PDA

View Full Version : Bill Veeck would be pleased!


Mr. Chicken
11-04-2003, 11:25 AM
The hiring of Ozzie Guillen is just the thing this league, let alone this team needs. The attitude he brings to the plate is one rarely found in today's era of overpaid, underachieving megastars.
I say bring back the excitement, the fun, the Eddy Gaedel's, the exploding scoreboards, the Ozzie Guillen's. I personally would love seeing Frank Thomas attempt a bunt...if anything maybe he would be humbled a bit. The White Sox historically are not like any other ball team...let's stop trying to be the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Cubs, and let's start being who we truly are...the base-stealin', hard-chargin' go go white sox. Give 'em hell Ozzie!

voodoochile
11-04-2003, 11:28 AM
Well, viewing it as a promotional hire puts it in a whole new light. Maybe JR is letting his inner showman out...

crector
11-04-2003, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Mr. Chicken
let's start being who we truly are...the base-stealin', hard-chargin' go go white sox. Give 'em hell Ozzie!


With this team's lack of speedsters, all of this base stealing that Ozzie wants is going to lead to an awful lot of unnecessary outs leading to lots of unnecessary losses.

poorme
11-04-2003, 11:38 AM
Given Veeck's winning %, I figured this to be a thread ripping the hiring. At least Veeck realized that bad and boring is worse than bad and interesting.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-04-2003, 11:39 AM
Show biz has always been Job 1 within the White Sox organization. Ozzie is the newest sideshow, and one that promises to be quite popular, too. We're talking about the bearded lady of professional sports, the Chicago White Sox.

You know who Reinsdorf ought to get for the new mascot? A carnival barker. It would be *perfect* for this outfit. :smile:

Too bad Ringmaster Ned passed away. Is Frazier Thomas available?

:)

FanOf14
11-04-2003, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by crector
With this team's lack of speedsters, all of this base stealing that Ozzie wants is going to lead to an awful lot of unnecessary outs leading to lots of unnecessary losses.

I think we have more speed than we know about because it was never used. When Maggs or CLee would run, they weren't as slow as one would expect a big guy to be. While we do have more than our share of slow-footed players, I think if utilized certain players' abilities properly, we could have a few more speed demons than we saw this past season.

I am all for bring speed back. So far, the long ball hasn't won crap for this team. Sorry but I don't consider a division crown followed by 3 and out much if anything at all. But, to each, his own.

dickallen15
11-04-2003, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Show biz has always been Job 1 within the White Sox organization. Ozzie is the newest sideshow, and one that promises to be quite popular, too. We're talking about the bearded lady of professional sports, the Chicago White Sox.

You know who Reinsdorf ought to get for the new mascot? A carnival barker. It would be *perfect* for this outfit. :smile:

Too bad Ringmaster Ned passed away. Is Frazier Thomas available?

:)

Frazier Thomas-----------He gawn

Dadawg_77
11-04-2003, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by FanOf14
I think we have more speed than we know about because it was never used. When Maggs or CLee would run, they weren't as slow as one would expect a big guy to be. While we do have more than our share of slow-footed players, I think if utilized certain players' abilities properly, we could have a few more speed demons than we saw this past season.

I am all for bring speed back. So far, the long ball hasn't won crap for this team. Sorry but I don't consider a division crown followed by 3 and out much if anything at all. But, to each, his own.

And what did we win in the "golden era" of White Sox baseball in the 50's and 60's?

voodoochile
11-04-2003, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by FanOf14
I think we have more speed than we know about because it was never used. When Maggs or CLee would run, they weren't as slow as one would expect a big guy to be. While we do have more than our share of slow-footed players, I think if utilized certain players' abilities properly, we could have a few more speed demons than we saw this past season.

I am all for bring speed back. So far, the long ball hasn't won crap for this team. Sorry but I don't consider a division crown followed by 3 and out much if anything at all. But, to each, his own.

Lee was a solid baserunner, but Maggs got thrown out so many times early in the year, that they revoked his green light (I am guessing because he stopped trying to steal after sometime in June).

Some of the players are just flat slow (PK, Crede, Thomas)

Some are old or have been injured (Alomar, Valentin, Everett)

Some are bad at stealing bases (Valentin, Maggs, Josh Paul (never hurts to throw a shot at Versatile when given a chance))

Some have all the tools and actually are good at stealing bases (Lee, Harris, Olivo (maybe, time will tell))

Since only two of those good players are starters and the jury is out on one of them, the team should not suddenly change it's philosophy, IMO unless there is a major roster change.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-04-2003, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by dickallen15
Frazier Thomas-----------He gawn

Ray Rayner?

Chulveston the Duck?

How about Chauncey? He never said much, but his do-it-yourself projects were always far superior to whatever Ray created with his glue-smeared hands. :smile:

I've got it! Garfield Goose, King of the United States! Problem solved.

:gulp:

FanOf14
11-04-2003, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Since only two of those good players are starters and the jury is out on one of them, the team should not suddenly change it's philosophy, IMO unless there is a major roster change.

Actually, I think we have Maggs, Lee, Centerfield (since it was a cross between Harris and Everett out there I am counting that position until it's filled), Olivo (that boy has hustle) and Valentin (when healthy) are 5 starters that can run. They just need to be taught how to run smart instead of out of innings. They have the tools, they just don't know how to get the most out of them. Get that through their hard heads and the speed game will be looking up.

poorme
11-04-2003, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
And what did we win in the "golden era" of White Sox baseball in the 50's and 60's?

