couldn't re-adjust. That's up to the player and if he can do it or not. Like you say, some just can't do that.

And then you got dudes like doublem who take this discussion to the extreme. Like it's either completely one way or the opposite, bringing in whole other completely unrelated aspects of putting together a baseball team like Kenny Willams drafting/trading/signing poorly or wisely, or Guilen's shuffling of the order. Mistaking objective observation for bias or "defending" a coach.

The job is not worthless, but you or I will never know whether or not he's actively disregarding his duties as coach, because at the major league level, what you are as a hitter is what you are. And this team is full of veteran players and have been the same kind of hitters they always have been and always will be. There are career years thrown into the mix (Konerko) as there are anomalies (Aramis Ramirez), but for the most part, it is what it is at this level.

HebrewHammer
07-04-2010, 09:13 AM
Well, lack of preparation is not the problem. These guys couldn't be any better prepared. They know what they're facing every night. It comes down to the types of individuals they have on the team. Hal, makes a good point in the bottom post below.


Based on what? Anyone who gets shutout by Dana ****ing Eveland is not well-prepared.

TornLabrum
07-04-2010, 10:35 AM
Based on what? Anyone who gets shutout by Dana ****ing Eveland is not well-prepared.

And that would be the fault of the scouts, not the hitting coach.

JB98
07-04-2010, 11:16 AM
And that would be the fault of the scouts, not the hitting coach.

How do we know that? It could be the fault of the scouts, the hitting coach or the players.

asindc
07-04-2010, 11:18 AM
Based on what? Anyone who gets shutout by Dana ****ing Eveland is not well-prepared.

Games Dana Eveland has started against the Sox while Greg Walker was the hitting coach:

April 15, 2008-Loss, 1-4, 4.2 IP, 3 ER.
April 15, 2010-Win, 7-3, 6.0 IP, 2 ER.
May 6, 2010--Win, 2-0, 7.0 IP, 0 ER.

Games Eveland has started against other teams since 2008 in which he has given up 2 ER or less:

April 5, 2008-Win, 6-1, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against CLE.
April 10, 2008-Win, 3-2, 6.1 IP, 0 ER against TOR.
April 20, 2008-Win, 7-1, 5.2 IP, 1 ER against KC.
May 5, 2008- Win, 2-1, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against BAL.
May 21, 2008-Win, 9-1, 9.0 IP, 0 ER against TB.
June 10, 2008-Loss, 1-3, 6.0 IP, 2 ER against NYY.
June 15, 2008-Win, 5-3, 6.2 IP, 1 ER against SF.
June 27, 2008-Win, 4-1, 7.1 IP, 1 ER against SF.
July 12, 2008-Loss, 1-4, 5.1 IP, 2 ER against LAA.
Aug. 23, 2008-Win, 5-1, 7.0 IP, 1 ER against SEA.
Aug. 28, 2008-Win, 3-2, 7.0 IP, 2 ER against MIN.
Sept. 9, 2008-Win, 3-2, 6.0 IP, 2 ER against DET.
Sept. 19, 2008-Win, 2-0, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against SEA.
April 26, 2009-Win, 7-1, 5.0 IP, 1 ER against TB.
Sept. 20, 2009-Win, 11-4, 5.0 IP, 1 ER against CLE.
April 10, 2010-Win, 3-0, 7.1 IP, 0 ER against BAL.
April 20, 2010-Win, 4-3, 5.1 IP, 2 ER against KC.

I bolded the games in which Eveland gave up 0 ER against other teams. Lest anyone think this is a post advocating for keeping Walker as hitting coach, if you check my previous posts on the subject you will see that I'm neutral. Either management thinks the team will be better off without him or not. If they decide to fire Walker, I will have no objection.

With due respect, it does irk me when someone makes statements like the one I quoted. The implication seems to be that only teams that are not well-prepared get shutout (or at least shutdown) by a pitcher of Eveland's caliber. Since that is not true, I wonder why such statements are made in the first place. It is right there with statements such as "if you score only two runs, you deserve to lose.":rolleyes:

JB98
07-04-2010, 11:27 AM
Everything you're saying supports the argument that it's more to do with development in the minors as opposed to what happens when they finally get here. To say that Anderson, Fields, etc. can't hit because of Walker, though, isn't accurate. They can't hit at this level because they can't hit at this level. They probably don't have the mental makeup to do it because it appears they don't have the confidence. It's not as if they went elsewhere and flourished. One of them is even trying to make it as a pitcher now. That's not because Greg Walker screwed him up, it's because he just isn't good enough to be a MLB hitter.

The real problem is in the talent itself. Those guys just aren't good enough to do it every day, every year, in this league. Plain and simple.

I just flat out disagree. I already said I don't blame Walker for guys like Owens and Richar. Those are examples of guys who don't have the talent to play at the MLB level, period.

The other hitters I brought up have talent. They were No.1 picks for a reason. This organization did not develop them properly. Perhaps that is not entirely Walker's fault, but when you see a guy like Fields regress like crazy at the MLB level, you have to wonder what the hell is going on. And when you see this team get shut down year after year by journeyman pitchers like Anthony Lerew and Dana Eveland, you have to wonder what the hell is going on.

More than anything, I'm really tired of this regime's failure to develop its own draft picks. In addition, I'm tired of the poor offensive execution I've been looking at since the second half of 2006. If this team was even league average offensively, it would win the division.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 12:21 PM
Jaramillo has a long track record of being good with young hitters.

But the Cubs have a bunch of veterans who are struggling.

Walker seems to have the most success with veterans who probably don't need as much assistance from him.

Under Walker's tenure, the Sox have developed very few young hitters. Since Rowand and Crede, they have had a lot of busts.

Isn't it Walker's job to help Beckham make adjustments?

Pablo_Honey
07-04-2010, 12:30 PM
The other hitters I brought up have talent. They were No.1 picks for a reason. This organization did not develop them properly. Perhaps that is not entirely Walker's fault, but when you see a guy like Fields regress like crazy at the MLB level, you have to wonder what the hell is going on. And when you see this team get shut down year after year by journeyman pitchers like Anthony Lerew and Dana Eveland, you have to wonder what the hell is going on.
I think it speaks more volume about the Sox' scouting, drafting and developing than it does about Walker's ability. Both Fields and Anderson had huge faults in their swings. Sox scouts must have seen this and the minor league director should have fixed them or at least minimize these holes. Instead, they were allowed to keep these bad swings to major league level just because they put up decent numbers down in the minors. Fields regressed because pitchers figured out how to exploit the holes in his swing. Not much Walker could have done besides offering mental tips.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 12:40 PM
I think it speaks more volume about the Sox' scouting, drafting and developing than it does about Walker's ability. Both Fields and Anderson had huge faults in their swings. Sox scouts must have seen this and the minor league director should have fixed them or at least minimize these holes. Instead, they were allowed to keep these bad swings to major league level just because they put up decent numbers down in the minors. Fields regressed because pitchers figured out how to exploit the holes in his swing. Not much Walker could have done besides offering mental tips.

???

If college freshman come to my US history survey not knowing how to think critically about history, it is my job to teach them to do so, even though it is not my fault that their previous teachers were incompetent derelicts (usually coaches).

Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.

Ranger
07-04-2010, 01:51 PM
Based on what? Anyone who gets shutout by Dana ****ing Eveland is not well-prepared.

Games Dana Eveland has started against the Sox while Greg Walker was the hitting coach:

April 15, 2008-Loss, 1-4, 4.2 IP, 3 ER.
April 15, 2010-Win, 7-3, 6.0 IP, 2 ER.
May 6, 2010--Win, 2-0, 7.0 IP, 0 ER.

