PDA

View Full Version : IF the Sox win the division...


Rocky Soprano
08-17-2011, 02:54 PM
IF the Sox manage to win the division.
What changes, if any, do you want to see happen next year?
Is everything forgiven and is Ozzie, his coaching staff, and KW brought back?

Does it depend on what the Sox do in the postseason?

I am happy to see the Sox show some life, but I feel like we have seen this show too many times. The team goes from being dead to showing life to being dead in a span of a week or two.

I have been vocal that it is time for change but it is hard to argue for change if somehow they manage to win the division, right?

blandman
08-17-2011, 03:34 PM
IF the Sox manage to win the division.
What changes, if any, do you want to see happen next year?
Is everything forgiven and is Ozzie, his coaching staff, and KW brought back?

Does it depend on what the Sox do in the postseason?

I am happy to see the Sox show some life, but I feel like we have seen this show too many times. The team goes from being dead to showing life to being dead in a span of a week or two.

I have been vocal that it is time for change but it is hard to argue for change if somehow they manage to win the division, right?

I don't believe Ozzie has anything to do with why we've had such a rough go of it. Adam Dunn, Alex Rios, Gordon Beckham, and Brent Morel are the largest culprits, with Kenny sharing part of the blame for picking up the first two and not addressing third base with a viable option on the roster.

chisoxfanatic
08-17-2011, 03:37 PM
I still want Walker gone.

Moses_Scurry
08-17-2011, 03:40 PM
If the Sox win the division, Ozzie and Kenny will be extended whether we like it or not. If they should win the world series, Ozzie and Kenny will be given unofficial lifetime Coach K-like status. I wouldn't mind it one bit if that happened.

Rocky Soprano
08-17-2011, 03:52 PM
I don't believe Ozzie has anything to do with why we've had such a rough go of it. Adam Dunn, Alex Rios, Gordon Beckham, and Brent Morel are the largest culprits, with Kenny sharing part of the blame for picking up the first two and not addressing third base with a viable option on the roster.

This is not the first time that the Sox have underachieved and wether its fair or not, the manager is usually the first to pay the price when that happens.

If the Sox fail to make the playoffs when they were, All In, I expect to see big changes.

Lip Man 1
08-17-2011, 03:57 PM
I think this is a better topic for later on in the season myself. let's see how the next four weeks go, I think that will tell JR a lot and ultimately its going to be his call.

Lip

MtGrnwdSoxFan
08-17-2011, 03:58 PM
I don't believe Ozzie has anything to do with why we've had such a rough go of it. Adam Dunn, Alex Rios, Gordon Beckham, and Brent Morel are the largest culprits, with Kenny sharing part of the blame for picking up the first two and not addressing third base with a viable option on the roster.

Yeah, Brent Morel is so killing us with his great defense and as-expected offense to be lumped in with the .160-hitting lead-glove DH/1B and the .210 hitting lazy bad CFer.

Jerko
08-17-2011, 04:10 PM
I'd still want Ozzie to hit the bricks.

pudge
08-17-2011, 04:12 PM
I don't know, winning the division because you were the tallest midget doesn't say much to me. You can't go firing a division-winning staff though. I personally feel Ozzie loses more games than he wins. I know Rogers recently wrote that from a "pythagorean" perspective the Sox were right about where they should be, with Leyland being the only one who has overachieved. I cannot see a scenario where the Sox are very good in a post-season series, but if they were to put up a fight, say go deep into the ALCS, then I think you give credit where credit is due. That's all highly unlikely though.

Johnny Mostil
08-17-2011, 04:15 PM
I think this is a better topic for later on in the season myself. let's see how the next four weeks go, I think that will tell JR a lot and ultimately its going to be his call.

Lip

+1. (Though, at this point, I might have said "after the season.")

DumpJerry
08-17-2011, 04:18 PM
Ahhh.....a refreshingly new topic of discussion on WSI!

kittle42
08-17-2011, 04:35 PM
Ahhh.....a refreshingly new topic of discussion on WSI!

Seriously. Can't we wait a few weeks? Nothing has really changed yet. Whoopie, a game over .500!

chisoxfanatic
08-17-2011, 04:37 PM
Seriously. Can't we wait a few weeks? Nothing has really changed yet. Whoopie, a game over .500!
The fact that this team has been able to finally get over .500 is a great first step, though, since that has been unable to be reached for 4 months!

DumpJerry
08-17-2011, 04:47 PM
Seriously. Can't we wait a few weeks? Nothing has really changed yet. Whoopie, a game over .500!
People need to let us know they want Ozzie and Kenny fired, Dunn thrown into the La Brea Tar Pits, Alex Rios to be fed to hungry wolves yet again lest we forget......

Nellie_Fox
08-17-2011, 04:49 PM
Seriously. Can't we wait a few weeks? Nothing has really changed yet. Whoopie, a game over .500!You're becoming a HomeFish clone.

kittle42
08-17-2011, 05:05 PM
You're becoming a HomeFish clone.

My optimism is guarded like Fort Knox.

Nellie_Fox
08-17-2011, 05:10 PM
My optimism is guarded like Fort Knox.There's optimism, there's hope, there's "wait and see," and there's constant pessimism.

blandman
08-17-2011, 05:21 PM
Yeah, Brent Morel is so killing us with his great defense and as-expected offense to be lumped in with the .160-hitting lead-glove DH/1B and the .210 hitting lazy bad CFer.

You don't go "all in" with a stopgap at the hot corner. Sorry.

blandman
08-17-2011, 05:21 PM
This is not the first time that the Sox have underachieved and wether its fair or not, the manager is usually the first to pay the price when that happens.

If the Sox fail to make the playoffs when they were, All In, I expect to see big changes.

You said if we win the division, so if we win the division Ozzie doesn't get fired. I'm just saying even if he was fired, it's obviously got less to do with him than people want to think.

kittle42
08-17-2011, 05:22 PM
There's optimism, there's hope, there's "wait and see," and there's constant pessimism.

I feel the third of those.

MeteorsSox4367
08-17-2011, 05:22 PM
I don't believe Ozzie has anything to do with why we've had such a rough go of it. Adam Dunn, Alex Rios, Gordon Beckham, and Brent Morel are the largest culprits, with Kenny sharing part of the blame for picking up the first two and not addressing third base with a viable option on the roster.

