PDA

View Full Version : Gammons on the Sox


hold2dibber
03-22-2004, 01:11 PM
In an article (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1765340) posted on ESPN.com today, Gammons has several paragraphs devoted to the Sox. He says Ozzie has been well-received by the Sox players, that Sweeney has been a stud and, elsewhere in the article, that the Sox had considered trying to acquire Griffey Jr. but ultimately decided not to (no info on who they would have had to have moved to get him).

BeerHandle
03-22-2004, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
In an article (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1765340) posted on ESPN.com today, Gammons has several paragraphs devoted to the Sox. He says Ozzie has been well-received by the Sox players, that Sweeney has been a stud and, elsewhere in the article, that the Sox had considered trying to acquire Griffey Jr. but ultimately decided not to (no info on who they would have had to have moved to get him).

Typical Gammons.......NO NEW OR REAL INFORMATION!

Baby Fisk
03-22-2004, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
In an article (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1765340) posted on ESPN.com today, Gammons has several paragraphs devoted to the Sox. He says Ozzie has been well-received by the Sox players, that Sweeney has been a stud and, elsewhere in the article, that the Sox had considered trying to acquire Griffey Jr. but ultimately decided not to (no info on who they would have had to have moved to get him).

So lemme get this straight: Gammons has now predicted the Sox to finish anywhere between 1st and 4th in the past few weeks (if not days).

Let me speak on behalf of everyone in saying:

Gammons is a moron.

hold2dibber
03-22-2004, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
So lemme get this straight: Gammons has now predicted the Sox to finish anywhere between 1st and 4th in the past few weeks (if not days).

Let me speak on behalf of everyone in saying:

Gammons is a moron.

When/where did he predict that they'll finish 1st?

Tekijawa
03-22-2004, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Baby Fisk
So lemme get this straight: Gammons has now predicted the Sox to finish anywhere between 1st and 4th in the past few weeks (if not days).

Let me speak on behalf of everyone in saying:

Gammons is a moron.

How else are they going to be able to go back at the end of the season and have a Clip of the DUmb @$$ saying that he predicted so and so to finish in such and such a place, if you make between 5 and 6 different predictions one is bound to be right (the NL central being the only one that would need 6).

Baby Fisk
03-22-2004, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
When/where did he predict that they'll finish 1st?

Sorry dibber, I misread. In the linked article, he says the SOX believe they should be considered "close to the divisional favourite" (whatever "close to" means). Still, if the Sox win the division, I'm sure he'll say he never disagreed with the Sox' sentiments.

fledgedrallycap
03-22-2004, 01:47 PM
I am just sick and tired of these national analyst blasting the Sox for situations that are two-years old. Both Gammons and Reynolds ridiculed the Sox's defense:

2003
1 Seattle 162 1441 5839 4323 1451 65 .989 36.06 .870
2 St. Louis 162 1463 6112 4391 1644 77 .987 37.11 .854
3 Florida 162 1445 6004 4336 1590 78 .987 36.90 .852
4 San Francisco 161 1437 6067 4312 1675 80 .987 37.49 .860
5 Minnesota 162 1461 5954 4385 1482 87 .985 36.13 .854
6 Texas 162 1433 6097 4300 1703 94 .985 37.69 .845
7 Houston 162 1450 6154 4350 1709 95 .985 37.61 .840
8 Chicago Sox 162 1431 5975 4293 1589 93 .984 36.99 .865

Ahead of both the beloved Yankees, Bo-Sox and Cubs.

Open your eyes you puds!

Iwritecode
03-22-2004, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by fledgedrallycap
I am just sick and tired of these national analyst blasting the Sox for situations that are two-years old. Both Gammons and Reynolds ridiculed the Sox's defense:

2003
1 Seattle 162 1441 5839 4323 1451 65 .989 36.06 .870
2 St. Louis 162 1463 6112 4391 1644 77 .987 37.11 .854
3 Florida 162 1445 6004 4336 1590 78 .987 36.90 .852
4 San Francisco 161 1437 6067 4312 1675 80 .987 37.49 .860
5 Minnesota 162 1461 5954 4385 1482 87 .985 36.13 .854
6 Texas 162 1433 6097 4300 1703 94 .985 37.69 .845
7 Houston 162 1450 6154 4350 1709 95 .985 37.61 .840
8 Chicago Sox 162 1431 5975 4293 1589 93 .984 36.99 .865

Ahead of both the beloved Yankees, Bo-Sox and Cubs.

Open your eyes you puds!

I hate defending those two morons but Minnesota has been ahead of the Sox in defense the past couple years.

They have also been part of the reason the Sox didn't win the division, which is what Gammons and Reynolds were saying.

They don't have to beat out the Yanks or Cubs to win the division...

Lip Man 1
03-22-2004, 01:52 PM
On ESPN's preview of the Sox Reynolds specifically said he'd get blasted by the stat people for this because he said the Sox finished 4th in the league in fielding percentage. I think he said it was .985.