Games Eveland has started against other teams since 2008 in which he has given up 2 ER or less:

April 5, 2008-Win, 6-1, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against CLE.
April 10, 2008-Win, 3-2, 6.1 IP, 0 ER against TOR.
April 20, 2008-Win, 7-1, 5.2 IP, 1 ER against KC.
May 5, 2008- Win, 2-1, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against BAL.
May 21, 2008-Win, 9-1, 9.0 IP, 0 ER against TB.
June 10, 2008-Loss, 1-3, 6.0 IP, 2 ER against NYY.
June 15, 2008-Win, 5-3, 6.2 IP, 1 ER against SF.
June 27, 2008-Win, 4-1, 7.1 IP, 1 ER against SF.
July 12, 2008-Loss, 1-4, 5.1 IP, 2 ER against LAA.
Aug. 23, 2008-Win, 5-1, 7.0 IP, 1 ER against SEA.
Aug. 28, 2008-Win, 3-2, 7.0 IP, 2 ER against MIN.
Sept. 9, 2008-Win, 3-2, 6.0 IP, 2 ER against DET.
Sept. 19, 2008-Win, 2-0, 7.0 IP, 0 ER against SEA.
April 26, 2009-Win, 7-1, 5.0 IP, 1 ER against TB.
Sept. 20, 2009-Win, 11-4, 5.0 IP, 1 ER against CLE.
April 10, 2010-Win, 3-0, 7.1 IP, 0 ER against BAL.
April 20, 2010-Win, 4-3, 5.1 IP, 2 ER against KC.

I bolded the games in which Eveland gave up 0 ER against other teams. Lest anyone think this is a post advocating for keeping Walker as hitting coach, if you check my previous posts on the subject you will see that I'm neutral. Either management thinks the team will be better off without him or not. If they decide to fire Walker, I will have no objection.

With due respect, it does irk me when someone makes statements like the one I quoted. The implication seems to be that only teams that are not well-prepared get shutout (or at least shutdown) by a pitcher of Eveland's caliber. Since that is not true, I wonder why such statements are made in the first place. It is right there with statements such as "if you score only two runs, you deserve to lose.":rolleyes:

Absolutely correct. Getting shutout by a pitcher does not necessarily have anything to do with preparation. Preparation is just a keyword people use to assign blame. "Got shutout? Must've been lack of preparation." Because technology is so advanced these days, the reality is that all teams pretty much have the same information available to them regarding other teams. There really aren't a whole lot of surprises in the modern era. They all know a pitcher's arsenal and tendencies, and the players are informed of them (at least those that want to know).

That's the other thing to keep in mind: some players just don't want to know much about a pitcher ahead of time. They don't want to look at tape. They just want to take their pregame swings and let it be. Some guys want a ton of info, some just want a little. A hitting coach can't make them absorb stuff they aren't willing to absorb.

For example, everyone with the team is fully aware the Andruw Jones is trying to pull everything at all times, always. Without fail. Every other team knows it, too, because if you see him get a pitch inside anytime soon, it will be the first time in a month or it will be a mistake. The Sox also know it, and he's been informed. Yet, he STILL is trying to pull EVERYTHING.

Players deserve 90 - 95% of blame for their failures.

???

If college freshman come to my US history survey not knowing how to think critically about history, it is my job to teach them to do so, even though it is not my fault that their previous teachers were incompetent derelicts (usually coaches).

Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.

Classroom learning is totally, totally different than what we're talking about here. You may step into a classroom and know absolutely nothing about the subject matter, or know very little. Major League Baseball players (and even minor leaguers to an extent) are already the absolute best in the world at what they do. For most of them, they already think they know what they're doing and believe they're making 7 or 8 figures because they must've been doing something right to get those contracts.

It just isn't the same as a kid coming into class with no foundation of knowledge for what you're teaching. Not to mention the fact that if he/she doesn't really want to learn it, he/she is just simply not going to learn it.

Pablo_Honey
07-04-2010, 01:53 PM
Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.
Nobody for sure knows whether Walker is even supposed to correct swings. I am going to reserve my judgement regarding whether or not Walk's doing his job until a lot of details about his responsibilites are cleared up. But anyway, I think I wasn't making a clear point in my last post so I'll try to clear it up a little more.

Minor league development team has all scouts' opinions as well as support from the entire organization to do whatever is necessary to develop the prospects. If the prospect's flaws were not corrected when he was under the responsibility of such an extensive network, why should it be one man's job to correct them all? More to the point, does Walker even have the authority to tweak the swings to the point where differences can be seen?

Let's say, as a general example, an entire factory thinks a certain product is good enough for distribution despite its flaws. Then, one man comes along and says he will alter the product because the flaws are too big to go unfixed. Do you think the entire factory would just let him waltz right in and piss on their work? They might, if they think the man has enough power and reputation, but what if the man's just your average Joe? No way will they let him 'sabotage' their work. To them, it would feel like a giant "**** you, I know better, go screw yourselves." kind of a deal.

Well, crap, now I'm sounding like a Walker apologist (I'm trying to be neutral in this argument) but Walker's responsibilites seem to be overexaggerated or assumed to be of importance. I can't say for certain they are but IMHO Walker is not responsible for much. Like Daver said, the Sox brass has a history of rushing prospects without developing them properly. IMHO, that had more impact on the long history of bust prospects than Walker's inability to coach young hitters.

Daver
07-04-2010, 02:14 PM
Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.

The player has to accept it first, many won't, Frank Thomas never listened to a word any hitting coach not named Walt ever told him.

I look at it from a different perspective, if your swing is that flawed you should be in the minors working out your problems, but poor player development decisions are part of the reason that the White Sox draft picks never seem to reach their potential.

Zisk77
07-04-2010, 02:44 PM
???

If college freshman come to my US history survey not knowing how to think critically about history, it is my job to teach them to do so, even though it is not my fault that their previous teachers were incompetent derelicts (usually coaches).

Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.


Even if that same students IQ is about 65 can you teach him to think critically about history? What if that student has ADHD real bad or some behavioral disorder? Can you teach them without help from the special ed department? I understand your analogy but I think it breaks down here.

Josh Fields had a slider speed bat...even when he hit 23 hrs. The league figured this out. B.A. always had a weird swing that seemed bottom hand dominant. Sometimes players are not physically or mentally capable of learning the correct habits. Sometimes bat speed can be improved by mechanics sometimes not. Unfortunately many slider speed bat types go along way because of aluminum bats in college and then still do well enough in the minors but just can't get it done in the majors.

A previous poster said that he didn't care if we kept Walker or not but thought most posters didn't understand a batting coaches duties. Although, I've always liked Walk as a player, I would have to side with letting management decide the job he's doing as I'm not there to see what he does or doesn't do.

Zisk77
07-04-2010, 03:04 PM
The player has to accept it first, many won't, Frank Thomas never listened to a word any hitting coach not named Walt ever told him.

I look at it from a different perspective, if your swing is that flawed you should be in the minors working out your problems, but poor player development decisions are part of the reason that the White Sox draft picks never seem to reach their potential.

Actually not entirely true. I heard a guy speak at a coaching clinic that used to be a part of the sox organization, but now manages in the diamondbacks system (he left our organization because the d'backs minor league affiliate happened to be close to his home and he was getting older, not because of any ill will to the sox which he praised profusely). He was talking how differnt players learned in different ways. Rowand wanted to drills to improve weaknesses - he needed to feel it. Konerko wanted someone to tell him what he was doing wrong and he'd correct it. Frank wanted to see it. Video of himself + video of the pitchers he was to face. As much details as possible. Possibly, Walt was the last guy that Frank would let him help him with mechanics however.

Sam Spade
07-04-2010, 03:27 PM
No, I understood it perfectly. He doesn't understand how this has anything to do with Greg Walker, but it has everything to do with Greg Walker. Reason being, most people around here seem to be absolutely positive he should lose his job because they don't think he's doing a good job. However, most of those same people believe Jaramillo is some sort of god, yet his team currently stinks at hitting. Therefore, the conclusion is that maybe it's really not about the hitting coach. If it were, the Cubs would be a great hitting team right now. But nobody is acknowledging that.



Yes.
That's your argument, clearly. I'm not disputing that. What I think he was saying does not support that argument at all. Its possible that the impact of a hitting coach is large, and yet the cubs still suck. Perhaps they would be a hell of a lot worse than they are now without him. Being impossible to determine that impact, we cannot say that because the cubs suck some, they wouldn't suck a lot more. I'm though playing devils advocate though.

