PDA

View Full Version : This week's sound off


Dadawg_77
11-24-2003, 10:34 AM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=6&id=2409

I wrote the thing, so wondering if any one has read it and what they think.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-25-2003, 09:47 AM
A nice analysis and definitely worth looking over and giving some thought. Clearly the numbers don't make Jerry into quite the Tinkerer he appeared to be in 2003.

Here are a few points to consider to explain some of the numbers.

1.) Manuel stopped rolling out a new lineup everyday sometime shortly after the all-star break. IIRC, KW made some veiled threats about needing to use the guys we've got more often and suddenly the tinkering came to an abrupt halt. Obviously this effected the season-long trend.

2.) Might Manuel have had less need to tinker than other managers that had to use substitute players because of injuries or major trades? The Sox were lucky to be healthy in 2003 and only the trades for Alomar and Everett had any effect on the everyday lineup.

3.) The indictment of Manuel as dugout tactician seems spot-on. The team got progressively less aggressive advancing runners, whether by steals, bunts, or run and hit. The Sox' league-leading number of GIDP is another indictment of either the manager or the ballplayers, but probably both, for not doing more to cover over a major weakness in the Sox attack.

He'll always be the Tinkererer to me.

:gulp:

Dadawg_77
11-25-2003, 12:55 PM
Not sure but off the top of my head Jerry was never a big tinker in past years. I just think he always tinkered in the wrong way last year. One thing the Sox did was when trying to move a runner over they bunted 34% of the time which led the AL, and gave up too many outs. If the Sox aren't fast enough to steal a base then just stay there. The problems with GDPs was Konerko couldn't handle a breaking ball from a righty last year if his life depended on it. Mags and Lee has always hit double plays, last year wasn't a fluke. I think they try to pull the ball way too much which hurts them up at the plate.

2> True, the worse you are the more moves you will make because you are reaching for something to work.

Hangar18
11-25-2003, 01:16 PM
nice job patrick, tells you how dangerous Perceptions can be

Iwritecode
11-25-2003, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=6&id=2409

I wrote the thing, so wondering if any one has read it and what they think.

Where did you get the stats on the # of lineups used? Not that I'm questioning them, I'm just curious who takes the time to do something like that...

Dadawg_77
11-25-2003, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
Where did you get the stats on the # of lineups used? Not that I'm questioning them, I'm just curious who takes the time to do something like that...

The Bill James Handbook.

pudge
11-25-2003, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


1.) Manuel stopped rolling out a new lineup everyday sometime shortly after the all-star break. IIRC, KW made some veiled threats about needing to use the guys we've got more often and suddenly the tinkering came to an abrupt halt. Obviously this effected the season-long trend.



That's exactly the first thing that came to my mind. He really cut down on lineups in the second half, which means the vast majority of his lineup tinkering was in the first half (the half when we blew the season).

Dadawg_77
11-25-2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by pudge
That's exactly the first thing that came to my mind. He really cut down on lineups in the second half, which means the vast majority of his lineup tinkering was in the first half (the half when we blew the season).

This might be true, but that begs the question of what came first the lineups or the bad play?

PaleHoseGeorge
11-25-2003, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
This might be true, but that begs the question of what came first the lineups or the bad play?

We played much better in the second-half. It wasn't till the Cotts Fiasco in NYC and the Paniaqua Massacre in mid-September that the first-place Sox were finally sunk. Manuel's fingerprints are all over the failures of the 2003 team.

Dadawg_77
11-25-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
We played much better in the second-half. It wasn't till the Cotts Fiasco in NYC and the Paniaqua Massacre in mid-September that the first-place Sox were finally sunk. Manuel's fingerprints are all over the failures of the 2003 team.

Yes but did the better play result from less lineups or did less lineups result from better play. The Sox sucked at the start of the year, now should Jerry have stayed with what was sucking or aggressively try to find something which would work. Once the Sox started to play better, there was no reason to search for something to work so he stopped.

What I contend is Jerry didn't aggressively or intelligently try to find something that worked, early on which doomed our season. He stuck with his old patterns which had mediocre success last year instead of more radical change which could have benefited the team.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-25-2003, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Yes but did the better play result from less lineups or did less lineups result from better play. The Sox sucked at the start of the year, now should Jerry have stayed with what was sucking or aggressively try to find something which would work. Once the Sox started to play better, there was no reason to search for something to work so he stopped.

What I contend is Jerry didn't aggressively or intelligently try to find something that worked, early on which doomed our season. He stuck with his old patterns which had mediocre success last year instead of more radical change which could have benefited the team.

I think the issue with Manuel in the first-half was his tinkering with new lineup every single day. He couldn't possibly know what was working and not working because he changed the lineup every game. It was tinkering for tinkering's sake. He admitted as much when he was quoted saying he spent the first-half trying to get everyone involved in the game, and after that winning became more important. He hung himself with that quote, IMO.

pudge
11-25-2003, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I think the issue with Manuel in the first-half was his tinkering with new lineup every single day. He couldn't possibly know what was working and not working because he changed the lineup every game. It was tinkering for tinkering's sake. He admitted as much when he was quoted saying he spent the first-half trying to get everyone involved in the game, and after that winning became more important. He hung himself with that quote, IMO.

I think both PHG and Dawg are on the mark - I was hoping JM would take some radical moves and stick with them for a while. I would have liked to see Daubauch as a fixture in the lineup after it was clear Konerko was a mess. If D-Bauch got his at bats, he would have been good for 20-25 homers. In essence, I agree that the poor play in the first half necessitated some changes, but a new lineup every day is only going to exacerbate the problem.

joepoe
11-26-2003, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=6&id=2409

I wrote the thing, so wondering if any one has read it and what they think.

Interesting statistical analysis. I had never seen such an approach before.

My whole thing with Jerry was a combination of things that have been discussed ad nauseum, and don't need to be dredged up in heinous detail again:

A) Not having a feel for the game situation, thereby making the wrong moves at the wrong time, and

2) Not instilling in the players any type of sense of urgency about winning.

These are things not readily apparent in the statistics.

RKMeibalane
11-26-2003, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
We played much better in the second-half. It wasn't till the Cotts Fiasco in NYC and the Paniaqua Massacre in mid-September that the first-place Sox were finally sunk. Manuel's fingerprints are all over the failures of the 2003 team.

Aren't you forgetting something, PHG? What about Manuel pulling Frank's chain about playing first base?

:jerry

"I can't imagine any reason short of an emergency for playing Frank at first base."

PaleHoseGeorge
11-26-2003, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by RKMeibalane
Aren't you forgetting something, PHG? What about Manuel pulling Frank's chain about playing first base?

:jerry
"I can't imagine any reason short of an emergency for playing Frank at first base."

Yeah, good point. That one had Manuel's fingerprints all over it, too. He just couldn't imagine using his best offensive player in the role that delivered the most offense. Go figure...