And Morel pisses you off how? The guy has caught dang near everything hit his way and even made some great plays on balls that a lot of MLB third baseman would have been nowhere near.

As for his offense, if the Sox have to rely on Morel to drive in tons of runs, then they have some serious issues. I still like Dunn and I think Rios is lazy and useless, but how about asking them to drive in some runs? These Konerko and Quentin fellows have done their part.

Bottom line is Morel is far from being the reason why the Sox have been inconsistent all season. Far from it.

blandman
08-17-2011, 05:23 PM
There's optimism, there's hope, there's "wait and see," and there's constant pessimism.

I'm saving my pessimism for the post season. The also-rans in our division might still hand that to us.

blandman
08-17-2011, 05:25 PM
And Morel pisses you off how? The guy has caught dang near everything hit his way and even made some great plays on balls that a lot of MLB third baseman would have been nowhere near.

As for his offense, if the Sox have to rely on Morel to drive in tons of runs, then they have some serious issues. I still like Dunn and I think Rios is lazy and useless, but how about asking them to drive in some runs? These Konerko and Quentin fellows have done their part.

Bottom line is Morel is far from being the reason why the Sox have been inconsistent all season. Far from it.

He's a bench player. He doesn't piss me off, but he's certainly part of the problem because he's in the everyday lineup. You want to have a good defender at third...that's fine. I don't disagree. But you have to have production there, it's a power/production spot and we're already losing one of those with our left fielder.

Frater Perdurabo
08-17-2011, 06:17 PM
He's a bench player. He doesn't piss me off, but he's certainly part of the problem because he's in the everyday lineup. You want to have a good defender at third...that's fine. I don't disagree. But you have to have production there, it's a power/production spot and we're already losing one of those with our left fielder.

Morel's a rookie and he's hitting .301 since the All Star Break.

MtGrnwdSoxFan
08-17-2011, 06:18 PM
He's a bench player. He doesn't piss me off, but he's certainly part of the problem because he's in the everyday lineup. You want to have a good defender at third...that's fine. I don't disagree. But you have to have production there, it's a power/production spot and we're already losing one of those with our left fielder.

Rios was supposed to have great offensive numbers for a CF, and well, we know about what Dunn was supposed to bring. That, along with Paulie and TCQ, would have been more than enough offense to be able to go defensive at third.

My point is, any of them are hitting anywhere near where they should be, no one says a word about Morel being at third, because he's there for his defense. I don't see how Morel should be thrown in as one of the Sox's disappointments because he can't cover Dunn's and Rios' asses offensively. He's done what's asked of him.

Frater Perdurabo
08-17-2011, 06:27 PM
Rios was supposed to have great offensive numbers for a CF, and well, we know about what Dunn was supposed to bring. That, along with Paulie and TCQ, would have been more than enough offense to be able to go defensive at third.

My point is, any of them are hitting anywhere near where they should be, no one says a word about Morel being at third, because he's there for his defense. I don't see how Morel should be thrown in as one of the Sox's disappointments because he can't cover Dunn's and Rios' asses offensively. He's done what's asked of him.

I think Morel has been BETTER than what we reasonably could have expected, especially since the All Star Break. It would be nice if he hit for a bit more power, and took a few more walks, but his average has been better than expected.

Hitmen77
08-17-2011, 06:33 PM
IF the Sox manage to win the division.
What changes, if any, do you want to see happen next year?
Is everything forgiven and is Ozzie, his coaching staff, and KW brought back?

Does it depend on what the Sox do in the postseason?

I am happy to see the Sox show some life, but I feel like we have seen this show too many times. The team goes from being dead to showing life to being dead in a span of a week or two.

I have been vocal that it is time for change but it is hard to argue for change if somehow they manage to win the division, right?

Even if the Sox win the division, I hope they take a long hard look at the way management makes decisions.

Anyone who think there aren't problems with the way this team is run (even if we eventually beat out Cle and Det) is just fooling themselves.

DumpJerry
08-17-2011, 06:51 PM
I find it amazing that of thirty teams in MLB, the only two which are mis-managed are in Chicago. Maybe the drinking water needs to be tested.

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 06:53 PM
If the Sox win the divsion for the third time in 7 years I'd say anyone who wants the management team fired is so deep into their own agenda as to be laughable. Basically if the facts don't fit their narrative they won't consider them.

Hitmen77
08-17-2011, 07:01 PM
If the Sox win the divsion for the third time in 7 years I'd say anyone who wants the management team fired is so deep into their own agenda as to be laughable. Basically if the facts don't fit their narrative they won't consider them.

I assume your post isn't aimed at me, but I think the Sox can (and should) take a long hard look at how they've made their decisions without necessarily firing the management team.

My agenda is to have the Sox avoid these dreaded early season funks even if it's KW and OG running the show again next year.

PalehosePlanet
08-17-2011, 07:08 PM
I think Morel has been BETTER than what we reasonably could have expected, especially since the All Star Break. It would be nice if he hit for a bit more power, and took a few more walks, but his average has been better than expected.

I'm glad he's making progress but he's certainly not better or anywhere close to what I expected -- which was not a lot. I think a .240-.250 avg. with a dozen homers and about 50-60 RBI is not too much to ask even of a rookie. He is not close to projecting to those very modest numbers. His .275 OBP and his .599 OPS are absolutely terrible -- even by rookie standards.

I am, however, satisfied with his D.

Scottiehaswheels
08-17-2011, 07:10 PM
If the Sox win the divsion for the third time in 7 years I'd say anyone who wants the management team fired is so deep into their own agenda as to be laughable. Basically if the facts don't fit their narrative they won't consider them.
We've also outspent the **** out of this division.. If we were in the AL East I would be more inclined to agree with you but with KC we basically have a 4 team division and Detroit is the only one that's spent anywhere close on payroll since '05.

blandman
08-17-2011, 07:20 PM
Morel's a rookie and he's hitting .301 since the All Star Break.

If you want to cherry pick stats, don't use one as useless as batting average over a period of one month. :rolleyes:

I think Morel has been BETTER than what we reasonably could have expected, especially since the All Star Break. It would be nice if he hit for a bit more power, and took a few more walks, but his average has been better than expected.

