PDA

View Full Version : Greg Couch is grumpy... hates winning baseball.


fquaye149
04-17-2005, 05:43 AM
OK WSIer's own up:

Who snuck into Greg Couch's office and wrote this:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg172.html

?

:rolleyes:

bartmanisgod
04-17-2005, 08:50 AM
Who snuck into Greg Couch's office and wrote this:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg172.html

?

:rolleyes:


It looks like someone took a crap in the printer and this is what came out.

TornLabrum
04-17-2005, 08:56 AM
Let's see, the Sox have Everett, Konerko, Dye, Rowand, and Crede, all of whom are capable of hitting 20-plus home runs and Couch is upset at the lack of sacrifice bunts in a game in which the Sox had one single among their four hits. The idiocy of Chicago sportswriters knows no bounds.

Kadafi311
04-17-2005, 09:05 AM
Not everyone is going to have an optimistic opinion of the Sox. That being said, please post the articles when you do find one.

ClaudelSleptHere
04-17-2005, 10:06 AM
I also enjoyed how he picked out the best hitter in baseball and basically said the Sox need to be more like Ichiro. Yeah, good idea. Why didn't I think of that?

CarlosMay'sThumb
04-17-2005, 10:11 AM
I thought Couch hit all the key points in a realistic assessment of the Sox - so far. All the talk of "small ball" is meaningless. It's mainly another marketing tool in a long line of marketing tools from "the kids can play" to "good guys wear black" to "win or die trying" (ugh).

I agree with Couch that the White Sox' terrible on-base percentage so far makes small ball impossible. And I loved Buehrle's performance yesterday - but there was absolutely no small ball. The Sox have definitely improved their pitching, but the "small ball" mantra is just an attempt to hide the failure of the Sox ownership to increase their payroll. Good teams play small ball and long ball.

Clembasbal
04-17-2005, 10:15 AM
I also enjoyed how he picked out the best hitter in baseball and basically said the Sox need to be more like Ichiro. Yeah, good idea. Why didn't I think of that?

The game has a ton of players like him, I surprised Kenny didn't go after any of them.

This article was a terrible read. Period. The other thing that he mentions that I will agree with, are the walks. We need to take more.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-17-2005, 10:25 AM
Let's see, the Sox have Everett, Konerko, Dye, Rowand, and Crede, all of whom are capable of hitting 20-plus home runs and Couch is upset at the lack of sacrifice bunts in a game in which the Sox had one single among their four hits. The idiocy of Chicago sportswriters knows no bounds.

I'm guessing Greg Couch needs to take an enema.

Or maybe Couch took an enema and this was the result?

Gotta love "The Bright One." What a rag...

:cool:

FoulTerritory
04-17-2005, 10:26 AM
I thought Couch hit all the key points in a realistic assessment of the Sox - so far. All the talk of "small ball" is meaningless. It's mainly another marketing tool in a long line of marketing tools from "the kids can play" to "good guys wear black" to "win or die trying" (ugh).

I agree with Couch that the White Sox' terrible on-base percentage so far makes small ball impossible. And I loved Buehrle's performance yesterday - but there was absolutely no small ball. The Sox have definitely improved their pitching, but the "small ball" mantra is just an attempt to hide the failure of the Sox ownership to increase their payroll. Good teams play small ball and long ball.

But the Sox ARE playing small ball and longball. There were several instances in the cleveland series, for example, where the sox manufactured runs. And there have also been games like yesterday where they've won via home run. Thats the point of why the Couch article is crap . . . as is Mariotti's recent drivel. Sure, there is a lot of talk about small ball because they lost quite a bit of power in the offseason, but they still have quite a bit of power, and they've balanced their lineup with elements of speed, bunting capability, defense etc.

And what was with Couch saying we "aren't very fast" . . . what does he want, 9 ichiros in the lineup??? Rowand, Uribe, Pods, Iguchi, and occassionally Dye are all threats to steal. Most MLB lineups do not have that much speed.