Daver
07-04-2010, 03:30 PM
Actually not entirely true. I heard a guy speak at a coaching clinic that used to be a part of the sox organization, but now manages in the diamondbacks system (he left our organization because the d'backs minor league affiliate happened to be close to his home and he was getting older, not because of any ill will to the sox which he praised profusely). He was talking how differnt players learned in different ways. Rowand wanted to drills to improve weaknesses - he needed to feel it. Konerko wanted someone to tell him what he was doing wrong and he'd correct it. Frank wanted to see it. Video of himself + video of the pitchers he was to face. As much details as possible. Possibly, Walt was the last guy that Frank would let him help him with mechanics however.

My comment was based on an e-mail exchange I had with Von Joshua many years ago and him telling me that Frank had his own regimen and never sought advice from him.

Ranger
07-04-2010, 08:10 PM
Even if that same students IQ is about 65 can you teach him to think critically about history? What if that student has ADHD real bad or some behavioral disorder? Can you teach them without help from the special ed department? I understand your analogy but I think it breaks down here.

Josh Fields had a slider speed bat...even when he hit 23 hrs. The league figured this out. B.A. always had a weird swing that seemed bottom hand dominant. Sometimes players are not physically or mentally capable of learning the correct habits. Sometimes bat speed can be improved by mechanics sometimes not. Unfortunately many slider speed bat types go along way because of aluminum bats in college and then still do well enough in the minors but just can't get it done in the majors.

A previous poster said that he didn't care if we kept Walker or not but thought most posters didn't understand a batting coaches duties. Although, I've always liked Walk as a player, I would have to side with letting management decide the job he's doing as I'm not there to see what he does or doesn't do.

This is exactly the way I wish most people would look at it. What is frustrating, however, is when fans are absolutely positive that Walker isn't any good when they have no real idea what he does or how he does it. And they have no real idea of what the actual impact is.

That's your argument, clearly. I'm not disputing that. What I think he was saying does not support that argument at all. Its possible that the impact of a hitting coach is large, and yet the cubs still suck. Perhaps they would be a hell of a lot worse than they are now without him. Being impossible to determine that impact, we cannot say that because the cubs suck some, they wouldn't suck a lot more. I'm though playing devils advocate though.

Well, the evidence and testimonials from players say the exact opposite. That there are some minor changes a coach can make to help a hitter, but 95% of the time, it's really on the player himself. I think we have a pretty good idea of what the actual reach of a hitting coach is.

However, I find it hard to believe the cubs would be that much worse without Jaramillo.

My comment was based on an e-mail exchange I had with Von Joshua many years ago and him telling me that Frank had his own regimen and never sought advice from him.

That is absolutely true about a lot of guys. Some simply don't want much help, if any. That being the case, it's very difficult for the hitting coach's fingerprints to be that much all over the offense as a whole. It's not like he's an offensive coordinator calling plays.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 08:14 PM
This is a results-oriented business.

Walker's results are mediocre.

Daver
07-04-2010, 08:20 PM
This is a results-oriented business.

Walker's results are mediocre.

Compared to what?

How are Ozzies results?


Or Harold Baines?

Or Joey Cora?

Or Don Cooper?

asindc
07-04-2010, 08:22 PM
This is a results-oriented business.

Walker's results are mediocre.

The point being made here by numerous posters is that there is no clear correlation between the Sox's offensive performance and Walker's efforts, since some players are simply not that talented to begin with and some don't take instruction from him at all.

Ranger
07-04-2010, 08:46 PM
The point being made here by numerous posters is that there is no clear correlation between the Sox's offensive performance and Walker's efforts, since some players are simply not that talented to being with and some don't take instruction from him at all.

Thank you for explaining that, because I really didn't feel like doing it again. This is the point of entire argument. It's not about the results themselves...it's about how much Walker is actually responsible for those results.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 08:50 PM
Compared to what?
How are Ozzies results?
Or Harold Baines?
Or Joey Cora?
Or Don Cooper?

Off the top of my head Cooper fixed these guys who came to the Sox with flaws: Loaiza, Contreras, Garland, Thornton and Floyd.

My thoughts on Ozzie are well known but often misrepresented. He has a winning record, but it would be better if he'd make fewer stupid decisions.

Cora seems to have helped Beckham and Alexei improve up the middle.

I'm not sure what Baines does that we can readily evaluate.

Daver
07-04-2010, 08:54 PM
I'm not sure what Baines does that we can readily evaluate.

And what does Walker do that you can readily evaluate?

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 09:01 PM
And what does Walker do that you can readily evaluate?

Other than PK in 2003 and Crede and Rowand, what hitters have come to the Sox (either from the minors or from other teams) and improved thanks to his coaching?

Baseball commentators heap lots of praise on Cooper. I've never heard Walker mentioned among the best hitting coaches in the majors, except by Sox employees. The best Mark Gonzalez can say is that he works very hard.

If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors?

Daver
07-04-2010, 09:18 PM
Other than PK in 2003 and Crede and Rowand, what hitters have come to the Sox (either from the minors or from other teams) and improved thanks to his coaching?

Baseball commentators heap lots of praise on Cooper. I've never heard Walker mentioned among the best hitting coaches in the majors, except by Sox employees. The best Mark Gonzalez can say is that he works very hard.

If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors?

How is Walker responsible for Beckham being promoted before he was ready?

I really don't give a rat's ass on the opinion of baseball commentators, if they were good talent evaluators they wouldn't be talking about players, they'd be scouting them or coaching them.

You are trying to pin the failure of the White Sox farm system in regards to hitting on someone that has no real involvement in that process, instead of pointing the finger at the real cause.

Scapegoat hunting is an easy target.

Ranger
07-04-2010, 09:27 PM
Other than PK in 2003 and Crede and Rowand, what hitters have come to the Sox (either from the minors or from other teams) and improved thanks to his coaching?

Baseball commentators heap lots of praise on Cooper. I've never heard Walker mentioned among the best hitting coaches in the majors, except by Sox employees. The best Mark Gonzalez can say is that he works very hard.

If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors?

And, honestly, that's really all any team asks of its hitting coaches. I'm being totally serious.

As for Beckham, if he fails, it's gonna be because his head gets in his way. The tools are there, his mechanics are fine for the most part. They were actually alarmed in the spring when he started questioning himself.

Lastly, pitching coaches generally have an easier time in making adjustments with pitchers than hitting coaches do with hitters. The main reason for that is hitting has two parts: not only do you have to figure out your own mechanics and flaws and correct them, but then you have to be able to take all of that and react to what's being thrown at you. Pitchers control the pace. They throw what they want, when they want to. Once the ball leaves their hand, their job is basically finished, if you know what I mean. As for the hitter, he has to make his own adjustments, and then adjust to the pitcher. He doesn't get to decide what they throw him or where they throw it or how hard they throw it. A pitcher isn't relying on reaction.

SI1020
07-04-2010, 09:31 PM
If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors? Yes Brian Anderson and Josh Fields had holes in their swings that even a dumbo like me could see. To me they looked fixable and would have permitted them to have productive careers. It didn't work out, let the Sox coaching staff off the hook for them. Gordon Beckham is another story altogether. He could be a special player, with a ceiling far above Fields or Anderson even if they would have been able to figure it out. To say he is now floundering badly is an understatement. What gives? This is a long standing problem with the Sox. They draft players and are either unable or unwilling to develop them to their potential. The organization has a number of problems that inferior fans such as yours truly can see but we are told to shut up and say hosannas for every one who is any one in the organization. Hitting has been a problem for several seasons. Players come and go but the results and the approach are the same. Do they have to hit .220 as a team and average under 3 runs a game for some to admit that maybe changes are in order? This is a sub .500 team going on nearly 4 seasons, the recent hot streak notwithstanding. I'd just like to see them be legitimate contenders most of the time. In the meantime I'll keep rooting and keep having opinions, even if I don't deserve to.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2010, 09:48 PM
How is Walker responsible for Beckham being promoted before he was ready?

I really don't give a rat's ass on the opinion of baseball commentators, if they were good talent evaluators they wouldn't be talking about players, they'd be scouting them or coaching them.

You are trying to pin the failure of the White Sox farm system in regards to hitting on someone that has no real involvement in that process, instead of pointing the finger at the real cause.

