PDA

View Full Version : *Official* It's Over postgame thread


Pages : 1 [2]

DirtySox
09-15-2010, 11:27 AM
I highly doubt that was the only reason it got changed. Sure, they whined, but the rule was really dumb. A coin flip? Really?

Indeed.

The rule didn't make sense and was unfair, thus it was changed.

TheOldRoman
09-15-2010, 11:34 AM
That rule had been in use for I believe 50 years to determine home field for tiebreakers. It makes sense with an imbalanced schedule. Take the wildcard, for instance. The Sox could tie with another team, and if each won all home games, lose the season series 3-6. Obviously head to head games are important, but the Sox losing 2 home games to the Twins 1 was more than negated by the favorable schedule the Twins had that year (Sox had an extra series against Tampa, two series with the Cubs, etc).

asindc
09-15-2010, 11:36 AM
That rule had been in use for I believe 50 years to determine home field for tiebreakers. It makes sense with an imbalanced schedule. Take the wildcard, for instance. The Sox could tie with another team, and if each won all home games, lose the season series 3-6. Obviously head to head games are important, but the Sox losing 2 home games to the Twins 1 was more than negated by the favorable schedule the Twins had that year (Sox had an extra series against Tampa, two series with the Cubs, etc).

I disagree. If one team beats another more often, then I say they have earned the advantage in any tiebreaker. It has been settled on the field, IMO. The coin flip should only be used to break ties between teams head-to-head records.

TheOldRoman
09-15-2010, 11:44 AM
I disagree. If one team beats another more often, then I say they have earned the advantage in any tiebreaker. It has been settled on the field, IMO. The coin flip should only be used to break ties between teams head-to-head records.But my point is that the Sox had the tougher schedule that year. Sure, the Twins had two more wins head to head, but the Sox got to the point of a tie by winning more games against tougher teams. The Sox could have lost the season series to the Twins but finished 5 games ahead of them if they had the weaker schedule, that is the point I'm making. Wouldn't logic say the Sox probably would have won a few more games if they had an extra series against the 101 loss Mariners (as the Twins did) instead of the Rays?

asindc
09-15-2010, 12:02 PM
But my point is that the Sox had the tougher schedule that year. Sure, the Twins had two more wins head to head, but the Sox got to the point of a tie by winning more games against tougher teams. The Sox could have lost the season series to the Twins but finished 5 games ahead of them if they had the weaker schedule, that is the point I'm making. Wouldn't logic say the Sox probably would have won a few more games if they had an extra series against the 101 loss Mariners (as the Twins did) instead of the Rays?

I think that's a fair point to make, but I like the idea of a team earning the right to host any post-season games. After all, the schedule balance shifts from year to year, even within a season sometimes. With that said, Nathan was still a whiny baby about a rule that was in place before the season started.

DrCrawdad
09-15-2010, 12:04 PM
Maybe if we bitch and moan enough we can get the Twins contracted.

Good thinking!

It's funny how the Twins complained about that rule but were fine spouting "the rule is the rule" when the the Texas player slightly touched the 3rd base coach. Of course even that is a moot pt because the rule is NOT any contact is an automatic out. But hey play that "the rule is the rule" when it suits your team.

The Twins are cry babies - players, coaches, management, broadcasters and fans.

vinny
09-15-2010, 12:05 PM
That was the only time this season where the Sox actually managed to score a run with the bases loaded against the Twins. This season the Sox had the bases loaded against the Twins 13 times. They scored once out of all those situations. That's pathetic.

We have been bad against the Twins in bases-loaded situations this season, but for the record:

5/11: 1 PA, 0 runs
7/16: 3 PA, 1 run
8/12: 7 PA, 1 run
8/17: 2 PA, 0 runs
8/19: 2 PA, 1 run
9/14: 3 PA, 1 run

BTW, AJ plated three of those runs (and he should have gotten credit for the RBI last night IMO)

soltrain21
09-15-2010, 12:12 PM
XjBwAYIxUso

hi im skot
09-15-2010, 12:17 PM
XjBwAYIxUso

I was totally going to post this. Get out of my head.

soltrain21
09-15-2010, 12:21 PM
I was totally going to post this. Get out of my head.

The Twins will not build a wall between us. We know they won't win.

palehozenychicty
09-15-2010, 12:23 PM
Because Kenny has a football mentality that Chicago fans love.

Our lack of organizational depth shows year after year. I think that's the biggest reason the Sox aren't able to make the playoffs more consistently.

The Sox have 10-15 guys on their roster who are really good players. I mean, really good players. But the bottom half of the roster is subpar. The minor leagues are subpar.