I will conceed though, that this team does need to walk more, but regardless, this team is winning in multiple fashions. To isolate one game and then say "see, they don't really play small ball at all", is just poor writing. Has this guy watched any games besides yesterdays?

elrod
04-17-2005, 10:30 AM
We play small ball when we can and when we need to. We play big ball when we can and when we need to. That's what teams do to win. Ryan Franklin is one of the great Sox killers of recent years. There's a reason we only got 4 hits - he owns us. We should be fortunate that two of those hits left the yard because that was the only way to get to Franklin.

SOXSINCE'70
04-17-2005, 10:48 AM
I sent this dirt bag an e mail that said "hey,you tend to your house,
Sox fans will tend to theirs".And to question the team's chemistry??
Who the hell does he think he is?? His favorite team has an "old school"
manager who poisons his team against the media with an "us vs.them"
attitude.This doofus,along with Maggott-otti and Sleaze-Hack
needs to be issued a pink slip now.:angry: :angry: :angry:

hempsox
04-17-2005, 11:03 AM
Franklin owns us...Had to go look.

Franklin's career vs. the Sox

Era: 3.89Wins:5

Losses: 2
Most wins and against any opponent other than the Angels who he has started against 12 times vs. only starting against us 6 times. We have been his (insert euphemism for female dog here) and minus the two Paulie knocks...we would have been looking at a rubber match today.

MRKARNO
04-17-2005, 11:17 AM
I do agree with Couch in the sense that this team is really not about small ball. I've said before that I see our team as more of a balanced offense than we had previously. We have solid major leaguers at every position as opposed to last year where we had players like Borchard, Timo, Harris (who I think is on the borderline), Davis, Burke, etc taking up three lineup spots on an everyday basis.

But the article itself was poorly written, pointlessly negative, and reminded me of the Windsock.

rdivaldi
04-17-2005, 11:23 AM
The Sox have definitely improved their pitching, but the "small ball" mantra is just an attempt to hide the failure of the Sox ownership to increase their payroll.

:?:

I never realized that $64 million was more than $75 million....

rdivaldi
04-17-2005, 11:26 AM
"So this season, the Sox dumped their best and most expensive players"

When did we trade Buerhle, Garcia, and Big Frank???

zach074
04-17-2005, 11:31 AM
What a moron. It amazes me how many dumb people work at our city's newspapers.

TornLabrum
04-17-2005, 11:32 AM
What a moron. It amazes me how many dumb people work at our city's newspapers.

And how many of them get side jobs on sportsblab radio.

White_Sock
04-17-2005, 11:37 AM
IMHO, the White Sox' low OBP just shows how dangerous we really are once we do get on the basepaths (we score with less oportunity). With a higher OBP, I think this team is unstoppable. With Scotty Pods in, manufacturing runs is not a problem. He hasn't been in for the last few days so small ball has been harder to execute. However, we still win with pitching/defense and with "big ball." What's the freakin problem Couch? Can you say: Versatile?

depy48
04-17-2005, 11:46 AM
my favorite line is where he is still trying to make the sox look bad for not retaining ordonez.
This is one big trick, a ploy not to pay Magglio Ordonez -- who is out for a few weeks
haha... yeah he's out for a "few" weeks.... i didnt know that few meant over a month. Not to mention the revolving door of not-knee related injuries.

MRKARNO
04-17-2005, 11:46 AM
IMHO, the White Sox' low OBP just shows how dangerous we really are once we do get on the basepaths (we score with less oportunity). With a higher OBP, I think this team is unstoppable.

I definitely agree that it's a good sign that the White Sox are winning in spite of their lousy on base percentage. A naysayer would point out that the team isnt going to win becaues the pitching staff is going to come back down to earth, but at the same time, while the team is not going to finish very high in OBP (unless Frank comes back and decidedes he wants to hit like he did last year before he got hurt and skew the numbers), they will finish higher. Konerko is not going to have a .302 OBP. Pierzynski is not going to have a .250 OBP. Rowand is not going to have a .231 OBP. Dye will not have a .222 OBP. The list goes on. While at the same time, Garcia might not end with a 1.93 ERA, I think the two might balance themselves out to a degree where the White Sox can keep this up to a certain degree.