Scapegoat hunting is an easy target.

My opinion of Walker would change 180 degrees if he were to go to the media and say, "How the **** am I supposed to coach these piece of **** hitters that our system routinely **** up?"

Until then, or in the absence of other contrary evidence, I remain convinced that he keeps his job only because he's a loyal company man who works hard.

TornLabrum
07-04-2010, 11:01 PM
???

If college freshman come to my US history survey not knowing how to think critically about history, it is my job to teach them to do so, even though it is not my fault that their previous teachers were incompetent derelicts (usually coaches).

Minor league instruction is not Walker's job, but it is his job to correct flaws of players under his tutelage on the major league team.

And you know he doesn't work with them on this how?

TornLabrum
07-04-2010, 11:11 PM
How is Walker responsible for Beckham being promoted before he was ready?

I really don't give a rat's ass on the opinion of baseball commentators, if they were good talent evaluators they wouldn't be talking about players, they'd be scouting them or coaching them.

You are trying to pin the failure of the White Sox farm system in regards to hitting on someone that has no real involvement in that process, instead of pointing the finger at the real cause.

Scapegoat hunting is an easy target.

May I suggest that Beckham's offensive problems might have something to do with his having to learn a new defensive position every year? My correlation is with Kenny Williams, whose offensive production fell apart when he was moved from CF to 3B. Of course my correlation is bull****, but heck, it's no worse than any of the other bull**** that has been served here.

TornLabrum
07-04-2010, 11:15 PM
My opinion of Walker would change 180 degrees if he were to go to the media and say, "How the **** am I supposed to coach these piece of **** hitters that our system routinely **** up?"

Until then, or in the absence of other contrary evidence, I remain convinced that he keeps his job only because he's a loyal company man who works hard.

And as soon as he said that he'd lose his job, as you would anyone else who went public with disgust about their bosses' performance.

Bob Roarman
07-04-2010, 11:32 PM
Other than PK in 2003 and Crede and Rowand, what hitters have come to the Sox (either from the minors or from other teams) and improved thanks to his coaching?

Baseball commentators heap lots of praise on Cooper. I've never heard Walker mentioned among the best hitting coaches in the majors, except by Sox employees. The best Mark Gonzalez can say is that he works very hard.

If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors?

Thing is, you can't even realistically say it was because of Walker that Konerko or Crede improved or became what they are. That's how it is at this level with hitters. Hitting coaches can only do so much. That's not being an apologist, that's being a realist. Shuffle around the hitting coaches in the game, the results wouldn't change. And pitching coaches are like how Ranger described, it's just different, not the same at all. Can't be compared.

And yes, if Beckham fails, it's going to be because he couldn't re-adjust. He couldn't adjust to the pitchers adjusting to him. There are a lot of players that happens to throughout the game. Too many to mention, happens every single year.

munchman33
07-04-2010, 11:40 PM
How is Walker responsible for Beckham being promoted before he was ready?

I really don't give a rat's ass on the opinion of baseball commentators, if they were good talent evaluators they wouldn't be talking about players, they'd be scouting them or coaching them.

You are trying to pin the failure of the White Sox farm system in regards to hitting on someone that has no real involvement in that process, instead of pointing the finger at the real cause.

Scapegoat hunting is an easy target.



Yeah, and police officers have no business arresting drug dealers because they're not good enough to be in the FBI. :rolleyes:

Assessing talent is part of both those jobs.

Zisk77
07-05-2010, 12:08 AM
Has anyone mentioned how well Rios is doing this year...ya know after Walker worked with him and lowered his hands?

Ranger
07-05-2010, 02:03 AM
Yes Brian Anderson and Josh Fields had holes in their swings that even a dumbo like me could see. To me they looked fixable and would have permitted them to have productive careers. It didn't work out, let the Sox coaching staff off the hook for them. Gordon Beckham is another story altogether. He could be a special player, with a ceiling far above Fields or Anderson even if they would have been able to figure it out. To say he is now floundering badly is an understatement. What gives? This is a long standing problem with the Sox. They draft players and are either unable or unwilling to develop them to their potential. The organization has a number of problems that inferior fans such as yours truly can see but we are told to shut up and say hosannas for every one who is any one in the organization. Hitting has been a problem for several seasons. Players come and go but the results and the approach are the same. Do they have to hit .220 as a team and average under 3 runs a game for some to admit that maybe changes are in order? This is a sub .500 team going on nearly 4 seasons, the recent hot streak notwithstanding. I'd just like to see them be legitimate contenders most of the time. In the meantime I'll keep rooting and keep having opinions, even if I don't deserve to.


You think that if you saw it, then everyone in the organization missed it? You see, almost every player is drafted with the knowledge that they have some flaws, sometimes severe. Even top prospects. However, they're drafted because there is a potential high reward to the organization if the player can overcome those flaws. Some players are capable of it, some are not. Some players just simply cannot be coached out of their deficiencies. That's sort of the idea of high risk-high reward.

The trick is finding players that have the greatest mental capacity to learn and adapt. That's the hardest thing to scout.

Nobody is saying that you shouldn't have an opinion. For me, I just wish some people would not be so absolutely certain they know Greg walker is the problem if they truly don't understand the actual on-field effect of a hitting coach.



My opinion of Walker would change 180 degrees if he were to go to the media and say, "How the **** am I supposed to coach these piece of **** hitters that our system routinely **** up?"

Until then, or in the absence of other contrary evidence, I remain convinced that he keeps his job only because he's a loyal company man who works hard.

Even if he wanted to do that, you know he can't do that. Nobody would do that unless they didn't care about being fired. Tell you what though, if he did get fired, he'd get another job if he wanted one.

dickallen15
07-05-2010, 07:58 AM
Other than PK in 2003 and Crede and Rowand, what hitters have come to the Sox (either from the minors or from other teams) and improved thanks to his coaching?

Baseball commentators heap lots of praise on Cooper. I've never heard Walker mentioned among the best hitting coaches in the majors, except by Sox employees. The best Mark Gonzalez can say is that he works very hard.

If Beckham fails, are the Walker apologists going to argue that Beckham didn't have what it takes to succed in the majors?


Thome, Dye, Uribe,Pods, Alexei.


How many players left the Sox and instantly became betters hitters under a new hitting coach? Swisher doesn't count because one reason the Sox dumped him was he didn't work with Walker.

The point of this is no matter who the Sox hitting coach is, how most fans will perceive their "perfomance" is in reality,going to be based on the quality of hitters KW has on the roster. .240-.250 hitters with low OBPs don't suddenly become HOF candidates based on a new hitting coach.

Leo Mazzone was a pitching genius with Atlanta. He took the money and ran to Baltimore. Baltimore's pitching talent was way lower than the pitching talent in Atlanta. Mazzone got fired with a year left on his contract, and no one has picked him up since.

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 09:17 AM
Thome, Dye, Uribe,Pods, Alexei.

Thome was well established as an elite power hitter before joining the Sox. He was injured the year before he joined the Sox.

Dye always had good hitting skills but suffered many freakish injuries before joining the Sox. If you want to give Walker credit for Dye's incredible 2006 you also must give him blame for Dye going into the tank during the second half of 2009.

Pods' game always has been his legs, and he bunted for a lot of hits.

Given that Alexei had no prior experience in baseball in the USA before joining the Sox, we have no way of knowing the extent to which Walker has helped Alexei's development as a hitter.



I'm sticking with Crede and Rowand, who both exhibited general consistent improvement under Walker's tutelage, and Paulie, because he said that Walker helped him rebuild his swing during/after 2003.

khan
07-05-2010, 11:27 AM
Although, I've always liked Walk as a player, I would have to side with letting management decide the job he's doing as I'm not there to see what he does or doesn't do.

This is exactly the way I wish most people would look at it. What is frustrating, however, is when fans are absolutely positive that Walker isn't any good when they have no real idea what he does or how he does it. And they have no real idea of what the actual impact is.

IMO, even though this is a silly thread, I think this is exactly how we as SOX fans should NOT look at it.