Over 162 games, it might take 30-35 players to get the job done. We lament all the time about how the Twins have guys come out of nowhere to help them. They have injuries; it doesn't even impact them. Well, that's because they have developed organizational depth. The Sox have not. That's shows up the second half of the season.


Bingo. This is what I've been saying for years. You need to develop guys underneath the major leagues properly. Look at the Yanks with Nova. He's kept them afloat with injuries and ineffectiveness to most of their rotation.

From afar, the Sox have the resources to dominate this division and consistently fail at it for this reason. Those second half slides are not an accident.

JB98
09-15-2010, 12:47 PM
Which is why the game 163 rule was changed to the team with the better head to head record gets the extra game. The Twins won the head to head, but lost a coin flip. That game should have been in Mn.

The Sox were a better team than the Twins in 2008. Deal with it.

JB98
09-15-2010, 12:56 PM
Bingo. This is what I've been saying for years. You need to develop guys underneath the major leagues properly. Look at the Yanks with Nova. He's kept them afloat with injuries and ineffectiveness to most of their rotation.

From afar, the Sox have the resources to dominate this division and consistently fail at it for this reason. Those second half slides are not an accident.

Agreed.

Every year, we get the "Ozzie has lost the team" posts when the Sox struggle in the second half. That's the lazy, Mariotti-like way of analyzing the team. The real issue is a lack of depth, and having to rely so much upon the same 10-15 players.

Until Sale's callup, the Sox never had a serviceable second left-hander in the bullpen. Should we be surprised that Matt Thornton wore out in the second half? Certainly not. He was used a lot. It's more than just the appearances and the innings pitched, too. One wonders how many times Matt warmed up, but ended up not coming into the game. That all adds up over time.

This team had relievers (Linebrink, Pena, Williams, etc.) who could not be trusted at all. Starting pitchers were asked to throw 120-plus pitches in games due to a short bullpen. Now, Danks and Floyd are out of gas. Should we be surprised?

Certainly not.

TomBradley72
09-15-2010, 12:58 PM
Poor production at DH + below average players at 3rd (offense) and RF (defense) + lack of organization pitching depth to offset injuries to Peavy, etc. = also ran.

Personally, I can't rip on the Twins....good manager, great ballpark, withstood major injuries better than we could and had organizational depth to compensate (Capps trade, call ups).

They are the better team this year, and have been better than us most of the last decade excluding 2005 and 2008.

white sox bill
09-15-2010, 01:03 PM
I actually wish we had a farm system like the Twins. They have good fundamentals, draft well and develop their own players. I admire them for that.

captain54
09-15-2010, 01:11 PM
From afar, the Sox have the resources to dominate this division and consistently fail at it for this reason. Those second half slides are not an accident.

I think this offseason, Sox management, (mainly Ozzie and KW), should put their egos aside and let go of 2005, and deal with the fact not being able to beat the Twins, not to mention not being able to dominate the other weaker teams in the division, has cost the WS dearly over the last 5 yrs.

Inside of trying to make dramatic splashy trades, trying to re-invent baseball by putting together erzatz rosters, and trying to keep your
fingers crossed with bargain basement rejects, the powers that be need to really sit down and put together a new plan of attack.

the only questions that need to be addressed should be:

1) what do we need to do in order to be able to dominate the weaker teams in the Central?
2) what do we need to do in order to AT LEAST go .500 against the Twins
3) what do we need to revamp or change in our organization, that causes us to consistently get out performed by the Minnesota Twins, a smaller market club with less resources? a team that lost two of its major players for most of the year and STILL kicked butt?

the reality of it is, that might include a big shakeup at the top, which is probably not gonna happen as long as Reinsdorf is alive and breathing

jdm2662
09-15-2010, 02:05 PM
The Sox were a better team than the Twins in 2008. Deal with it.

Seriously, the whinning still amuses me to no end. If you didn't want to come to Chicago for the tie breaker, you should've taken care of business at home agaisnt KC when you had the chance. You didn't. Go whine somewhere else.

The 2010 Twins are better than the 2010 Sox. I have no problem admitting this and moving on. It sucks, but it's life.

russ99
09-15-2010, 02:17 PM
Every team has question marks on the roster, we shouldn't assume the Sox should be immune to this league-wide issue of too many teams/jobs and not enough high-level talent.