It's not that he needs to hit for a bit more power, or draw a few more walks. If he's going to be a starting third basemen in this league, he'll need to hit for a lot more power and get on base a whole lot more. He isn't close to acceptable.

blandman
08-17-2011, 07:21 PM
i'm glad he's making progress but he's certainly not better or anywhere close to what i expected -- which was not a lot. I think a .240-.250 avg. With a dozen homers and about 50-60 rbi is not too much to ask even of a rookie. He is not close to projecting to those very modest numbers. His .275 obp and his .599 ops are absolutely terrible -- even by rookie standards.


+1

blandman
08-17-2011, 07:26 PM
We've also outspent the **** out of this division.. If we were in the AL East I would be more inclined to agree with you but with KC we basically have a 4 team division and Detroit is the only one that's spent anywhere close on payroll since '05.

We're also one of how many teams in that time frame with a World Series?

Cherry pick stats all you want, this team has had a very successful run the last seven seasons by all but the most strict standards. Even if we lose the division, I don't see how the management is the problem.

Lip Man 1
08-17-2011, 07:39 PM
Going into this evening the Sox are barely over the .500 mark since the start of the 2007 season when by all accounts things started to turn south.

That season Kenny decided to go with a different approach to the bullpen and it blew up in his face. I simply cite that as one example of how management was responsible for an issue...can't blame that on the players.

Given the advantages the White Sox have in population size, advertising and business marketing ventures, the worth of their radio and TV rights I don't think it's unreasonable to ask why Cleveland could dominate this division in the 90's, Minnesota could dominate the division in the 00's but the Sox can't even make the post season in consecutive seasons let alone "dominate" the division.

Something simply isn't working despite numerous players at different levels of experience, from different organizations with different ages and different skill sets.

Kenny, Ozzie and the coaching staff have remained a constant.

Just something to consider.

Lip

blandman
08-17-2011, 07:49 PM
Going into this evening the Sox are barely over the .500 mark since the start of the 2007 season when by all accounts things started to turn south.

That season Kenny decided to go with a different approach to the bullpen and it blew up in his face. I simply cite that as one example of how management was responsible for an issue...can't blame that on the players.

Given the advantages the White Sox have in population size, advertising and business marketing ventures, the worth of their radio and TV rights I don't think it's unreasonable to ask why Cleveland could dominate this division in the 90's, Minnesota could dominate the division in the 00's but the Sox can't even make the post season in consecutive seasons let alone "dominate" the division.

Something simply isn't working despite numerous players at different levels of experience, from different organizations with different ages and different skill sets.

Kenny, Ozzie and the coaching staff have remained a constant.

Just something to consider.

Lip

I don't think the bullpen thing was as big a gambit as people make it out to be. Bullpens are volatile, and plenty of GM's stack throwers hoping things stick. The back of the pen was set, it just so happened that in that year, none of those other guys worked out (and I say that year because some of those guys went on to be pretty darn good).

It's not like the pen was the only issue on that team. The real issue, if there's anything to be held accountable for, is that this team has never been blown up even though we haven't seen WS contending talent since 2006. Every year is a patchwork to compete for the division with no legitimate chance to take it all. But the patchwork is all that can be done if we're not gonna blow the whole thing up. And we all know how you feel about that, Lip.

tstrike2000
08-17-2011, 08:12 PM
People need to let us know they want Ozzie and Kenny fired, Dunn thrown into the La Brea Tar Pits, Alex Rios to be fed to hungry wolves yet again lest we forget......

Wait, you mean these things are a possibility?

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 08:16 PM
We've also outspent the **** out of this division.. If we were in the AL East I would be more inclined to agree with you but with KC we basically have a 4 team division and Detroit is the only one that's spent anywhere close on payroll since '05.

Twins were at 97M last year and 113 this year.

And no my comments were not aimed at any one person in particular. I do think people get caught up in what they perceive to be the important details and miss the big picture. And that big picture is that if the Sox win another division this year it will be the greatest management team run in team history in terms of making the playoffs. I'm inclined to say that deserves some praise.

And for all the griping about Ozzie's in game management once again even with major components failing massively Ozzie has this team in the thick of things and refusing to quit. That's part of the manager's job too.

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 08:20 PM
If you want to cherry pick stats, don't use one as useless as batting average over a period of one month. :rolleyes:



It's not that he needs to hit for a bit more power, or draw a few more walks. If he's going to be a starting third basemen in this league, he'll need to hit for a lot more power and get on base a whole lot more. He isn't close to acceptable.

Oh good lord this tired crap again? Not you munch, I mean in general. The Sox have plenty of power in the lineup (at least in theory). Given that Morel is a rookie who didn't spend a lot of time in AA and AAA either I'd say he's doing just fine. Yes you'd like to see more power from him but I also think that will come he's got good bat speed and a nice compact swing.

blandman
08-17-2011, 09:22 PM
Oh good lord this tired crap again? Not you munch, I mean in general. The Sox have plenty of power in the lineup (at least in theory). Given that Morel is a rookie who didn't spend a lot of time in AA and AAA either I'd say he's doing just fine. Yes you'd like to see more power from him but I also think that will come he's got good bat speed and a nice compact swing.

If we were the Yankees, I might agree with you. But this lineup would have needed more pop from him even if Dunn and Rios didn't forget to play this year to be a real contender. It was a poor decision at best, and probably one of the worst mistakes of Kenny Williams career to not look for a more suitable option. He's never going to hit or get on base enough to be a solid regular, that was obvious to most scouts before the decision was made to start him solely based on out of character production for one month last year. That it's his rookie year shouldn't shield him from that, he's producing as poorly as his career projected to.

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 09:44 PM
If we were the Yankees, I might agree with you. But this lineup would have needed more pop from him even if Dunn and Rios didn't forget to play this year to be a real contender. It was a poor decision at best, and probably one of the worst mistakes of Kenny Williams career to not look for a more suitable option. He's never going to hit or get on base enough to be a solid regular, that was obvious to most scouts before the decision was made to start him solely based on out of character production for one month last year. That it's his rookie year shouldn't shield him from that, he's producing as poorly as his career projected to.

No sorry, I completely disagree. You have to fill some holes with young inexpensive talent unless you are the teams you mentioned. What inexpensive power producing 3B were available this year anyway?

Assuming Rios and Dunn are on the team Morel is the obvious choice for 3B unless you can actually name a guy who hits for power and average plays a solid 3B and was cheap too. Not many of those players out there from my experience, but maybe you can name some.