Stupid fans are the morons that accept failures on the part of their management. [Such as the sheeple who go to the urinal, despite THAT craptacular product.] Well-informed fans can, and MUST question what their team is doing. Otherwise, what the hell is the point of following a team?

Blind acceptance of what a team's management/coaching does is the epitome of stupidity, IMO. Tickets cost too ****ing much to take this quaint view. People are too busy to take this antiquated blind acceptance any more. This isn't little league baseball, mite hockey, or your kid's high school team. Fandom of a professional team is a money-consuming, and time-consuming hobby.

In sum, the fans pay the salaries, therefore they have the right and the responsibility to question what is being done with their money [indirectly].



As to the topic of the thread, who gives a rip? Even the "supporters" of Walker admit that batting coaches do exactly jack and **** for players. Extrapolating from this view, even a blind, drunk monkey can be a MLB batting coach. It just doesn't ****ing matter either way.


What IS cogent, however, is that this team was stupidly assembled to be incomplete in the offseason. [NO LH power bat, NO proper DH, no 3rd LHP option out of the 'pen or in Charlotte, No long man in the 'pen, etc...]

khan
07-05-2010, 11:33 AM
You can bring up the same points over and over and over again and it won't matter because there's apparently no blaming anybody for anything. It's not Kenny's fault for bringing in bad players, leaving huge holes in our lineup, or signing bad players to inexplicable contracts. It's not Ozzie's fault for shuffling the lineup around like he's Jerry Manuel, Jr., or playing ridiculous R/L splits, or bringing terrible pitchers into high pressure situations. It's not the players fault for being awful because they're trying super, duper, really hard. It's not Walker's fault because he's obviously got the poshest job in America, where people are quick to pat him on the back when the going is good and quick to alleviate the heat when the going's not.

Everybody who looked at this roster and saw the giant holes in the roster, the utter lack of trade-worthy pieces in the minors, and all the other problems facing the Sox are obviously just inferior fans; whiners who, for some reason or another, should be more content to just sit like a bump on a log, mindlessly watching the game without ever trying to understand what they're seeing. Obviously baseball is supposed to be a game for simpletons who are only allowed to react.

So whatever, don't try and critique Greg Walker's terribleness, because that obviously makes you a lesser fan than the rest, who can't come up with a better defense for the guy than, "well, he really doesn't do anything."

Agreed, especially with the bolded part. I remember how many here were opining that Vlad Guerrero was an inferior choice for a DH than Jones/Kotsay this offseason. I remember how Kotsay was a better choice than Thome at an apparently similar salary number. This team is/was incomplete.


Also, all the bull**** about how KW will trade the polished turds in this denuded minor league system for a useful piece [like Dunn or Fielder] is silly, IMO. The SOX don't appear to have enough of ANYTHING to fix what should have been fixed in the offseason.

TomBradley72
07-05-2010, 01:26 PM
But they also did alot of things right in the offseason/2nd half of last season. We have a solid starting rotation, a great bullpen, much improved defense, much improved team speed. I agree with the holes at 3rd and DH especially, but we're 1 game out of 1st on July 5th...so I'm not carrying a pitch fork to the castle just yet. Our mediocre farm system continues to be our achilles heal.

As far as Walker and hitting coaches in general....in the 3-4 years that "Fire Walker" threads have existed in WSI...it's very rare where someone can point out who the replacement should be...and while I do think they can have an impact...I think it's analagous to a Tight Ends coach in football...if your tight ends suck, it's probably because your players suck not because you have the wrong coach. That's my view on major league teams...if you're hitting sucks, it's more likely the players than it is the coach.

Zisk77
07-05-2010, 01:43 PM
IMO, even though this is a silly thread, I think this is exactly how we as SOX fans should NOT look at it.


Stupid fans are the morons that accept failures on the part of their management. [Such as the sheeple who go to the urinal, despite THAT craptacular product.] Well-informed fans can, and MUST question what their team is doing. Otherwise, what the hell is the point of following a team?

Blind acceptance of what a team's management/coaching does is the epitome of stupidity, IMO. Tickets cost too ****ing much to take this quaint view. People are too busy to take this antiquated blind acceptance any more. This isn't little league baseball, mite hockey, or your kid's high school team. Fandom of a professional team is a money-consuming, and time-consuming hobby.

In sum, the fans pay the salaries, therefore they have the right and the responsibility to question what is being done with their money [indirectly].



As to the topic of the thread, who gives a rip? Even the "supporters" of Walker admit that batting coaches do exactly jack and **** for players. Extrapolating from this view, even a blind, drunk monkey can be a MLB batting coach. It just doesn't ****ing matter either way.


What IS cogent, however, is that this team was stupidly assembled to be incomplete in the offseason. [NO LH power bat, NO proper DH, no 3rd LHP option out of the 'pen or in Charlotte, No long man in the 'pen, etc...]

I don't have blind acceptance of what management is doing in regards to walker. I also am not an uniformed fan. In fact i derive part of my income coaching baseball. I know implicity how frustrating it is trying to teach hitting to players. Some aren't coachable, some aren't just talented enough. Its much easier to teach fielding or pitching.

Its much more easier to be critical of what ozzie does because its much more ostensible. I'm not there to see what he preaches. And I know from experience, that you can't judge a hitting coach necessarily from how well the team hits. some guys get what you are teaching and others do not or cannot.

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 01:50 PM
I think it's analagous to a Tight Ends coach in football...if your tight ends suck, it's probably because your players suck not because you have the wrong coach. That's my view on major league teams...if you're hitting sucks, it's more likely the players than it is the coach.

Yes, the players are the biggest part of the equation.

But a tight ends coach analogy breaks down after that. At most there are 4-5 TEs on a team of 53 players. There are 12-14 position players on a baseball team (half the roster), nine of whom bat at least three times every game.

What level of on-field ineptitude would Sox hitters have to demonstrate before his most ardent apologists would admit that Walker needs to go?

Would the Sox have to be shut out every game for a week? Two weeks? A month? Go hitless for half a season? How absurd would things have to get before it's appropriate to hold the hitting coach responsible?

I'm not asking to be facetious; I'm asking because I really want to know.

khan
07-05-2010, 02:19 PM
I don't have blind acceptance of what management is doing in regards to walker. I also am not an uniformed fan.
I'm sure you're not in uniform, either.

In fact i derive part of my income coaching baseball. I know implicity how frustrating it is trying to teach hitting to players. Some aren't coachable, some aren't just talented enough. Its much easier to teach fielding or pitching.

Its much more easier to be critical of what ozzie does because its much more ostensible. I'm not there to see what he preaches. And I know from experience, that you can't judge a hitting coach necessarily from how well the team hits. some guys get what you are teaching and others do not or cannot.
See, Ranger [and others] that defend Walker so often state that a MLB hitting coach does NOT "teach" players how to hit.

Therefore, I maintain that a blind, drunk monkey would do equally well or poorly as any other MLB hitting coach. Since they're not "teaching" and they really have "no effect" on a player's performance, why not hire Bonzo?

Alternatively, why not a full-time travelling sports psychologist, since all a hitting coach can do is to help work on the "mental aspect" of hitting? [I'm guessing that a guy with a Doctorate in Psychology could teach better than a virtual illiterate.]

TomBradley72
07-05-2010, 02:23 PM
Yes, the players are the biggest part of the equation.

But a tight ends coach analogy breaks down after that. At most there are 4-5 TEs on a team of 53 players. There are 12-14 position players on a baseball team (half the roster), nine of whom bat at least three times every game.

What level of on-field ineptitude would Sox hitters have to demonstrate before his most ardent apologists would admit that Walker needs to go?

Would the Sox have to be shut out every game for a week? Two weeks? A month? Go hitless for half a season? How absurd would things have to get before it's appropriate to hold the hitting coach responsible?

I'm not asking to be facetious; I'm asking because I really want to know.

I don't have an absolute for you...we're 10th in runs scored and OPS so far this year...based on the make up of the roster...I think that's about right..very little production from 3rd base or DH...I believe that's based on the talent of the players in those positions not Walker's ability.

For the month of June, we moved into 7th and 5th for those 2 categories, so we're improving.