MRKARNO
04-17-2005, 11:47 AM
haha... yeah he's out for a "few" weeks.... i didnt know that few meant over a month. Not to mention the revolving door of not-knee related injuries.
Seruously, 6 weeks is nearly a quarter of the season.

soxwon
04-17-2005, 11:57 AM
We play small ball when we can and when we need to. We play big ball when we can and when we need to. That's what teams do to win. Ryan Franklin is one of the great Sox killers of recent years. There's a reason we only got 4 hits - he owns us. We should be fortunate that two of those hits left the yard because that was the only way to get to Franklin.

what diff does it make if we play small ball or long ball, as long as the end result is a W.
enuff of this small vs long.
it is playing as a team.
i dont see in the box score, well this was a SMALL BALL WIN
or
2 homers by konerko, so thats a LONG BALL WIN.
who the Fudge cares.
its a WIN.

Dan H
04-17-2005, 12:18 PM
I actually think that Couch has brought up some good points here. Time may prove him totally wrong, but I don't think we should be condemning him yet.

I'll take an 8-3 start any day. It is the best start since 1982 when the Sox won their first eight. But in in '82 the White Sox came in third and never serioiusly contended for anything.

11 games is too early to judge the team. Long ball or small ball, it won't matter if the team doesn't get some kind of consistency from its 3-4-5 starters. If that consistency is there, the Sox will be there at the end. If not, it's back to the drawing board.

flo-B-flo
04-17-2005, 12:26 PM
Doesn't matter how many you win by. Just win. If the season continues as I expect, with the Sox having the good season I think they will have, Couch will have the "what a great season" column and will rebut some of this screed. Keep this drivel handy and compare in July. GO-GO SOX!!

infohawk
04-17-2005, 12:48 PM
We play small ball when we can and when we need to. We play big ball when we can and when we need to. That's what teams do to win. Ryan Franklin is one of the great Sox killers of recent years. There's a reason we only got 4 hits - he owns us. We should be fortunate that two of those hits left the yard because that was the only way to get to Franklin.

I completely agree. The season is very young, but the Sox have already faced a number of good pitching perfomances from other teams. Santana, Radke, Franklin and Millwood (twice). Over the course of a season, offensive numbers are often inflated by teams facing junk pitching. The Sox offensive numbers will improve. What is telling for me is that they find a way to win close games against good pitching. Why doesn't Couch compliement the Sox for keeping the opposition from running up the score and necessitating that the Sox score more runs? If he is going to complain about the lack of .OBP, why doesn't he either praise our low ERA or criticize the offensive performances of other teams. Apparently they can't hit either!!! :rolleyes: What's good for the goose....

Unregistered
04-17-2005, 01:07 PM
So far, it has been all fun. Winning teams develop a magic about them, a togetherness. The Minnesota Twins seem to have that every year.

The Sox never do. Well the "magic-less" Sox have already beaten the Twins 2 of 3 on the young season. In fact, they've won EVERY series they've played so far (Something you can't say about the Twins).

jdm2662
04-17-2005, 02:23 PM
The great Al Davis has the most noteable quote in sports "Just win, baby." If they keep winning, who cares? 11 games is way to early to judge the season, but winning April games is much better than losing them... The White Sox won't get much respect because it isn't "cool" to be a Sox fan. Also, giving a team props doesn't sell papers, articles causing stir do. That's why there is so much crap in the media.
________
Free Magento Themes (http://themesfree.org)

Palehose13
04-17-2005, 02:45 PM
what diff does it make if we play small ball or long ball, as long as the end result is a W.
enuff of this small vs long.
it is playing as a team.
i dont see in the box score, well this was a SMALL BALL WIN
or
2 homers by konerko, so thats a LONG BALL WIN.
who the Fudge cares.
its a WIN.

Gosh darn right. Excellent post, soxwon.

MRKARNO
04-17-2005, 02:57 PM
The great Al Davis has the most noteable quote in sports "Just win, baby." If they keep winning, who cares?

The issue is that sometimes you cant keep winning if you are playing a certain way. You're not going to win every one run game. You're not going to make the playoffs if you finish last in OBP. Certain things are going to have to improve, and there's a good chance that they will, if the White Sox are going to continue their winning ways.

jdm2662
04-17-2005, 03:48 PM
The issue is that sometimes you cant keep winning if you are playing a certain way. You're not going to win every one run game. You're not going to make the playoffs if you finish last in OBP. Certain things are going to have to improve, and there's a good chance that they will, if the White Sox are going to continue their winning ways.