Here's the players on this year's team we've acquired with home-grown minor league talent:

Peavy, Konerko, Pierre, Jenks, Jackson, Teahen, Danks, Quentin, Floyd, Thornton (for our previous top prospect), Pena, Castro, Lillibridge, Santos

Would you rather have these guys, or slightly better fill-in players than we have now from the minor leagues when guys get hurt?

Good farm systems are for teams that can't spend on quality players. The Sox are a big-market team and they can.

DirtySox
09-15-2010, 02:30 PM
Good farm systems are for teams that can't spend on quality players. The Sox are a big-market team and they can.

Worst argument ever.

dickallen15
09-15-2010, 02:33 PM
Good farm systems are for teams that can't spend on quality players. The Sox are a big-market team and they can.

Wow. You do realize the Yankees started winning with a core of homegrown players, and the Red Sox have a lot of them too? The Phillies have some talent they developed.

I realize in your world Ozzie and Kenny cannot posssibly do wrong, but really you should think before you post something this obnoxious.

fram40
09-15-2010, 02:41 PM
That was the only time this season where the Sox actually managed to score a run with the bases loaded against the Twins. This season the Sox had the bases loaded against the Twins 13 times. They scored once out of all those situations. That's pathetic.

rather apropos that it was on a ground ball that turned into a double play.

Lip stated earlier that the Sox lost five games to the Twins where they held a lead in the 7th inning or later. FIVE!! Thorw every other stat out the window - if that stat was one game, we'd be in first by a game. Rather than 7 out.

Pitching was supposed to be the strength of this team - yet it failed too often.

Craig Grebeck
09-15-2010, 02:43 PM
Worst argument ever.
Yes.

Domeshot17
09-15-2010, 02:57 PM
Every team has question marks on the roster, we shouldn't assume the Sox should be immune to this league-wide issue of too many teams/jobs and not enough high-level talent.

Here's the players on this year's team we've acquired with home-grown minor league talent:

Peavy, Konerko, Pierre, Jenks, Jackson, Teahen, Danks, Quentin, Floyd, Thornton (for our previous top prospect), Pena, Castro, Lillibridge, Santos

Would you rather have these guys, or slightly better fill-in players than we have now from the minor leagues when guys get hurt?

Good farm systems are for teams that can't spend on quality players. The Sox are a big-market team and they can.


This is company line to a new level. Most of the good BIG MARKET teams get help from their minors. Would the Yankees be in this race without Hughes?

SoxSpeed22
09-15-2010, 03:20 PM
The question is where they are spending. Many others have pointed out that international scouting is one department the Sox fail badly in. They have made some splashes with the Alexei and Viciedo signings, but other than that, they haven't gotten or developed international talent at all.
As far as drafting goes, it does seem that they are going the right way with it, but they are still nowhere near where they can be. There's still a long way to go with the farm system. You have to have a good combo of homegrown talent and acquisitions.

DirtySox
09-15-2010, 03:31 PM
As far as drafting goes, it does seem that they are going the right way with it, but they are still nowhere near where they can be. There's still a long way to go with the farm system. You have to have a good combo of homegrown talent and acquisitions.

I don't think they are going the right way about drafting. They spend abysmally for a large market team. They were 4th to last in draft spending this year. The totals for 2010 and 2009 draft spending combined are less than many teams spend in one year. The system is also terrible at developing the talent that they do manage to acquire. Couple that with a complete absence of any signings during international free agency, and the farm system is a disaster.

The only positive I've seen lately is in 1st round draft picks. They have certainly had more upside in the last 4 drafts than in previous years.

russ99
09-15-2010, 03:33 PM
This is company line to a new level. Most of the good BIG MARKET teams get help from their minors. Would the Yankees be in this race without Hughes?

No, but the Yankees trade their top prospects for quality players even more than we do.

And it's not the "company line". It's been the team philosophy since Kenny took over as GM in 2000, and it's done very well for us.

But if you want to go back to the days of Ron Schueler and Larry Himes working with mid-level payrolls and the constant need to promote players from the system, fine.

And need I remind you we have two of our last three number one picks contributing for us at the big league level this year. It's not like the club is forsaking all player development.

soltrain21
09-15-2010, 03:39 PM
No, but the Yankees trade their top prospects for quality players even more than we do.

And it's not the "company line". It's been the team philosophy since Kenny took over as GM in 2000, and it's done very well for us.

But if you want to go back to the days of Ron Schueler and Larry Himes working with mid-level payrolls and the constant need to promote players from the system, fine.

And need I remind you we have two of our last three number one picks contributing for us at the big league level this year.

Where the hell is that coming from? No they don't.

russ99
09-15-2010, 03:42 PM
Where the hell is that coming from? No they don't.