What a tired refrain....the Yankees won every year between 1949 and 1964. The White Sox won in 59, the 111 game winning Indians won in 54.

The Yankees won because they bought all the best players.

CubKilla
11-04-2003, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by poorme
The Yankees won because they bought all the best players.

Nothing's changed :angry:

Dadawg_77
11-04-2003, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by CubKilla
Nothing's changed :angry:


How did they buy them if FA wasn't around? They got young kids in their system and won with them. True they out spent aquiring farm talent but they still had to find the talent.

The Yankees also didn't play small run ball.

poorme
11-04-2003, 12:07 PM
Simple: they bought all the best amatuers and minor leaguers. If I could cherry-pick the best talent every year, it would be a chinch.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-04-2003, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Simple: they bought all the best amatuers and minor leaguers. If I could cherry-pick the best talent every year, it would be a chinch.

It's only a "cinch" if the Yankees are smart enough to "cherry pick" position players that live up to their BRONX BOMBERS tradition. You are still trying to convince us it was glovework that made the Yankees champions, not their bats.

It's silly on its face. The Sox *didn't* beat the Yankees. Our pitching was good enough, but our hitting wasn't. Glovework didn't make the difference. Hitting did. You aren't seriously suggesting the gold glovers of the Go-Go Sox *beat* the New York Yankees, are you?

poorme
11-04-2003, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
The Yankees also didn't play small run ball.

I don't know where to find team historical sac hits, but I found league leaders:

year
64 Bobby_Richardson_(NYY) 16
62 Bobby_Richardson_(NYY) 20
59 Tony_Kubek*_(NYY) 13
57 Gil_McDougald_(NYY) 19
52 Phil_Rizzuto+_(NYY) 23
51 Phil_Rizzuto+_(NYY) 26
50 Phil_Rizzuto+_(NYY) 19
49 Phil_Rizzuto+_(NYY) 25

poorme
11-04-2003, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
You are still trying to convince us it was glovework that made the Yankees champions, not their bats.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm telling you that world championship teams are good in ALL ASPECTS of the game. HITTING, PITCHING, AND DEFENSE.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-04-2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm telling you that world championship teams are good in ALL ASPECTS of the game. HITTING, PITCHING, AND DEFENSE.

Are they equal in value? If not, please rank them for us.

Please remember, the 8 position players must both hit and play in the field, too.

Grobber33
11-04-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by dickallen15
Frazier Thomas-----------He gawn


Ray Rayner is still with us!!!

poorme
11-04-2003, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Are they equal in value? If not, please rank them for us.

Please remember, the 8 position players must both hit and play in the field, too.


You're trying to make it a little more simple than it is in reality.

My rough guess:

50% pitching
40% hitting
10% defense

But when you pit two of the top teams against eachother, every single % counts. I would say the worst defensive team in the league has virtually no chance at a championship.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-04-2003, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by poorme
You're trying to make it a little more simple than it is in reality.

My rough guess:

50% pitching
40% hitting
10% defense

But when you pit two of the top teams against eachother, every single % counts. I would say the worst defensive team in the league has virtually no chance at a championship.

No quibbling from me over the percentages. I agree with your general idea. Pitching is the single greatest component, hitting is #2, and defensive prowess falls way below the others.

So wouldn't it logically follow that you choose the 8 position players far more for their hitting ability rather than their defense prowess?

They have to do both, right? The rules of baseball require it. So explain again how "pitching and defense" wins ballgames. By your own reckoning, it doesn't add up.

"Pitching" wins ballgames. "Pitching and offensive production" wins ballgames. "Pitching and defense" does not win ballgames. Earl Weaver knew it. That's why he mentioned 3-run homers, not gold glovers, as the key to his success.

poorme
11-04-2003, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
They have to do both, right? The rules of baseball require it. So explain again how "pitching and defense" wins ballgames. By your own reckoning, it doesn't add up.

I don't think I ever said pitching and defense can win a championship by themselves. They are a necessary, but not sufficient criteria of championship caliber clubs.

I don't think the ghost of John McGraw could manage this team to a championship. As a fan, I would get more enjoyment out of a team that didn't make mental mistakes and could generate a run on pure will once in a while.

Paulwny
11-04-2003, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge

So wouldn't it logically follow that you choose the 8 position players far more for their hitting ability rather than their defense prowess?



1b, 3b, lf, rf--hitters, power
c,ss,cf--defense
2nd base-- toss up

nasox
11-04-2003, 08:47 PM
yes he would be pleased. I hope we win it all just in time for the movie about him

minastirith67
11-04-2003, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I don't think I ever said pitching and defense can win a championship by themselves. They are a necessary, but not sufficient criteria of championship caliber clubs.

I don't think the ghost of John McGraw could manage this team to a championship. As a fan, I would get more enjoyment out of a team that didn't make mental mistakes and could generate a run on pure will once in a while.

How do you generate a run on "pure will"? I mean you can put a really crappy team out there and they won't be able to "will" a run in.

TornLabrum
11-04-2003, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by poorme
Simple: they bought all the best amatuers and minor leaguers. If I could cherry-pick the best talent every year, it would be a chinch.

They used the Kansas City A's as their AAAA farm club.

crector
11-05-2003, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
They used the Kansas City A's as their AAAA farm club.

Just like the Pittsburgh Pirates are the Cubs' AAAA farm club today?