PDA

View Full Version : Manuel's Comments Following The Game


RKMeibalane
08-19-2003, 12:01 AM
After the game, Jerry Manuel's press conference was shown on ESPN. Someone asked him about his recent spat with Frank regarding home runs and swinging for the fences. Here was Manuel's response:

:jerry

"He had four runs batted in tonight. That's what I'm happy about."

Hello, Jerry! Did you happen to notice that two of those RBI's were the result of Frank driving himself in?

I can understand why Manuel doesn't want his players thinking about home runs, but there is another problem that he continues to overlook: the Sox continue to have problems getting people on base in front their power hitters. For the longest time this season, Frank was without a home run that came with men on base. His first nine homers of the season were solo shots.

Even since Alomar and Everett joined the club, the Sox are still vulnerable because nobody gets on base. Frank and Maggs are leading the team in OBP at .385. The problem is that those guys should be driving in the table-setters, not setting the table themselves.

Rick Suttcliffe mentioned that Maggs may not reach the one hundred mark in RBIs. Yet he is hitting well over .300 for the season. To me, that says there aren't enough people on base ahead of him.

This needs to be addressed, and soon. Carlos Lee has cooled off again, it seems. I don't know if there's anything that can be done about that. They may just have to wait until he gets hot again. Maggs hit the ball hard tonight, but he also hasn't been right recently. Robbie Alomar did a nice job tonight, but his offense has also been streaky.

The top of the lineup will become increasingly important if the Sox are to reach the postseason. Getting men on base makes a big difference, because pitchers are forced to work differently when runners are aboard.

Tragg
08-19-2003, 12:15 AM
:jerry

I would like to also compliment Mike Scocia on his brilliant 9th inning strategy. Not only is pitching to a batter with a runner on 3rd and 1st and 2nd open a great idea, it makes even more sense when that batter is Frank Thomas - with such a poor hitting approach, as Frank Thomas has, he must be pitched to.
Now shut up and let me get some sleep - that damn crowd woke me up in the 7th.

Lip Man 1
08-19-2003, 01:21 AM
In my interview with Les today he correctly pointed out that the real problem with the White Sox is all they do is hit home runs. He said they can't manufacture them. When they don't hit home runs they lose.

And he also said the Cubs offense is pathetic.

Lip

TornLabrum
08-19-2003, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
In my interview with Les today he correctly pointed out that the real problem with the White Sox is all they do is hit home runs. He said they can't manufacture them. When they don't hit home runs they lose.

And he also said the Cubs offense is pathetic.

Lip

It's not that they can't. They scored 10 runs without a home run before the last losing streak. It's just that they keep swinging from the heels.

jeremyb1
08-19-2003, 03:15 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
In my interview with Les today he correctly pointed out that the real problem with the White Sox is all they do is hit home runs. He said they can't manufacture them. When they don't hit home runs they lose.

And he also said the Cubs offense is pathetic.

Lip

I don't think its an issue of manufacturing runs, its simply that throughout the season they have not hit the ball with runners in scoring position. Call it pressing too much or simply just bad luck but there's no logical reason for a team to perform so poorly once runners reach base. They wouldn't need to manufacture runs if they could simply hit when it counts.

southpaw40
08-19-2003, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Rick Suttcliffe mentioned that Maggs may not......

Has anyone other than myself noticed what an anti-Sox, Royals-loving moron Rick Sutcliffe is? I thought I was watching a Royals game for the first couple of innings last night!

bobj4400
08-19-2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by southpaw40
Has anyone other than myself noticed what an anti-Sox, Royals-loving moron Rick Sutcliffe is? I thought I was watching a Royals game for the first couple of innings last night!

Sutcliffe is the Royals announcer when he isnt doing ESPN games, so I can see where the bias comes from...

TornLabrum
08-19-2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by bobj4400
Sutcliffe is the Royals announcer when he isnt doing ESPN games, so I can see where the bias comes from...

That bias is supposed to disappear when you do a national telecast. Even as big a homer as Jack Brickhouse played it down the middle in the '59 World Series when he did the national TV (on NBC) with Vin Scully.

MisterB
08-19-2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I don't think its an issue of manufacturing runs, its simply that throughout the season they have not hit the ball with runners in scoring position. Call it pressing too much or simply just bad luck but there's no logical reason for a team to perform so poorly once runners reach base. They wouldn't need to manufacture runs if they could simply hit when it counts.

The Sox are 10th in all of baseball in OPS with runners in scoring position, but only Detroit and Oakland have had fewer at bats with RISP. The problem is they don't get the runners into scoring position in the first place. This points to a lack of fundamentals (bunting runners over) and situational hitting (hitting behind the runner, etc.).

jeremyb1
08-19-2003, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
The Sox are 10th in all of baseball in OPS with runners in scoring position, but only Detroit and Oakland have had fewer at bats with RISP. The problem is they don't get the runners into scoring position in the first place. This points to a lack of fundamentals (bunting runners over) and situational hitting (hitting behind the runner, etc.).

I disagree. A base hit with a runner on first gets that runner to third base the majority of the time. If you hit with runners on base, you don't need to bunt or hit behind the runner to advance the runner on the basepaths.

MarqSox
08-19-2003, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
That bias is supposed to disappear when you do a national telecast. Even as big a homer as Jack Brickhouse played it down the middle in the '59 World Series when he did the national TV (on NBC) with Vin Scully.

You're right, but I'm sure that's harder to do than it looks. If Hawk were to ever do a national game, he could probably refrain from rooting, but his biases would still come out in comments here and there. It's just hard to avoid.