I do not believe a new hitting coach will have a big impact on our production at 3rd base or DH...our biggest shortcomings. We need real major league starters in those roles...that's KW's job.

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 02:23 PM
I'm sure you're not in uniform, either.


See, Ranger [and others] that defend Walker so often state that a MLB hitting coach does NOT "teach" players how to hit.

Therefore, I maintain that a blind, drunk monkey would do equally well or poorly as any other MLB hitting coach. Since they're not "teaching" and they really have "no effect" on a player's performance, why not hire Bonzo? Why not a full-time travelling sports psychologist, since all a hitting coach can do is to help work on the "mental aspect" of hitting? [I'm guessing that a guy with a Doctorate in Psychology could teach better than a virtual illiterate.]

More to the point, if the hitting coach has no effect on the major league hitters, why not use Walker's salary to hire a couple more scouts and/or minor league instructors?

Daver
07-05-2010, 02:26 PM
Therefore, I maintain that a blind, drunk monkey would do equally well or poorly as any other MLB hitting coach. Since they're not "teaching" and they really have "no effect" on a player's performance, why not hire Bonzo?


Why don't you apply for the job?

I have little doubt you meet those requirements.

khan
07-05-2010, 02:28 PM
Why don't you apply for the job?

I have little doubt you meet those requirements.
Indeed, I have considered it.

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 02:31 PM
Why don't you apply for the job?

I have little doubt you meet those requirements.

It seems that the only requirement the Sox have for the job of hitting coach is that one be Greg Walker.

captain54
07-05-2010, 04:22 PM
Nobody is saying that you shouldn't have an opinion. For me, I just wish some people would not be so absolutely certain they know Greg walker is the problem if they truly don't understand the actual on-field effect of a hitting coach.



Whether or not you understand the on-field effect of hitting coach,
no matter how you spin it, you can't say for 100% whether or not a change in the batting coach would improve the offensive production of the current WS, unless you are clairvoyant.

that being said, why is your opinion more valid than anyone else's?

Bob Roarman
07-05-2010, 05:58 PM
See, Ranger [and others] that defend Walker so often state that a MLB hitting coach does NOT "teach" players how to hit.

Therefore, I maintain that a blind, drunk monkey would do equally well or poorly as any other MLB hitting coach. Since they're not "teaching" and they really have "no effect" on a player's performance, why not hire Bonzo?

Alternatively, why not a full-time travelling sports psychologist, since all a hitting coach can do is to help work on the "mental aspect" of hitting? [I'm guessing that a guy with a Doctorate in Psychology could teach better than a virtual illiterate.]

See here is the classic example of going to an extreme when talking about this particular subject. It gets ridiculous.

voodoochile
07-05-2010, 05:59 PM
See here is the classic example of going to an extreme when talking about this particular subject. It gets ridiculous.

:welcome:

SI1020
07-05-2010, 06:20 PM
See here is the classic example of going to an extreme when talking about this particular subject. It gets ridiculous. I don't see it that way at all. I see some posters trying hard to make logical points and not get marginalized in the process. If you get on KW's or Ozzie's or Walk's case you're going to get hammered by a pretty good sized contingent. Even if you read, write, spell and think reasonably well. If there is any going to the extreme one side does it a lot more than the other. It's getting to the point where I figure why try? Just root hard for the Sox and enjoy the other features of the site. Try to post more on less controversial matters.

voodoochile
07-05-2010, 06:22 PM
I don't see it that way at all. I see some posters trying hard to make logical points and not get marginalized in the process. If you get on KW's or Ozzie's or Walk's case you're going to get hammered by a pretty good sized contingent. Even if you read, write, spell and think reasonably well. If there is any going to the extreme one side does it a lot more than the other. It's getting to the point where I figure why try? Just root hard for the Sox and enjoy the other features of the site. Try to post more on less controversial matters.

Yeah, the people who disagree with management, never ever go off the deep end in their quest to make a point...:rolleyes:

Both sides are guilty of taking things to a logical extreme at times Bob was commenting on one of those times...

Daver
07-05-2010, 06:38 PM
I don't see it that way at all. I see some posters trying hard to make logical points and not get marginalized in the process. If you get on KW's or Ozzie's or Walk's case you're going to get hammered by a pretty good sized contingent. Even if you read, write, spell and think reasonably well. If there is any going to the extreme one side does it a lot more than the other. It's getting to the point where I figure why try? Just root hard for the Sox and enjoy the other features of the site. Try to post more on less controversial matters.

If the White Sox fired Ozzie tomorrow I would welcome the news, but to go out of your way to make up reasons to fire a coach that is pretty much doing nothing more than his job will draw a response from me.

Where are the threads calling for the firing of Joey Cora because of weak infield defense or bad baserunning?

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 06:56 PM
Where are the threads calling for the firing of Joey Cora because of weak infield defense or bad baserunning?

I have read in multiple places that Cora coaches the infielders on their fielding. May I assume that Baines, as a former outfielder who had great defensive skills (before injuries forced him to DH) also coaches the outfielders on their fielding?

Is Cora the main baserunning coach? What does Cox do besides coach third base?

If Cora is the baserunning coach? If so, I think he does deserve some measure of responsibility for bad overall team baserunning.

Actually, it seems that the infield defense - especially up the middle - has improved.

The difference is that the Sox seem to place a premium on position players' ability to hit. Therefore, at least on paper, KW promotes and/or acquires guys who should hit well. Therefore, the Sox should routinely be a good hitting team. Therefore, when they don't hit well, we have to ask ourselves why. And some of us think the hitting coach ought to have something to do with it, especially when the same kinds of problems keep happening (i.e. poor hitting against soft-tossers, swinging at curveballs in the dirt, struggling against below-average rookies). Consistently struggling with these same things would seem to indicate a coaching failure.

Everyone "in the know" says that Walker does a great job working hard, making himself available, and being prepared. Therefore, there are two remaining conclusions:

1. The hitting coach has nothing to do with how the hitters hit;

2. The hitting coach isn't getting through to the hitters.


To me, Option 1 is negated by the consistent pattern of success demonstrated by hitters Rudy Jaramillo (for instance) has coached. (And to bring this full circle, yes, the Cubs hitters are struggling this year, but as of right now it's the first time in a long time that Jaramillo has not had success, and moreoever it's been veteran players - Lee, Ramirez - who have sucked the most.)

Therefore, I'm forced to conclude that Walker simply has been generally unsuccessful at getting enough of his players to improve as hitters.

Frater Perdurabo
07-05-2010, 07:02 PM
All that aside, during this extended hot streak the Sox have been remarkably successful at executing good situational hitting. In that regard, Walker does deserve some credit. I also think some credit belongs to the much improved starting pitching, as the hitters don't go up the plate thinking their have to hit a home run to try to make up for the five runs the pitching had been giving up in April and May.

On the other hand, the significant improvement in situational hitting has been offset somewhat by a noticeable decline in power. (In April, the opposite was true: the Sox led the league in HRs but were terrible at hitting with RISP.)

Bob Roarman
07-05-2010, 07:17 PM
I don't see it that way at all. I see some posters trying hard to make logical points and not get marginalized in the process. If you get on KW's or Ozzie's or Walk's case you're going to get hammered by a pretty good sized contingent. Even if you read, write, spell and think reasonably well. If there is any going to the extreme one side does it a lot more than the other. It's getting to the point where I figure why try? Just root hard for the Sox and enjoy the other features of the site. Try to post more on less controversial matters.

I don't care how the team is doing, firing a hitting coach never marks any dramatic turn around. It's a position to be filled by someone who knows the game yes, but it's not a do or die decision for the team's sucess on whom that person is. That kind of position is filled by Ozzie and Kenny. Those are the positions to heap praise/blame on if you're out to do that.

It's like firing the bench coach. They're never detrimental to a team to where they are a scapegoat and the primary reason for failure and they are never as beneficial to a team to be put up as some kind of amazing asset to be bragged about.

SI1020
07-05-2010, 07:17 PM
If the White Sox fired Ozzie tomorrow I would welcome the news, but to go out of your way to make up reasons to fire a coach that is pretty much doing nothing more than his job will draw a response from me.
Yes, IIRC you have never been a big fan of Ozzie.