Of course your not going to win every game with the way they have been playing. If they keep winning, I could care less how they do it. Good teams win 1 run baseball games. Good teams come through when needed. Good teams find ways to win period no matter how they play. The White Sox need to prove to us they are a good team by continuing to win. Just win baby!
________
Marijuana Strain Green Crack (http://trichomes.org/marijuana-strains/green-crack)

Dick Allen
04-17-2005, 07:01 PM
Greg Couch is just another member of the Cub-Times' stable of Cub-loving writers. I simply don't read what these simpletons have to say anymore. Lowers the blood pressure, gives me more time to read whatever intelligent columns there may be in the paper, if any.

Lip Man 1
04-17-2005, 08:29 PM
Dick:

Your comment doesn't wash...it was Couch who had the series of columns and stories revealing the Cubs ticket scalping scam.

I know Greg but can't speak for him in this regard. My impression is that his point is, the Sox being in Chicago, should be able to afford to keep the players they have, as well as then going out to increase talent, not having to choose between the two.

Lip

brewcrew/chisox
04-17-2005, 10:04 PM
OK WSIer's own up:

Who snuck into Greg Couch's office and wrote this:



:moron

"i have no idea!"

This is a bad article; hands down, no argument here....it belongs in the trash, or worse, the red eye.

Dick Allen
04-17-2005, 10:35 PM
Dick:

Your comment doesn't wash...it was Couch who had the series of columns and stories revealing the Cubs ticket scalping scam.

I know Greg but can't speak for him in this regard. My impression is that his point is, the Sox being in Chicago, should be able to afford to keep the players they have, as well as then going out to increase talent, not having to choose between the two.

LipLip, with all due respect, my comment does wash, simply from the standpoint that I have been a subscriber to that paper forever, and by now I know who the Cub lovers are there. Because he wrote a series on the ticket scalping doesn't mean he isn't a Cub lover, he simply works for the team owners' rival newspaper. Either that, or he takes the common local media stance and writes more about the team perceived to have the larger following, in order to sell more newspapers.

mikehuff
04-18-2005, 11:27 AM
Last year year when the Sox were in first place, the negative was that all they could do is hit homeruns and they couldn't hold the opposing offense. This year the negative is that they can pitch, but they can't score runs.
I look at this as a huge positive. Yes, we are not hitting too well, but we are still in first place and we are still winning games. Those wins don't go away, they stay there and decide who goes to the playoffs. If we can play this well when we aren't firing on all cylinders, then we'll be unstopable when we are.

It seems like nobody can be happy with a first place team. Remember the 2001 Bears? I can't believe how much negativity surrounded that team.

I'll get pissed if they fall apart. As for Couch, his quote... "Jermaine Dye, who is about due to get hurt, can hit homers" just shows that he's looking to write something negative.

Lip Man 1
04-18-2005, 12:21 PM
Dick:

For what it's worth Couch had a column today on the steroid issue and had this to say about Frank Thomas:

"No one has come out of this scandal better than Frank Thomas. Throughout his career with the White Sox, we never have seen him suddenly balloon to inhuman proportions. He came that way. And he has pushed for testing. The smell test suggests that he's clean and that steroid cheats hit homers at his expense."

Lip

hawkjt
04-18-2005, 02:33 PM
Call me crazy but I agree with some of his points. Do I need to hear constantly from hawk and DJ how great the new approach is going to be every year? Last year it was ozzieball and having fun. Well in light of the comments by Ozzie on Sunday last year no one was having fun cuz the attitude was sooo horrible. Now this year it is smart ball and balance. All right already -we get it. Just win baby. The over the top sell job does seem designed to deflect attention away from the departed stars. I was not happy with Carlos leaving but I have accepted it and am ready to move on. Do we need Ozzie continuing to dredge up old news and bad blood for last years team? Counterproductive.