Oh please. How many of their top 5 prospects from the last 10 years are on their roster. They're always trading prospects.

What about the Granderson trade, for instance...

Sure, they've developed Jeter, Pettitte and other star players, but what have they done lately, other than Cano, Gardner, Hughes and Joba, and all of them have been in trade rumors from time to time.

Back to the Sox, how about the beginning of last season - they promoted tons of kids to big league jobs and they were awful. Was anyone clamoring for a good farm system happy with that?

soltrain21
09-15-2010, 03:44 PM
Oh please. How many of their top 5 prospects from the last 10 years are on their roster. They're always trading prospects.

What about the Granderson trade, for instance...

Sure, they've developed Jeter, Pettitte and other star players, but what have they done lately, other than Cano, Gardner, Hughes and Joba.

Um. That's a pretty good haul of homegrown prospects. Way more than we have developed. We have Beckham. And...uh...

SoxSpeed22
09-15-2010, 03:47 PM
I don't think they are going the right way about drafting. They spend abysmally for a large market team. They were 4th to last in draft spending this year. The totals for 2010 and 2009 draft spending combined are less than many teams spend in one year. The system is also terrible at developing the talent that they do manage to acquire. Couple that with a complete absence of any signings during international free agency, and the farm system is a disaster.

The only positive I've seen lately is in 1st round draft picks. They have certainly had more upside in the last 4 drafts than in previous years.Drafting isn't always about huge signing bonuses and contracts, especially given Kenny Williams' refusal to deal with Scott Boras. I wish they would spend more on drafting, even if it meant taking away from the major league payroll.
Both of us agree on the lack of international talent. Both getting and developing the talent is a problem.
The reason I felt that drafting has taken a small step forward is the first rounders. They have gone away from the Royce Rings and Lance Broadways of the world and gone for more upside. They still have ways to go with it though.

WhiteSox5187
09-15-2010, 04:28 PM
Um. That's a pretty good haul of homegrown prospects. Way more than we have developed. We have Beckham. And...uh...

Hudson!...oh, wait.

It's kind of sad that the two best players to come out of our system in the past ten years have spent a combined five months in our minor leagues. Maybe not even that.

SOXSINCE'70
09-15-2010, 05:59 PM
Oh hell, this does suck.

Amen.It's all over but the shouting.:mad:

:darkcloud::facepalm:

rdwj
09-15-2010, 06:05 PM
Amen.It's all over but the shouting.:mad:



...and the whining - don't forget the whining.

...And of course the constant calls for the heads of ownership, management and coaching staff.

Rockabilly
09-15-2010, 06:33 PM
Where the hell is that coming from? No they don't.


They traded a lot of their farm system for quality players. Look at the Jackson & Coke for Granderson deal.

They were also going to give up Montero for Lee.

Rockabilly
09-15-2010, 06:42 PM
Um. That's a pretty good haul of homegrown prospects. Way more than we have developed. We have Beckham. And...uh...

How about Sale & Dayan?

rainbow6
09-15-2010, 06:46 PM
Like most of the members of this forum, last night's loss was a punch in the gut and the end of the season (for me). I held out hope we could at least make it interesting down the stetch but watching that game cemented the fact that I would not be paying much attention from here on out.

It was truly depressing.

I woke up this morning somewhat relieved that I wouldn't have to "worry" about the game tonight - more time to play with kids, read or do chores. It was somewhat liberating to think I wouldn't be tied down to a goddamn baseball game - or at least constantly trying to get a score if otherwise occupied.

Than it happened.

First at lunch...

"what if we take the next two..."
"five out with sixteen to go..."

Than later in the day at work, scribbling some scenarios out on a piece of scratch paper..

"we go 12-4, they go 7-9, tied for the division lead.."

Winning the next two doesn't seem THAT improbable, does it?

The 12-4/7-9 deal isn't some type of insane comeback that would be talked about for years, right?

12-4
7-9.

Those are normal stretches for any team during a sixteen game span.

I'm about to begin a game of monopoly jr. with my eight year old. If it's not done by first pitch I'm hiding my money under the game board - I will conceed the loss so I can see tonights game.

It's exhausting being a White Sox fan.