Also, I'm sorry Munch but this sounds like the same old same old from you. Rushing to judgment and taking a hard line stance on something that isn't nearly as black and white as you are making it. To call it one of the worst mistakes of KW's career is simply over the top ridiculous...

Frater Perdurabo
08-17-2011, 09:48 PM
If you want to cherry pick stats, don't use one as useless as batting average over a period of one month. :rolleyes:

It's not that he needs to hit for a bit more power, or draw a few more walks. If he's going to be a starting third basemen in this league, he'll need to hit for a lot more power and get on base a whole lot more. He isn't close to acceptable.

Again, it is his ROOKIE season. Recent stats are more telling for rookies than they are for seasoned veterans.

At every level of minor league ball, More struggled initially and then got acclimated, made adjustments and thrived. It looks like the same thing is happening now at the major league level.

His stats are skewed by a bad April, in which he hit .203. He hit .261 in June and over .280 in May, July and August. He's trending in the right direction and it would be beyond foolish to give up on him at this point.

A. Cavatica
08-17-2011, 09:54 PM
And for all the griping about Ozzie's in game management once again even with major components failing massively Ozzie has this team in the thick of things and refusing to quit. That's part of the manager's job too.

Voodoo, I think you're a great poster, but come on. They're one game over .500.

Ozzie doesn't have them in the thick of things, the ineptitude of the Tigers/Jndjans/Twins/Royals has them in the thick of things!

Ozzie is a major reason why they haven't already run away with this decision. Ozzie has given away dozens of outs (and several games) with stupid managing. Ozzie is why Dunn and Rios have so many at-bats, instead of Viciedo and De Aza. Ozzie is why Walker hasn't been fired.

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 09:59 PM
Voodoo, I think you're a great poster, but come on. They're one game over .500.

Ozzie doesn't have them in the thick of things, the ineptitude of the Tigers/Jndjans/Twins/Royals has them in the thick of things!

Ozzie is a major reason why they haven't already run away with this decision. Ozzie has given away dozens of outs (and several games) with stupid managing. Ozzie is why Dunn and Rios have so many at-bats, instead of Viciedo and De Aza. Ozzie is why Walker hasn't been fired.

We will just have to agree to disagree. There have been many opportunities for this team to fold this year and they haven't. That counts for something in my book and the credit goes to the guy running the show.

skobabe8
08-17-2011, 10:00 PM
And Morel pisses you off how?

Sometimes he looks gumpy.

JB98
08-17-2011, 10:11 PM
We will just have to agree to disagree. There have been many opportunities for this team to fold this year and they haven't. That counts for something in my book and the credit goes to the guy running the show.

Unfortunately, I don't really see the Sox as a never-say-die group. I've seen these players give away a lot of ABs this season late in games when they are trailing.

They are basically still in the hunt because the competition also has plenty of warts.

A. Cavatica
08-17-2011, 10:12 PM
We will just have to agree to disagree. There have been many opportunities for this team to fold this year and they haven't. That counts for something in my book and the credit goes to the guy running the show.

Is that what it looks like to you? I see a few of the guys still trying, and the rest mailing it in.

Dan H
08-17-2011, 10:14 PM
Voodoo, I think you're a great poster, but come on. They're one game over .500.

Ozzie doesn't have them in the thick of things, the ineptitude of the Tigers/Jndjans/Twins/Royals has them in the thick of things!

Ozzie is a major reason why they haven't already run away with this decision. Ozzie has given away dozens of outs (and several games) with stupid managing. Ozzie is why Dunn and Rios have so many at-bats, instead of Viciedo and De Aza. Ozzie is why Walker hasn't been fired.


I agree. The Sox remain in the hunt primarily because the division is weak. And the ineptitude of the AL Central has kept the Sox from making major changes to turn this team around. Instead no changes were made and the team probably won't win the division anyway.

voodoochile
08-17-2011, 10:37 PM
While I agree that the reason the Sox remain in the hunt is primarily because the division is weak, the fact remains the team could have folded up shop in May or June or any of the numerous times they got to .500 only to fall back and certainly a mentally weaker team would have said "**** it" after losing those 6 straight to NY and Boston, but the fact is the team has continued to plug along despite getting horrible production from two major pieces.

Call it what you will those remain the facts.

kittle42
08-17-2011, 10:51 PM
While I agree that the reason the Sox remain in the hunt is primarily because the division is weak, the fact remains the team could have folded up shop in May or June or any of the numerous times they got to .500 only to fall back and certainly a mentally weaker team would have said "**** it" after losing those 6 straight to NY and Boston, but the fact is the team has continued to plug along despite getting horrible production from two major pieces.

Call it what you will those remain the facts.

And as long as this organization's philosophy is to build a team to "compete" in a subpar division, this is all we have to look forward to.

JB98
08-17-2011, 10:52 PM
While I agree that the reason the Sox remain in the hunt is primarily because the division is weak, the fact remains the team could have folded up shop in May or June or any of the numerous times they got to .500 only to fall back and certainly a mentally weaker team would have said "**** it" after losing those 6 straight to NY and Boston, but the fact is the team has continued to plug along despite getting horrible production from two major pieces.

Call it what you will those remain the facts.

This team has put on a clinic in making mental mistakes this season. They shoot themselves in the foot constantly and relentlessly. I don't see how you can view the Sox as a mentally strong group this season.

Lip Man 1
08-17-2011, 11:12 PM
Munch:

Not sure what that last line was supposed to mean. I think blowing it up would be financial suicide for the organization given the lack of talent at the minor league level but if you also go back through the threads you'll see that when the Sox were losing 18 of 22 I went on the record as saying I don't care if they blow it up or try to buy their way out of it but pick a plan and stick with it come hell or high water.

This "contending while rebuilding" crap doesn't work.

And you didn't even attempt to get into my main point that regardless of all these different players being brought in the results have been pretty much the same...mediocrity. One of the few constants has been Kenny, Ozzie and the coaching staff.

Coincidence? Don't know for sure but it may be a big indicator that something is not right.

Lip

DirtySox
08-17-2011, 11:36 PM
Munch:

Not sure what that last line was supposed to mean. I think blowing it up would be financial suicide for the organization given the lack of talent at the minor league level but if you also go back through the threads you'll see that when the Sox were losing 18 of 22 I went on the record as saying I don't care if they blow it up or try to buy their way out of it but pick a plan and stick with it come hell or high water.