Still, I think Joe Buck does a great job staying neutral on his Fox broadcasts. I know he only works for the Cardinals in a limited capacity nowadays, but given his father's close ties to the club, it's impressive how evenly he calls games when the Cardinals are on.

Dadawg_77
08-19-2003, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by MisterB
The Sox are 10th in all of baseball in OPS with runners in scoring position, but only Detroit and Oakland have had fewer at bats with RISP. The problem is they don't get the runners into scoring position in the first place. This points to a lack of fundamentals (bunting runners over) and situational hitting (hitting behind the runner, etc.).


LOL, man I love it when people who have no clue talk. Why are you trying to fit a circle into a square slot here? You totally missed the first step there. The Sox are horrible at getting people on base. They have a horrible grasp of the strike zone, at from what I have seen. If the Sox improve this fundamental, and this is a fundamental, the offense should improve ten fold. The Sox are 19th in OBP in the MLB. That doesn't lead to many scoring opportunities. The only reason the Sox are somewhat producing is a decent slugging percentage of .433 8th in MLB. Remember the proverb it better to remain silent and let people guess you are a fool, then talk and confirm it.

Randar68
08-19-2003, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I disagree. A base hit with a runner on first gets that runner to third base the majority of the time. If you hit with runners on base, you don't need to bunt or hit behind the runner to advance the runner on the basepaths.

Not on this team. How many times have the Sox had 3 singles in an inning this year and gotten nothing out of it. I would bet it's in the double digits.

MisterB
08-19-2003, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
LOL, man I love it when people who have no clue talk. Why are you trying to fit a circle into a square slot here? You totally missed the first step there. The Sox are horrible at getting people on base. They have a horrible grasp of the strike zone, at from what I have seen. If the Sox improve this fundamental, and this is a fundamental, the offense should improve ten fold. The Sox are 19th in OBP in the MLB. That doesn't lead to many scoring opportunities. The only reason the Sox are somewhat producing is a decent slugging percentage of .433 8th in MLB. Remember the proverb it better to remain silent and let people guess you are a fool, then talk and confirm it.

Jeremy stated that the Sox are bad with RISP, I gave a fact that refutes that claim, and offered a suggestion that might improve that situation. OBP never came into the conversation.

Also, as you state, the Sox are 19th in OBP, yet they're 28th in number of AB's with RISP, which means there are 9 teams with lower OBP then us who get more runners into scoring position. Sounds like getting runners into scoring position is a problem for us, no?

To paraphrase another proverb: Let he who has a clue cast the first stone.

harwar
08-19-2003, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by bobj4400
Sutcliffe is the Royals announcer when he isnt doing ESPN games, so I can see where the bias comes from...

Just as a matter of being factual,Sutcliffe is not the royals everyday play-by-play or color guy.The only time he does royals games in for espn.

Dadawg_77
08-19-2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
Jeremy stated that the Sox are bad with RISP, I gave a fact that refutes that claim, and offered a suggestion that might improve that situation. OBP never came into the conversation.

Also, as you state, the Sox are 19th in OBP, yet they're 28th in number of AB's with RISP, which means there are 9 teams with lower OBP then us who get more runners into scoring position. Sounds like getting runners into scoring position is a problem for us, no?

To paraphrase another proverb: Let he who has a clue cast the first stone.

Man, a person who can't comprehend his own writing. You didn't prove anything just a bunch of mumble jumbo you are trying to use to prove your weak point that the Sox don't bunt enough and hit to many home runs. You stated that the Sox can't move runners into scoring position and then suggested the main reason was they couldn't play "fundamental" baseball. By fundamental you meant bunting, hitting behind the runner or giving up outs to move a guy one base further. When in fact it is they just aren't getting on base. Secondly, you use a very poor choice of a stat to prove your point At Bat not Plate Appearance or something else more descriptive. Sacrifices, walks, hp don't count as an at bat, so your interpretation completely ignores any effect "fundamental" play by the Sox has. At least when making a bad point use the right means to make it.

MisterB
08-19-2003, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Man, a person who can't comprehend his own writing. You didn't prove anything just a bunch of mumble jumbo you are trying to use to prove your weak point that the Sox don't bunt enough and hit to many home runs. You stated that the Sox can't move runners into scoring position and then suggested the main reason was they couldn't play "fundamental" baseball. By fundamental you meant bunting, hitting behind the runner or giving up outs to move a guy one base further. When in fact it is they just aren't getting on base. Secondly, you use a very poor choice of a stat to prove your point At Bat not Plate Appearance or something else more descriptive. Sacrifices, walks, hp don't count as an at bat, so your interpretation completely ignores any effect "fundamental" play by the Sox has. At least when making a bad point use the right means to make it.

Here's your reading comprehension quiz:

1) Where in my first post did OBP come up?

2) Where in my first post do I mention 'hitting too many home runs'?

3) Where, in the post I was initially responding to, were either of these topics brought up?

Since you didn't 'comprehend' it the first time, I'll restate: Jeremy brought up a specific point about hitting with RISP, and I brought up a specific stat refuting it. I neither included nor excluded any other factors. You read something into the post that wasn't there (that 'fundamental baseball' meant no home runs) and proceeded to insult me for it. I will admit that AB's with RISP isn't the best stat to use to counter your claim, but guess what? With runners in scoring position the Sox are: 12th in hit batsmen, 23rd in sac flies, 26th in sac bunts, and 28th in walks. Which means the Sox are getting more of their plate appearances credited as at-bats than most teams, which makes my point even stronger.

For the record:
I do think the Sox need to get more men on base.
I have no problem with the long ball, just that the guys who are less likely to drive in a runner from first use their heads once in a while and get the guy over so someone else can drive him in.
I do not appreciate people putting words in my mouth and then jumping down my throat after them.

Thank You.