Daver
07-05-2010, 07:23 PM
It's like firing the bench coach. They're never detrimental to a team to where they are a scapegoat and the primary reason for failure and they are never as beneficial to a team to be put up as some kind of amazing asset to be bragged about.


Joe Nosseck survived multiple managers as the Sox Bench coach for a reason, it was a sad day for the Sox when he chose to retire, and he truly was an asset that couldn't be replaced.

Bob Roarman
07-05-2010, 07:34 PM
He could have been a great guy, that I'm not disputing, but if he magically made people better baseball players in terms of their abilities he's the first bench coach in the history of all bench coaching to have done that.

Daver
07-05-2010, 07:40 PM
He could have been a great guy, that I'm not disputing, but if he magically made people better baseball players in terms of their abilities he's the first bench coach in the history of all bench coaching to have done that.

Joe Nosseck could figure out the opposing teams signs by the third inning, and was able to relay that info to the field through the end of the game, in his way he did make the fielders better, it's easier to field a bunt when you know it is coming.

Zisk77
07-05-2010, 10:37 PM
I'm sure you're not in uniform, either.


See, Ranger [and others] that defend Walker so often state that a MLB hitting coach does NOT "teach" players how to hit.

Therefore, I maintain that a blind, drunk monkey would do equally well or poorly as any other MLB hitting coach. Since they're not "teaching" and they really have "no effect" on a player's performance, why not hire Bonzo?

Alternatively, why not a full-time travelling sports psychologist, since all a hitting coach can do is to help work on the "mental aspect" of hitting? [I'm guessing that a guy with a Doctorate in Psychology could teach better than a virtual illiterate.]

I look dead sexy in a uniform :redneck.

Dub25
07-05-2010, 11:33 PM
[QUOTE=Ranger;2540761]No, I understood it perfectly. He doesn't understand how this has anything to do with Greg Walker, but it has everything to do with Greg Walker. Reason being, most people around here seem to be absolutely positive he should lose his job because they don't think he's doing a good job. However, most of those same people believe Jaramillo is some sort of god, yet his team currently stinks at hitting. Therefore, the conclusion is that maybe it's really not about the hitting coach. If it were, the Cubs would be a great hitting team right now. But nobody is acknowledging that.

No, they hit, the problem is driving in the big run/s. They won on Saturday vs the Reds while stranding 17. How does 17 runners get on base?

Dub25
07-05-2010, 11:35 PM
The Cubs hype everyone as the next greatest at whatever they happen to be hired for. The Cubs overhyping a coach isn't news.

The problem I have with Walker is the lack of preparation. How many times has a White Sox opponent faced a pitcher for the first time and struggled? He's been in a position for a long time and we've been having the same problems with the offense. I'd like to see a change.

Yep, Saturday vs. the Rangers would be a good example.

Dub25
07-05-2010, 11:43 PM
[QUOTE=Ranger;2541704]Absolutely correct. Getting shutout by a pitcher does not necessarily have anything to do with preparation. Preparation is just a keyword people use to assign blame. "Got shutout? Must've been lack of preparation." Because technology is so advanced these days, the reality is that all teams pretty much have the same information available to them regarding other teams. There really aren't a whole lot of surprises in the modern era. They all know a pitcher's arsenal and tendencies, and the players are informed of them (at least those that want to know).

That's the other thing to keep in mind: some players just don't want to know much about a pitcher ahead of time. They don't want to look at tape. They just want to take their pregame swings and let it be. Some guys want a ton of info, some just want a little. A hitting coach can't make them absorb stuff they aren't willing to absorb.

For example, everyone with the team is fully aware the Andruw Jones is trying to pull everything at all times, always. Without fail. Every other team knows it, too, because if you see him get a pitch inside anytime soon, it will be the first time in a month or it will be a mistake. The Sox also know it, and he's been informed. Yet, he STILL is trying to pull EVERYTHING.

Players deserve 90 - 95% of blame for their failures.

If you really believe all of this then why do you spend every Greg Walker related thread telling us the same thing?

Dub25
07-05-2010, 11:45 PM
And, honestly, that's really all any team asks of its hitting coaches. I'm being totally serious.

As for Beckham, if he fails, it's gonna be because his head gets in his way. The tools are there, his mechanics are fine for the most part. They were actually alarmed in the spring when he started questioning himself.

Lastly, pitching coaches generally have an easier time in making adjustments with pitchers than hitting coaches do with hitters. The main reason for that is hitting has two parts: not only do you have to figure out your own mechanics and flaws and correct them, but then you have to be able to take all of that and react to what's being thrown at you. Pitchers control the pace. They throw what they want, when they want to. Once the ball leaves their hand, their job is basically finished, if you know what I mean. As for the hitter, he has to make his own adjustments, and then adjust to the pitcher. He doesn't get to decide what they throw him or where they throw it or how hard they throw it. A pitcher isn't relying on reaction.

Really, read the bold. Not the same swing as last year. Even though he is slowly creeping up from the .185 from earlier this year.

Dub25
07-05-2010, 11:47 PM
May I suggest that Beckham's offensive problems might have something to do with his having to learn a new defensive position every year? My correlation is with Kenny Williams, whose offensive production fell apart when he was moved from CF to 3B. Of course my correlation is bull****, but heck, it's no worse than any of the other bull**** that has been served here.


No.

asindc
07-06-2010, 09:23 AM
The Cubs hype everyone as the next greatest at whatever they happen to be hired for. The Cubs overhyping a coach isn't news.

The problem I have with Walker is the lack of preparation. How many times has a White Sox opponent faced a pitcher for the first time and struggled? He's been in a position for a long time and we've been having the same problems with the offense. I'd like to see a change.

Yep, Saturday vs. the Rangers would be a good example.

Maybe as often as it happens to at least one other team:

http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2009/06/fernando_nieve_latest_firsttim.html

khan
07-06-2010, 10:55 AM
I don't care how the team is doing, firing a hitting coach never marks any dramatic turn around. It's a position to be filled by someone who knows the game yes, but it's not a do or die decision for the team's sucess on whom that person is.
Thank you for agreeing with me.

The hitting coach, ANY hitting coach, doesn't really do anything at the MLB level. There's really no good reason to have one, regardless of who is the hitting coach.

In the minors, however, it appears that as players are still learning the game and their own abilities, having a hitting instructor/coach does have some merit.

doublem23
07-06-2010, 11:05 AM
Maybe as often as it happens to at least one other team:

http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2009/06/fernando_nieve_latest_firsttim.html

That would be the Yankees who averaged 5.6 RPG in 2009 (1st in the AL) and 5.35 RPG in 2010 (2nd in the AL), right?

asindc
07-06-2010, 11:38 AM
That would be the Yankees who averaged 5.6 RPG in 2009 (1st in the AL) and 5.35 RPG in 2010 (2nd in the AL), right?

Yes, that very same team. Maybe they will decide to fire their hitting coach based on the fact that they struggle against starters they face for the first time, regardless of how good that starter is. Or maybe they will decide to fire him for a legitimate reason.

Look, if the Sox fire Walker today, I'll be surprised but I won't protest. But just as I said before, many of the reasons given for why he should be fired apply to other teams as well, some who actually hit well. So maybe those reasons aren't valid when trying to determine if Walker is doing a good job or not.

"Good teams don't let first-time starter consistently beat them, good teams don't get shutout by xxxx starter, good teams don't blah, blah, blah..." Nonsense.

TDog
07-06-2010, 11:39 AM
Maybe as often as it happens to at least one other team:

http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2009/06/fernando_nieve_latest_firsttim.html

And people thought it was only the White Sox who had that problem. Really, it's most teams, sort of.

The White Sox win most of the games they play against starters they play for the first time. In interleague play, the White Sox were usually facing starters they hadn't seen before, except for the Cubs games. And two of their three interleague losses came against the Cubs.

If a pitcher is doing what he should be doing, the stuff that got him to the majors, he should be tough against any team the first couple of times through the order, and by then the other team has gone to the bullpen. If the pitcher is on, he will have the advantage against hitters he has never faced before, at least the first time through the lineup and maybe the second, depending on how many pitches are working for him. Nowadays, most managers will go to the bullpen when such an advantage diminishes.