When you break it down are we better defensively? AJ vs Miguel- no, AJ has stunk it up defensively so far. Pods vs Carlos- yes ,if he stays healthy. Dye vs Maggs- no maggs was faster and better and so far Dye has struggled. Iguchi vs Uribe - push Jose vs Uribe - yes

Basically the defense may be slightly better due to Juan at ss. Speed wise I think we lost with Dye,AJ, ; gained with Pods and Juan - it is a push.

When you look at our hitting it is horrible and we are winning so it should improve but is that guaranteed? What if we are a .270 OBA all season? These stats are scary but maybe we will pick it up. What bothers me is that Meche and Millwood shut us down and other team crush them. Are all the starters we face that good? Hope it clicks in against the twins. Go Sox.

soxrme
04-18-2005, 03:04 PM
[QUOTE=hawkjt]Call me crazy but I agree with some of his points. Do I need to hear constantly from hawk and DJ how great the new approach is going to be every year? Last year it was ozzieball and having fun. Well in light of the comments by Ozzie on Sunday last year no one was having fun cuz the attitude was sooo horrible. Now this year it is smart ball and balance. All right already -we get it. Just win baby. The over the top sell job does seem designed to deflect attention away from the departed stars. I was not happy with Carlos leaving but I have accepted it and am ready to move on. Do we need Ozzie continuing to dredge up old news and bad blood for last years team? Counterproductive.

I agree completely, every bunt or sacrifice is about the new approach. Enough already, call the games. I don't think that Couch or Morronotti are totally wrong on the financial aspects.

Foulke You
04-18-2005, 03:07 PM
I think the problem with the Couch article wasn't necessarily the content, but the tone and timing of the article. The tone was very much sounding like a Cub fan trying to rain on the Sox parade. The Sox are off to a hot start and the Cubs are off to a mediocre start. Make no mistake, Couch is a die-hard Cub guy and has admitted as much in his articles.

Ask yourself this, if the tables were turned and the Cubs were 8W-4L sitting atop the NL Central but winning the same way as last year, would Couch write an article poo-pooing the Cubs success and urging Sun-Times readers "don't buy into what the Cubs are selling"? The answer is absolutely not. There would most likely be a fluff piece in its place proclaiming that this could possibly be the year of the Cubs.

I also found it amusing how Couch went out of his way to not mention the great pitching the Sox have been getting. What happened to the old "pitching wins championships" adage Greg?

jdm2662
04-18-2005, 03:16 PM
Just win baby! If the Cubs were 8-4, we'd be hearing how great they are and it's there year. It's just another Cubbie fan not liking the Sox winning. I do give Couch props for his story on the Cubs scalping tickets. He was the only one with the balls to write about it. How dare anyone rip on the Cubbies!
________
Handjob asian (http://www.****tube.com/categories/663/asian/videos/1)

converted
04-18-2005, 03:20 PM
Not everyone is going to have an optimistic opinion of the Sox. That being said, please post the articles when you do find one.

I second that motion. Anyone else tired of reading crappy sportswriting and hearing about our "illusion" of a team this season? I agree that not everyone is going to agree with our crazy ways, but let's start posting some articles worth reading.
:?:

daveeym
04-18-2005, 03:28 PM
I second that motion. Anyone else tired of reading crappy sportswriting and hearing about our "illusion" of a team this season? I agree that not everyone is going to agree with our crazy ways, but let's start posting some articles worth reading.
:?: The problem is there are very few out there and as i said in the morrisey thread in the ****house it would be nice to see the sox combat this in some way. Not whining about how the media screws them but by providing their own content such as a game or weekly recap cowritten with different players. Get some more fluff pieces written about all our new players that alot of fans know little about and then let WSI users to send those links out all over the place.

Dick Allen
04-18-2005, 05:50 PM
Dick:

For what it's worth Couch had a column today on the steroid issue and had this to say about Frank Thomas:

"No one has come out of this scandal better than Frank Thomas. Throughout his career with the White Sox, we never have seen him suddenly balloon to inhuman proportions. He came that way. And he has pushed for testing. The smell test suggests that he's clean and that steroid cheats hit homers at his expense."

LipWell yes, I'm sure he's not always going to write an article that insults a true baseball fan's intelligence.

Jerome
04-18-2005, 06:39 PM
Most of this crap is just sox-bashing garbage that he would never in a write about the Cubs. But he is 100% accurate about the walks.