This "contending while rebuilding" crap doesn't work.

And you didn't even attempt to get into my main point that regardless of all these different players being brought in the results have been pretty much the same...mediocrity. One of the few constants has been Kenny, Ozzie and the coaching staff.

Coincidence? Don't know for sure but it may be a big indicator that something is not right.

Lip

Contending while rebuilding is a phrase used to merely placate fans. Bolstering your farm system while competitive by spending on the draft is feasible though, and many of the powerhouse organizations do it. The White Sox don't and will not it seems. The organization was dead last in draft spending this year. MLB teams combined to spend $236 million this year on amateur talent. The White Sox accounted for about 1.2% of that total spending with a measly $2.78 million.

CLUBHOUSE KID
08-17-2011, 11:45 PM
IF the Sox manage to win the division.
What changes, if any, do you want to see happen next year?
Is everything forgiven and is Ozzie, his coaching staff, and KW brought back?

Does it depend on what the Sox do in the postseason?

I am happy to see the Sox show some life, but I feel like we have seen this show too many times. The team goes from being dead to showing life to being dead in a span of a week or two.

I have been vocal that it is time for change but it is hard to argue for change if somehow they manage to win the division, right?

Same thing I said before. NOT OG fault. Get rid of Walker (just because nothing can be worse) and KW I really don't care as long as good players are signed, traded for, developed, etc. It really isn't Ozzies fault. And if it was, then in these past games, he should get credit, right?

CLUBHOUSE KID
08-17-2011, 11:55 PM
I assume your post isn't aimed at me, but I think the Sox can (and should) take a long hard look at how they've made their decisions without necessarily firing the management team.

My agenda is to have the Sox avoid these dreaded early season funks even if it's KW and OG running the show again next year.

I mean the White Sox the past few seasons play in a bad division. Detroit (1st) would be in 3rd in the East/West divisions. The White Sox, if they made it, aren't a play-off team they just made it there if that makes sense. If they make it, I'll still say the 2008 team was better.

Nellie_Fox
08-18-2011, 01:32 AM
Get rid of Walker (just because nothing can be worse)Nonsense. It can always get worse. Always.

34 Inch Stick
08-18-2011, 08:51 AM
They won't have to fire Ozzie. This will play out similar to last off season. He will demand an extension. JR will say he has a contract and a game of chicken will ensue. Maybe the Marlins will give up Logan Morrison for Ozzie in a trade of one tweeting mess for another.

Hitmen77
08-18-2011, 08:59 AM
I find it amazing that of thirty teams in MLB, the only two which are mis-managed are in Chicago. Maybe the drinking water needs to be tested.

:?: Who said this?

DumpJerry
08-18-2011, 09:14 AM
They won't have to fire Ozzie. This will play out similar to last off season. He will demand an extension. JR will say he has a contract and a game of chicken will ensue. Maybe the Marlins will give up Logan Morrison for Ozzie in a trade of one tweeting mess for another.
He already got the extension.

asindc
08-18-2011, 09:23 AM
:?: Who said this?

It has been implied by several posters. For instance, many posters have said that KW should be fired for signing Dunn and Rios, as if other (successful) GMs don't make such mistakes (if you call them mistakes this early in the game). If you look around the league, however, it doesn't take long to find another example of a GM striking out on more than one FA signing. For example, one GM has missed on his nine of his last ten FA signings:

Byung-Hyun Kim
Matt Clement
Edgar Renteria
J.D. Drew
Julio Lugo
Mike Cameron
Adrian Beltre
John Lackey
Bobby Jenks
Carl Crawford

Only Beltre worked out for them, and he stayed there only one year. GMs miss on FAs. It happens. Now, this doesn't mean that KW should not be replaced if the Sox can find someone better, but the implication that no GMs that are worth retaining would make such FA moves is nonsense.

Hitmen77
08-18-2011, 10:03 AM
It has been implied by several posters. For instance, many posters have said that KW should be fired for signing Dunn and Rios, as if other (successful) GMs don't make such mistakes (if you call them mistakes this early in the game). If you look around the league, however, it doesn't take long to find another example of a GM striking out on more than one FA signing. For example, one GM has missed on his nine of his last ten FA signings:

Byung-Hyun Kim
Matt Clement
Edgar Renteria
J.D. Drew
Julio Lugo
Mike Cameron
Adrian Beltre
John Lackey
Bobby Jenks
Carl Crawford

Only Beltre worked out for them, and he stayed there only one year. GMs miss on FAs. It happens. Now, this doesn't mean that KW should not be replaced if the Sox can find someone better, but the implication that no GMs that are worth retaining would make such FA moves is nonsense.

That's not the same as saying people think the only 2 mismanaged teams in baseball are in Chicago. Which poster said Baltimore, Houston, NY Mets, Dodgers, among others aren't mismanaged? :dunno:

As far as your example above, of course BoSox management has the benefit of being able to spend their way around bad signings/albatross contracts. There are probably only 2 teams in MLB that can easily do that. Because of this, it's tough to compare Red Sox FA signing success to that of most other teams.

Also, the Red Sox are on pace to win 98 games. This makes them even less comparable to how well people think the White Sox are managed.

FarmerAndy
08-18-2011, 03:33 PM
While I agree that the reason the Sox remain in the hunt is primarily because the division is weak, the fact remains the team could have folded up shop in May or June or any of the numerous times they got to .500 only to fall back and certainly a mentally weaker team would have said "**** it" after losing those 6 straight to NY and Boston, but the fact is the team has continued to plug along despite getting horrible production from two major pieces.

Call it what you will those remain the facts.

So what?

When I watch the Royals they don't look like a team that has folded either. They try. They play hard. BUT THEY JUST AREN'T THAT GOOD OF A TEAM.

The White Sox right now have the 9th best record out of 14 American League teams. They are in contention because of this weak division. And think about it, with the unbalanced schedule they have the luxury of playing this weak division a lot. Imagine how bad their record might look having to play the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays all the time.

This thread is about evaluating this team after the season if they win the division, right? That whole concept is flawed in the first place. You can't take arbitrary lines drawn on a map into account when evaluating how good a team is.

Example: Say the White Sox end up with 85 wins and take the division........ that doesn't make them any better or worse than if they end up with 85 wins and the Tigers take the division with 86 wins. An 85 win team is an 85 win team, division title or not.