However he then said that's not what he means when he said they have bad defense. He explained that the Sox simply don't get to balls that other teams do, that they don't know how to do the small things defensively like being able to execute run downs, throwing to the correct base or hitting the cut off man, that factors into close games. That also is part of having a good defense.

I personally find nothing wrong about Reynolds statement. We fans have been saying the same things here at WSI for years. Basically this team does not have a lot of good baseball sense.

Lip

Deadguy
03-22-2004, 02:07 PM
And the problem with a JR/Thomas clubhouse would be what, exactly? Aren't these two guys friends? Both combined would only cost us 12 million dollars in the present, and the potential for getting an exceeded return on the investment is rather high.

I wish they could have pulled the trigger, although I like Rowand.

hold2dibber
03-22-2004, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Deadguy
And the problem with a JR/Thomas clubhouse would be what, exactly? Aren't these two guys friends? Both combined would only cost us 12 million dollars in the present, and the potential for getting an exceeded return on the investment is rather high.

I wish they could have pulled the trigger, although I like Rowand.

As always, it depends on what the Sox would have had to give up to get him. No matter what, it would have been risky. But I still think it probably would have been a risk worth taking - assuming, that is, that the Sox would not have had to give up too much AND that acquiring him would not have made it impossible to re-sign Maggs.

jeremyb1
03-22-2004, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
On ESPN's preview of the Sox Reynolds specifically said he'd get blasted by the stat people for this because he said the Sox finished 4th in the league in fielding percentage. I think he said it was .985.

However he then said that's not what he means when he said they have bad defense. He explained that the Sox simply don't get to balls that other teams do, that they don't know how to do the small things defensively like being able to execute run downs, throwing to the correct base or hitting the cut off man, that factors into close games. That also is part of having a good defense.

I personally find nothing wrong about Reynolds statement. We fans have been saying the same things here at WSI for years. Basically this team does not have a lot of good baseball sense.

The problem is, defensive efficiency (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/current/def_eff2003.htm) which does take into account range and the other "small things" indicates the Sox were the fourth best defensive team in baseball last season. So, taking into account the "little things" fielding percentage ignores, we are even better.

Valentin, Olivo, and Maggs were outstanding defenders last season. Lee and Crede were quite solid. Also, Garland and Buehrle are good fielders for pitchers. Other than first base I'm not sure we have a defensive shortcoming on the entire roster. I mean come on, how many games does Reynolds even watch? He really has no idea here.

Also, how many run downs does Harold Reynolds think there are in a given game? When was the last time anyone saw a player escape a rundown without being called out?

Lip Man 1
03-22-2004, 08:28 PM
Well for what it's worth when Reynolds was talking about the Sox 'defensive lapses' they were showing video of Thomas butchering a pick off throw down to second enabling the runner to slide in safely, then went to video of Sox outfielders over throwing cut off men.

Obviously it's happened. Has it happened enough to cost the Sox say four games? (Which is what they lost the division by?)

Can't say for sure but it may have.

Lip

Deadguy
03-22-2004, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Well for what it's worth when Reynolds was talking about the Sox 'defensive lapses' they were showing video of Thomas butchering a pick off throw down to second enabling the runner to slide in safely, then went to video of Sox outfielders over throwing cut off men.

Obviously it's happened. Has it happened enough to cost the Sox say four games? (Which is what they lost the division by?)

Can't say for sure but it may have.

Lip

How many rallies were killed with GIDPs last year? How many potential Ball 4's were lost when players wildly at balls out of the zone, and ended up creating outs?

We were 4th in the league in Runs Allowed last year, so obviously our pitching + defense was playoff calibre.

Our inability to win the divison last year was certainly not the result of too many defensive lapses. Of course if the team had commited zero defensive lapses they may have won the division, but it's ridiculous to expect any team to do that over the course of 162 games.

Railsplitter
03-23-2004, 09:39 AM
Gammons proved he was an idiot from the first time I heard of him. Back in 1983, when he was with the Sporting News, he actually thought the Inidan's Julio Franco was an equal to ron Kittle and used a fomula of his own devising to "prove" it. It it, claimed that an if Franco had an RBI sibgle and scored on a teammate's home run, he had done the same if Kittle had a two run homer.

But here's the statistical breakdown:

Franco: 1 hit, 0 HR, 1 RBI, I run scored.

Kittle: 1 hit, 1HR, 2 RBI, 1 run scored.

I've been waiting over twenty years for a forum to expose this!

Mohoney
03-23-2004, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by Deadguy
How many rallies were killed with GIDPs last year? How many potential Ball 4's were lost when players wildly at balls out of the zone, and ended up creating outs?

We were 4th in the league in Runs Allowed last year, so obviously our pitching + defense was playoff calibre.

Our inability to win the divison last year was certainly not the result of too many defensive lapses. Of course if the team had commited zero defensive lapses they may have won the division, but it's ridiculous to expect any team to do that over the course of 162 games.

Our inability to win the division was ENTIRELY THE MANAGER'S FAULT! His worthlessness cost us at LEAST 8 games, maybe even 10.