In 2004, Zack Greinke beat the Sox in his first game against them. He took a no-hitter into the fifth before Crede got the first hit. But the Sox also hit him hard in the six and got a home run off of him in the seventh before the Royals went to the bullpen.

Greinke faced the White Sox in his next start and didn't get through six, giving up three home runs and 10 hits in all, along with seven earned runs. The White Sox won six of the next 10 games Greinke started against them, including a game in 2008 where seven of the first eight hitters got hits against him, the exception being Carlos Quentin who was hit by a pitch. He finally got an out when Alexei Ramirez very nearly hit a home run but had to settle for a sacrifice fly. Some days Greinke has it, and the days he doesn't are rarer these days.

On the other hand, the first time the White Sox faced Gio Gonzalez, he didn't get out of the fourth, giving up eight runs on six hits while walking five. The Sox were hitting everything so well, they didn't hit a pitch foul until the fourth. The next time the Sox faced Gonzalez, he pitched better, but still gave up six runs in five innings. If he does even better against the Sox this year, it won't be because they haven't seen him before.

The thing is, during Gonzalez's debut in Toronto nine days before he faced the White Sox in Oakland for the first time, Gonzalez retired 15 of 16 Blue Jays at one point, allowing only a walk during that streak. I don't know if the Jays announcers were talking about what a great pitcher Gonzalez was or if they were complaining that their team had trouble against pitchers they hadn't seen before.

Games where the Sox do well against pitchers they haven't seen before are forgotten, of course. Only the games where the Sox can't beat some bum rookie are remembered. I can remember complaints about how hopeless the 1970 White Sox were because they couldn't beat this 19-year-old kid named Bert Blyleven. In 1970, though, they were half right.

doublem23
07-06-2010, 11:54 AM
Yes, that very same team. Maybe they will decide to fire their hitting coach based on the fact that they struggle against starters they face for the first time, regardless of how good that starter is. Or maybe they will decide to fire him for a legitimate reason.

Look, if the Sox fire Walker today, I'll be surprised but I won't protest. But just as I said before, many of the reasons given for why he should be fired apply to other teams as well, some who actually hit well. So maybe those reasons aren't valid when trying to determine if Walker is doing a good job or not.

"Good teams don't let first-time starter consistently beat them, good teams don't get shutout by xxxx starter, good teams don't blah, blah, blah..." Nonsense.

I think you missed the point of my posts. Who gives a **** the Yankees struggle against 1st time pitchers? They're still always at the top of the league in terms of runs scored. We're not. You can't afford to lose to no names when you can't score runs on anyone else, either.

asindc
07-06-2010, 11:58 AM
I think you missed the point of my posts. Who gives a **** the Yankees struggle against 1st time pitchers? They're still always at the top of the league in terms of runs scored. We're not. You can't afford to lose to no names when you can't score runs on anyone else, either.

I understood your point. My point is that the Sox struggling against first-time pitchers is not evidence that the hitting coach is not doing is job, unless you think other hitting coaches are failing in that regard as well.

doublem23
07-06-2010, 12:07 PM
I understood your point. My point is that the Sox struggling against first-time pitchers is not evidence that the hitting coach is not doing is job, unless you think other hitting coaches are failing in that regard as well.

I think the fact that the Sox struggle basically against everybody is proof that their hitting coach is a failure.

asindc
07-06-2010, 12:14 PM
I think the fact that the Sox struggle basically against everybody is proof that their hitting coach is a failure.

Maybe, maybe not. As Ranger has said more than once, I wonder how many people here know what a hitting coach does and, more to the point, know just how Walker is failing in those responsibilities. Besides Ranger, I'm guessing no more than one or two other posters have that knowledge. Which is why statements such as "good teams don't lose to blah, blah, blah..." strike me as conclusions in search of a reason.

TomBradley72
07-06-2010, 12:56 PM
I think the fact that the Sox struggle basically against everybody is proof that their hitting coach is a failure.

Or it's proof that we have sub par hitters at the DH role (aggregate stats- .224-9-31), 3rd base (.244-6-33) and 2nd base (.209-2-23).

TomBradley72
07-06-2010, 01:22 PM
Here's the ranking of AL teams in runs scored for 2010 and their hitting coaches...I choose roster over hitting coach as the main variable driving success:
Red Sox- Dave Magadan
Yankees- Kevin Long
Rangers- Clint Hurdle
Rays- Derek Shelton
Angels- Mickey Hatcher
Twins-Joe Vavra
Tigers-Lloyd McClendon
Blue Jays- Dwayne Murphy
Royals- Kevin Seitzer
White Sox

dickallen15
07-06-2010, 03:05 PM
Yes, that very same team. Maybe they will decide to fire their hitting coach based on the fact that they struggle against starters they face for the first time, regardless of how good that starter is. Or maybe they will decide to fire him for a legitimate reason.

Look, if the Sox fire Walker today, I'll be surprised but I won't protest. But just as I said before, many of the reasons given for why he should be fired apply to other teams as well, some who actually hit well. So maybe those reasons aren't valid when trying to determine if Walker is doing a good job or not.

"Good teams don't let first-time starter consistently beat them, good teams don't get shutout by xxxx starter, good teams don't blah, blah, blah..." Nonsense.
You do realize that recently the Sox won 8 games in a row against starters theywere facing for the first time.

TornLabrum
07-06-2010, 03:23 PM
No.

Why not? As I said is just as much bull**** as anything else I've seen in this thread.

asindc
07-06-2010, 03:35 PM
You do realize that recently the Sox won 8 games in a row against starters theywere facing for the first time.

I did not realize it was that many, but I'm not surprised. DoubleM and others might be, but I'm not.

Bob Roarman
07-06-2010, 03:49 PM
Why not? As I said is just as much bull**** as anything else I've seen in this thread.

Yeah but as the Hawk would say, that's a STRETCH! Doesn't matter. It's the adjustment pitchers are making to him, not him playing a new position. It happens to every hitter worth a damn, it is what separates major league hitters from career minor leaguers/journeymen. If he can adjust back, he'll be ok, if he can't, again as the Hawk would say, he gone. That's up to him, not any coach. It's always dangerous to see a first year player play as well as he did, win rookie of the year and then just expect him to immediately improve from that in the coming year(s). Doesn't really work that way.

TornLabrum
07-07-2010, 12:11 PM
Yeah but as the Hawk would say, that's a STRETCH! Doesn't matter. It's the adjustment pitchers are making to him, not him playing a new position. It happens to every hitter worth a damn, it is what separates major league hitters from career minor leaguers/journeymen. If he can adjust back, he'll be ok, if he can't, again as the Hawk would say, he gone. That's up to him, not any coach. It's always dangerous to see a first year player play as well as he did, win rookie of the year and then just expect him to immediately improve from that in the coming year(s). Doesn't really work that way.

I completely agree. That's why I said it bull****.

SI1020
07-07-2010, 12:35 PM
Why not just say all opinions are equal but some are more equal than others? Particularly with regard to hitting coaches.

Bob Roarman
07-07-2010, 01:28 PM
You can be wrong. It's not an impossibility just because we can all have our own opinions.

TornLabrum
07-07-2010, 09:53 PM
A very wise person, who was a politician or something like that and whose name I forget right now) once said, "You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts."

Then there was what Mike Ditka had to say about opinions.

Nellie_Fox
07-08-2010, 11:50 PM
A very wise person, who was a politician or something like that and whose name I forget right now) once said, "You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts."
It was Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was a very wise man in many ways.

doublem23
07-09-2010, 12:12 AM
A very wise person, who was a politician or something like that and whose name I forget right now) once said, "You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts."

So then it's cool that if I stumbled on a magic genie lamp, I would wish for Greg Walker to be fired three times? (Just to be on the safe side).

TomBradley72
07-09-2010, 08:20 AM
So then it's cool that if I stumbled on a magic genie lamp, I would wish for Greg Walker to be fired three times? (Just to be on the safe side).

We need Dave Magadan or Clint Hurdle!