I want the Sox to win the division. I will root for them in the playoffs if they make it. But that doesn't have an impact on how I will evaluate them in the off-season. They are what they are. And what they are is a mediocre-at-best team who is going to finish with a record in the bottom half of the American League, division title or not. That remains the fact.

I haven't even formed my opinion on what they should do in the off season yet. But when I do evaluate it all, things like whether they win the division or "they tried really hard" are not going to be part of the equation.

kittle42
08-18-2011, 03:49 PM
So what?

When I watch the Royals they don't look like a team that has folded either. They try. They play hard. BUT THEY JUST AREN'T THAT GOOD OF A TEAM.

The White Sox right now have the 9th best record out of 14 American League teams. They are in contention because of this weak division. And think about it, with the unbalanced schedule they have the luxury of playing this weak division a lot. Imagine how bad their record might look having to play the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays all the time.

This thread is about evaluating this team after the season if they win the division, right? That whole concept is flawed in the first place. You can't take arbitrary lines drawn on a map into account when evaluating how good a team is.

Example: Say the White Sox end up with 85 wins and take the division........ that doesn't make them any better or worse than if they end up with 85 wins and the Tigers take the division with 86 wins. An 85 win team is an 85 win team, division title or not.

I want the Sox to win the division. I will root for them in the playoffs if they make it. But that doesn't have an impact on how I will evaluate them in the off-season. They are what they are. And what they are is a mediocre-at-best team who is going to finish with a record in the bottom half of the American League, division title or not. That remains the fact.

I haven't even formed my opinion on what they should do in the off season yet. But when I do evaluate it all, things like whether they win the division or "they tried really hard" are not going to be part of the equation.

Great post.

pudge
08-18-2011, 05:37 PM
It has been implied by several posters. For instance, many posters have said that KW should be fired for signing Dunn and Rios, as if other (successful) GMs don't make such mistakes (if you call them mistakes this early in the game). If you look around the league, however, it doesn't take long to find another example of a GM striking out on more than one FA signing. For example, one GM has missed on his nine of his last ten FA signings:

Byung-Hyun Kim
Matt Clement
Edgar Renteria
J.D. Drew
Julio Lugo
Mike Cameron
Adrian Beltre
John Lackey
Bobby Jenks
Carl Crawford

Only Beltre worked out for them, and he stayed there only one year. GMs miss on FAs. It happens. Now, this doesn't mean that KW should not be replaced if the Sox can find someone better, but the implication that no GMs that are worth retaining would make such FA moves is nonsense.

I don't know if there was something else to the Edgar Renteria situation, but hitting .270+ and playing stellar SS for a playoff team isn't exactly a bad signing IMO. Julio Lugo didn't hit that well, but must have been doing something right to make 630 plate appearances for a World Champion. Same goes for JD Drew, who never lived up to his career potential, but was a contributor on a WS champ and won an All-Star game. Mike Cameron was 37, anything they got out of that was a total bonus.

As others have said, you make different decisions based on your environment and needs. BOS can plug holes with toilet paper if they want. I'm not so bothered by bad FA signings, because those happen, we've just had some really ugly ones lately.

KMcMahon817
08-18-2011, 05:38 PM
It has been implied by several posters. For instance, many posters have said that KW should be fired for signing Dunn and Rios, as if other (successful) GMs don't make such mistakes (if you call them mistakes this early in the game). If you look around the league, however, it doesn't take long to find another example of a GM striking out on more than one FA signing. For example, one GM has missed on his nine of his last ten FA signings:

Byung-Hyun Kim
Matt Clement
Edgar Renteria
J.D. Drew
Julio Lugo
Mike Cameron
Adrian Beltre
John Lackey
Bobby Jenks
Carl Crawford


You forgot Scutaro. That'd be considered a terrible contract around these parts.

asindc
08-18-2011, 05:48 PM
I don't know if there was something else to the Edgar Renteria situation, but hitting .270+ and playing stellar SS for a playoff team isn't exactly a bad signing IMO. Julio Lugo didn't hit that well, but must have been doing something right to make 630 plate appearances for a World Champion. Same goes for JD Drew, who never lived up to his career potential, but was a contributor on a WS champ and won an All-Star game. Mike Cameron was 37, anything they got out of that was a total bonus.

As others have said, you make different decisions based on your environment and needs. BOS can plug holes with toilet paper if they want. I'm not so bothered by bad FA signings, because those happen, we've just had some really ugly ones lately.

All the Boston fans I know would take exception with you putting "steller defense" and "Renteria" in the same sentence, and what Lugo did right is follow Renteria and get Epstein to pay him $9 million a year. The point I'm making is that GMs can only deal with the market available to them, just as you noted.

Do you really think Epstein preferred Cameron over any other CF in baseball? Of course not. Is Epstein the reason why Crawford is playing worse this year than Rios did last year? Nope. Is Epstein an idiot for signing Jenks? Well... you might have a point there. By the way, Boston fans will tell you that Drew contributed to a WS champion the same way Marte contributed to a WS champion here. After the player is acquired for lots o' guaranteed money, there is not much a GM can do, even if he has NESN money to spend.

blandman
08-18-2011, 06:00 PM
Munch:

Not sure what that last line was supposed to mean. I think blowing it up would be financial suicide for the organization given the lack of talent at the minor league level but if you also go back through the threads you'll see that when the Sox were losing 18 of 22 I went on the record as saying I don't care if they blow it up or try to buy their way out of it but pick a plan and stick with it come hell or high water.

This "contending while rebuilding" crap doesn't work.

And you didn't even attempt to get into my main point that regardless of all these different players being brought in the results have been pretty much the same...mediocrity. One of the few constants has been Kenny, Ozzie and the coaching staff.

Coincidence? Don't know for sure but it may be a big indicator that something is not right.

Lip

That is what I meant by how you feel about it. You don't want the "contending while rebuilding" or the "blow it up". There isn't really any other option, unless you're able to spend over mistakes (which we could never be able to do). If we put more money into the minors, the major league budget has to go down. We could stop acquiring these middling talent players and keep our minor leaguers, but then our on field product wouldn't compete. You can't be against blowing it up and then also against the route they're going. They're the only two routes available.

No sorry, I completely disagree. You have to fill some holes with young inexpensive talent unless you are the teams you mentioned. What inexpensive power producing 3B were available this year anyway?

