PDA

View Full Version : Is Ozzie really running the Sox?


gosox41
02-25-2004, 08:20 AM
I saw a blurb the other day (probably in the Tribune) that Schoenewies is listed as the Sox #4 starter and could even move ahead of Garland and be the #3 guy.

It made me wonder How Ozzie came to this decision so quickly. He hasn't been in the AL the last few years. And doign any research in to Scott's career numbers will show that he is statistically a below average starter and much more effective as a reliever.

So why is there talk of him possible being the #3 guy in the rotation? Is Ozzie that clueless or is KW telling him what to do like he did with JM?

If I'm Ozzie I would have an open competition for the #4 and 5 spots. Buehrle and Loiaza are givens. Garland has a decent 2003 so he should be in the rotation. But what if Rauch and Grilli (or whatver his name is) come into camp and pitch lights out with under 2.00 ERA's while Schoenweis gets lit up for a 6.00 ERA as righties continue to hit .325 or higher against him? Does that mean Schoenweis is still in the rotation?

Doesn't seem like the most intelligent move to me. If I were Ozzie I'd keep my options open for the last 2 spots in the rotation and not declare that 4 spots are taken. I have a feeling in May, Ozzie will be agreeing with me that Schoenweis is not starting pitcher material.

Bob

SEALgep
02-25-2004, 08:24 AM
Scottie is refining his change up, and as a result should be much more effective against righties. If Ozzie is listening to anyone about this issue, and he listens to everyone, it is Coop. That's partly why Ozzie came out and said we are going to go deep with our starters. Coop knows what's up, and if he wants Scott as our #4, I am definitey willing to see how it goes.

benjamin
02-25-2004, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Scottie is refining his change up, and as a result should be much more effective against righties. If Ozzie is listening to anyone about this issue, and he listens to everyone, it is Coop. That's partly why Ozzie came out and said we are going to go deep with our starters. Coop knows what's up, and if he wants Scott as our #4, I am definitey willing to see how it goes.


How does the desire to have starting pitchers "pitch deep into games" show that a pitching coach knows "what's up"???

Beyond his foot in mouth abilities, the thing that Dusty Baylor, er Baker, gets criticized most for is the way in which he leaves his starters in the game too long.

It's one thing if a guy is throwing 100 pitch complete games, but that is not by any means the norm in today's game.

ode to veeck
02-25-2004, 11:23 AM
Beyond his foot in mouth abilities, the thing that Dusty Baylor, er Baker, gets criticized most for is the way in which he leaves his starters in the game too long.

I think this criticism stems from how Dusty skippered the Flubs last season (see game 6 NLCS), but in reality his bullpen was very weak. In the Gianta WS aftermath he was criticized for just the opposite.

KingXerxes
02-25-2004, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by benjamin
[BIt's one thing if a guy is throwing 100 pitch complete games, but that is not by any means the norm in today's game. [/B]

I've got to be honest with you benjamin, I think baseball is on the verge of unconciously switching back to the 125-140 pitch performance by its starters.

When the price of good pitchers went up (in the 80's), management was WAY too concerned about injuries, and drastically cut back on the innings that their high priced talent would be able to throw. I don't think it did a damn thing to reduce arm injuries, and I think baseball has collectively just started to figure that out. The coming trend, if one were to ask me, is for the starters to go deeper and deeper into the game, and then stock the bullpen with "specialists" who can get the one or two guys you need out at a specific time in the game.

It isn't ancient history to look back 25 years or so and see guys who threw 300 innings in a year. I strongly suspect baseball is just now getting back to that. It won't happen in a year, but you can see signs of it in guys like Baker.

SEALgep
02-25-2004, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by benjamin
How does the desire to have starting pitchers "pitch deep into games" show that a pitching coach knows "what's up"???

Beyond his foot in mouth abilities, the thing that Dusty Baylor, er Baker, gets criticized most for is the way in which he leaves his starters in the game too long.

It's one thing if a guy is throwing 100 pitch complete games, but that is not by any means the norm in today's game. Well first of all, Coop knows what's up because he knows the game and knows the pitchers he has well. I was just saying, since Ozzie has limited experience with the pitching side of coaching, he is using Coop's expertise to his advantage. A big knock on Manuel was that he didn't trust his starters enough to allow them to get out of their own jams. That's not to say he is going to blindly leave them in, but he gave a scenerio where a pitcher who has gone solid throught 6 or so innings isn't going to be taken out necessarily because he gave up a hit or two. There is no doubt that every situation is different and will be handled as such, but the hope is that the starters can carry their game further. That's all I meant.