TDog
09-15-2010, 07:06 PM
We have been bad against the Twins in bases-loaded situations this season, but for the record:

5/11: 1 PA, 0 runs
7/16: 3 PA, 1 run
8/12: 7 PA, 1 run
8/17: 2 PA, 0 runs
8/19: 2 PA, 1 run
9/14: 3 PA, 1 run

BTW, AJ plated three of those runs (and he should have gotten credit for the RBI last night IMO)

The reason a player does not get credit for an RBI on a force-out doubleplay is the rationale that the defense could have prevented the run from scoring but chose instead to get two outs instead, just as a fielder doesn't get credit for reaching base on a fielder's choice under the rationale that the fielder could have retired the hitter but chose to get one of the runners on base instead. There are doubleplays where there could have been no play at the plate, even if the infielders were positioned for such, and there are fielder's choices where the only possible play is on a baserunner. But the rule establishes consistency to reliever scorers of judgments that could affect players statistics. There is enough of that anyway.

I think a scoring rule that should be changed instead is the one that doesn't count a run-scoring fly ball (or even a line drive since the 1970s) as a time at bat for the hitter.

Tragg
09-15-2010, 07:10 PM
To award a batter a RBI for hitting into a double play with the bases loaded and nobody out is rewarding failure and non-productive outcomes.

It's not within the spirit of the statistic.

WhiteSox5187
09-15-2010, 07:12 PM
How about Sale & Dayan?

Sale spent a month in the minors (if that) and Dayan hasn't shown a whole lot of consistency and was technically a free agent signing.

JB98
09-15-2010, 07:14 PM
Seriously, the whinning still amuses me to no end. If you didn't want to come to Chicago for the tie breaker, you should've taken care of business at home agaisnt KC when you had the chance. You didn't. Go whine somewhere else.

The 2010 Twins are better than the 2010 Sox. I have no problem admitting this and moving on. It sucks, but it's life.

Yep. I'm not sobbing all over my keyboard and making excuses for the Sox like the Twins fans did in 2008.

The Sox haven't been good enough this year. That's reality. You take your medicine like an adult and move forward.

soltrain21
09-15-2010, 07:14 PM
How about Sale & Dayan?

Waiting for them to prove themselves in the way those Yankee guys have.

SI1020
09-15-2010, 08:02 PM
Worst argument ever. Mind boggling.

TDog
09-15-2010, 08:26 PM
To award a batter a RBI for hitting into a double play with the bases loaded and nobody out is rewarding failure and non-productive outcomes.

It's not within the spirit of the statistic.

You're right, of course. But a player who makes the second out in the ninth inning by driving in a runner from third with a fly out or a ground out is rewarded with an RBI. If it's a fly out and it leave the bases empty and essentially takes your team out of the game because the run didn't mean anything, the hitter isn't even charged with a time at bat.

I don't mind so much that people are credited with meaningless RBIs. But I think it is obvious that grounding into a doubleplay is the failure (although the only run in the White Sox last World Series win before 2005 was scored in that manner).

If a run scores on a doubleplay that begins with a fly ball or a line drive, the hitter does get an RBI, though.

RadioheadRocks
09-15-2010, 08:39 PM
Yep. I'm not sobbing all over my keyboard and making excuses for the Sox like the Twins fans did in 2008.

The Sox haven't been good enough this year. That's reality. You take your medicine like an adult and move forward.


Well said, JB.

Nelfox02
09-15-2010, 08:52 PM
How about Sale & Dayan?

Sale has shown a lot more positives than Dayan (IMO), but the jury definitely still out on both

Jurr
09-15-2010, 09:55 PM
This season died in Detroit last week, though you could say it died earlier against KC and Cleveland. This team just didn't have it.

Brian26
09-15-2010, 11:22 PM
The reason a player does not get credit for an RBI on a force-out doubleplay is the rationale that the defense could have prevented the run from scoring but chose instead to get two outs instead, just as a fielder doesn't get credit for reaching base on a fielder's choice under the rationale that the fielder could have retired the hitter but chose to get one of the runners on base instead. There are doubleplays where there could have been no play at the plate, even if the infielders were positioned for such, and there are fielder's choices where the only possible play is on a baserunner. But the rule establishes consistency to reliever scorers of judgments that could affect players statistics. There is enough of that anyway.

I think a scoring rule that should be changed instead is the one that doesn't count a run-scoring fly ball (or even a line drive since the 1970s) as a time at bat for the hitter.

Excellent synopsis of the rule. It's also amazing to note that Ted Williams, the last player to bat over .400, did so under the old rules.

Wickel
09-15-2010, 11:23 PM
I think it died in the last series vs. the Twins. After tonight, I'm really bummed.

mcsoxfan
09-16-2010, 12:13 AM
At the end of it all, we were just an above-average team that overachieved in June and July after a terrible April and May.
Go Rays

this is an average team who overachieved in june and july and just simply came back to playing in their norm