Assuming Rios and Dunn are on the team Morel is the obvious choice for 3B unless you can actually name a guy who hits for power and average plays a solid 3B and was cheap too. Not many of those players out there from my experience, but maybe you can name some.

Also, I'm sorry Munch but this sounds like the same old same old from you. Rushing to judgment and taking a hard line stance on something that isn't nearly as black and white as you are making it. To call it one of the worst mistakes of KW's career is simply over the top ridiculous...

Sorry Voodoo, but that's not Brent Morel. That's the company line on Brent Morel based on three and a half weeks of major league production last September. It has no basis in reality, where scouts have pointed at Brent's completely non-existent plate discipline as a reason he will never be anything but a backup.

Again, it is his ROOKIE season. Recent stats are more telling for rookies than they are for seasoned veterans.

At every level of minor league ball, More struggled initially and then got acclimated, made adjustments and thrived. It looks like the same thing is happening now at the major league level.

His stats are skewed by a bad April, in which he hit .203. He hit .261 in June and over .280 in May, July and August. He's trending in the right direction and it would be beyond foolish to give up on him at this point.

He could luck out and hit .300 for the rest of the year and he'd still be one of the worst offensive players at his position in baseball. He has no power, no plate discipline, and he's not a speedster. Being able to field a position doesn't make you a good starting candidate, it's half the equation. That's just as asinine as the insistence that someone be given a position on the field solely based on their hitting. And what does it matter if he's a rookie? He doesn't have the talent to succeed. Are we to assume I'll magically become a power hitter? I'm a rookie too!

Daver
08-18-2011, 07:07 PM
That is what I meant by how you feel about it. You don't want the "contending while rebuilding" or the "blow it up". There isn't really any other option, unless you're able to spend over mistakes (which we could never be able to do). If we put more money into the minors, the major league budget has to go down. We could stop acquiring these middling talent players and keep our minor leaguers, but then our on field product wouldn't compete. You can't be against blowing it up and then also against the route they're going. They're the only two routes available.



Sorry Voodoo, but that's not Brent Morel. That's the company line on Brent Morel based on three and a half weeks of major league production last September. It has no basis in reality, where scouts have pointed at Brent's completely non-existent plate discipline as a reason he will never be anything but a backup.



He could luck out and hit .300 for the rest of the year and he'd still be one of the worst offensive players at his position in baseball. He has no power, no plate discipline, and he's not a speedster. Being able to field a position doesn't make you a good starting candidate, it's half the equation. That's just as asinine as the insistence that someone be given a position on the field solely based on their hitting. And what does it matter if he's a rookie? He doesn't have the talent to succeed. Are we to assume I'll magically become a power hitter? I'm a rookie too!

This is classic Munch right here, the same towering baseball intellect that can make HOF preparations for minor league pitchers, while most rational people realize that pitching prospects have very little actual value.

Keep delivering pure comedy gold Munch.

asindc
08-18-2011, 07:17 PM
You forgot Scutaro. That'd be considered a terrible contract around these parts.

I also forgot Dice-K.

blandman
08-18-2011, 07:27 PM
This is classic Munch right here, the same towering baseball intellect that can make HOF preparations for minor league pitchers, while most rational people realize that pitching prospects have very little actual value.

Keep delivering pure comedy gold Munch.

That kid's just started his career, and is pretty lights out FWIW.

And if repeating scouting reports when the bulk are in direct conflict with the team's perspective is comedic gold to you, so be it. It's not like I'm not laughing when people say Morel's gonna be anything but a late game replacement for the bulk of his career.

Edit: what a minute...most people realize that pitching prospects have very little value? HAHAHAHAHAHA.....oh man. Too funny. You almost had me going there....

Lip Man 1
08-18-2011, 08:12 PM
Is De Los Santos in the Hall yet?

:D:

Lip

SI1020
08-18-2011, 08:17 PM
Great post. I agree.

Daver
08-18-2011, 08:24 PM
That kid's just started his career, and is pretty lights out FWIW.

And if repeating scouting reports when the bulk are in direct conflict with the team's perspective is comedic gold to you, so be it.


How much of Morel's minor league play did you see, or are you forming an opinion based solely on what you have not actually seen?

And if you are even trying to imply that I would back the club's perspective, then you are more delusional than I ever would have pegged you for.

Keep chasing paper windmills Munch, it amuses us more than you know.

blandman
08-18-2011, 09:14 PM
Is De Los Santos in the Hall yet?

:D:

Lip

He hasn't retired yet. duh. :tongue:

How much of Morel's minor league play did you see, or are you forming an opinion based solely on what you have not actually seen?

And if you are even trying to imply that I would back the club's perspective, then you are more delusional than I ever would have pegged you for.

Keep chasing paper windmills Munch, it amuses us more than you know.

I saw some, but on top of that it's hard to ignore the ratings when across the board we're saying something everyone else isn't seeing. Especially with how bad our teams minor league talent evaluation is, I think it would be obvious to most not to buy into it.

blandman
08-18-2011, 09:16 PM
So what?

When I watch the Royals they don't look like a team that has folded either. They try. They play hard. BUT THEY JUST AREN'T THAT GOOD OF A TEAM.

The White Sox right now have the 9th best record out of 14 American League teams. They are in contention because of this weak division. And think about it, with the unbalanced schedule they have the luxury of playing this weak division a lot. Imagine how bad their record might look having to play the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays all the time.

This thread is about evaluating this team after the season if they win the division, right? That whole concept is flawed in the first place. You can't take arbitrary lines drawn on a map into account when evaluating how good a team is.

Example: Say the White Sox end up with 85 wins and take the division........ that doesn't make them any better or worse than if they end up with 85 wins and the Tigers take the division with 86 wins. An 85 win team is an 85 win team, division title or not.

I want the Sox to win the division. I will root for them in the playoffs if they make it. But that doesn't have an impact on how I will evaluate them in the off-season. They are what they are. And what they are is a mediocre-at-best team who is going to finish with a record in the bottom half of the American League, division title or not. That remains the fact.

I haven't even formed my opinion on what they should do in the off season yet. But when I do evaluate it all, things like whether they win the division or "they tried really hard" are not going to be part of the equation.

This is a really good post.

DirtySox
08-18-2011, 09:38 PM
This is a really good post.

+1. Probably the best post in this thread.

voodoochile
08-18-2011, 09:46 PM
So what?

When I watch the Royals they don't look like a team that has folded either. They try. They play hard. BUT THEY JUST AREN'T THAT GOOD OF A TEAM.

The White Sox right now have the 9th best record out of 14 American League teams. They are in contention because of this weak division. And think about it, with the unbalanced schedule they have the luxury of playing this weak division a lot. Imagine how bad their record might look having to play the Yankees, Red Sox, and Rays all the time.

This thread is about evaluating this team after the season if they win the division, right? That whole concept is flawed in the first place. You can't take arbitrary lines drawn on a map into account when evaluating how good a team is.

Example: Say the White Sox end up with 85 wins and take the division........ that doesn't make them any better or worse than if they end up with 85 wins and the Tigers take the division with 86 wins. An 85 win team is an 85 win team, division title or not.

I want the Sox to win the division. I will root for them in the playoffs if they make it. But that doesn't have an impact on how I will evaluate them in the off-season. They are what they are. And what they are is a mediocre-at-best team who is going to finish with a record in the bottom half of the American League, division title or not. That remains the fact.

I haven't even formed my opinion on what they should do in the off season yet. But when I do evaluate it all, things like whether they win the division or "they tried really hard" are not going to be part of the equation.

Well several people like your post and I admit it's well thought out but I will merely add one point that an 85 win team seemed all but impossible in early May and if they were indeed to get there AND win the division in the process one could make a strong argument that it supports bringing back the management team especially in light of the struggles of Rios and Dunn...

Frater Perdurabo
08-18-2011, 09:54 PM
Well several people like your post and I admit it's well thought out but I will merely add one point that an 85 win team seemed all but impossible in early May and if they were indeed to get there AND win the division in the process one could make a strong argument that it supports bringing back the management team especially in light of the struggles of Rios and Dunn...

I'm going to stick with my pre-season, and long-standing, insistence that a third consecutive year of failing to win the division would merit Ozzie being fired.

But the division is so bad this year, and Ozzie's managing has been so poor, that even if the Sox won the division with fewer than 90 wins, I would not argue with Ozzie getting canned.

A. Cavatica
08-18-2011, 10:29 PM
Well several people like your post and I admit it's well thought out but I will merely add one point that an 85 win team seemed all but impossible in early May and if they were indeed to get there AND win the division in the process one could make a strong argument that it supports bringing back the management team especially in light of the struggles of Rios and Dunn...

Go look at the pre-season predictions. I don't think anyone picked the Sox for as few as 85 wins.

This team should've been a lot better, and Ozzie is right up there with Dunn and Rios for deserving blame.

kittle42
08-18-2011, 10:33 PM
Well several people like your post and I admit it's well thought out but I will merely add one point that an 85 win team seemed all but impossible in early May and if they were indeed to get there AND win the division in the process one could make a strong argument that it supports bringing back the management team especially in light of the struggles of Rios and Dunn...

That same management team was responsible for the 11-22 stretch, too. 85 win team is 85 win team.

Johnny Mostil
08-18-2011, 10:54 PM
Go look at the pre-season predictions. I don't think anyone picked the Sox for as few as 85 wins.

This team should've been a lot better, and Ozzie is right up there with Dunn and Rios for deserving blame.

Didn't PECOTA peg them at 80-82? :duck: (I've no idea what the reasoning was.)

JB98
08-18-2011, 11:00 PM
That same management team was responsible for the 11-22 stretch, too. 85 win team is 85 win team.

This management team has presided over multiple slow starts, too. Five straight years of slow starts can't be blamed 100 percent on the players because there has been plenty of roster turnover in that time frame.

kittle42
08-18-2011, 11:13 PM
This management team has presided over multiple slow starts, too. Five straight years of slow starts can't be blamed 100 percent on the players because there has been plenty of roster turnover in that time frame.

In other news, this team ain't winning 85 games or a division, anyway.

JB98
08-18-2011, 11:15 PM
In other news, this team ain't winning 85 games or a division, anyway.

Agree completely.

Brian26
08-18-2011, 11:23 PM
In other news, this team ain't winning 85 games or a division, anyway.

Not a chance. It's wishful thinking on our parts. Too many holes in the lineup from top to bottom.

hi im skot
08-18-2011, 11:24 PM
Not a chance. It's wishful thinking on our parts. Too many holes in the lineup from top to bottom.

Another season of wasting very solid pitching.

Nellie_Fox
08-19-2011, 12:46 AM
I'm going to stick with my pre-season, and long-standing, insistence that a third consecutive year of failing to win the division would merit Ozzie being fired.

But the division is so bad this year, and Ozzie's managing has been so poor, that even if the Sox won the division with fewer than 90 wins, I would not argue with Ozzie getting canned.No, really? Boy, that's out of the blue coming from you!

doublem23
08-19-2011, 01:12 AM
Another season of wasting very solid pitching.

Just like the late 90s/early 00s when we had a dynamite offense but couldn't hold teams to under 10 runs per game.

kittle42
08-19-2011, 01:40 AM
Just like the late 90s/early 00s when we had a dynamite offense but couldn't hold teams to under 10 runs per game.

Butter, butter, Parque.

Frater Perdurabo
08-19-2011, 08:19 AM
No, really? Boy, that's out of the blue coming from you!

What can I say; we all regress to the mean?

asindc
08-19-2011, 08:31 AM
Didn't PECOTA peg them at 80-82? :duck: (I've no idea what the reasoning was.)

I wonder if the same projection model pegged these performances from Dunn and Rios.:scratch:

Johnny Mostil
08-19-2011, 12:07 PM
I wonder if the same projection model pegged these performances from Dunn and Rios.:scratch:

Heh. Doubtful. (Though, again, as noted, I've no idea what the reasoning was.)

Nellie_Fox
08-19-2011, 02:26 PM
What can I say; we all regress to the mean?Wouldn't you have had to stray from the mean in order to regress to it? :wink:

Frater Perdurabo
08-19-2011, 02:29 PM
Wouldn't you have had to stray from the mean in order to regress to it? :wink:

We are what we are, no? :tongue:

FarmerAndy
08-19-2011, 03:09 PM
Didn't PECOTA peg them at 80-82? :duck: (I've no idea what the reasoning was.)

Reasoning? It's a computer algorithm.

Not "deadly accurate" as BP advertises, but still a little more trusty than sportswriters and their predictions that they pull out of the air.