PDA

View Full Version : Interesting Stat


Cowhead418
06-08-2005, 11:51 AM
Here are the records the Sox have in each game of a series:
1st game: 15-5
2nd game: 17-3
3rd game: 7-9
4th game: 0-2
Last game: 6-10 (8-11 if you count the second game of a 2-game series)

The Sox really can't close out series this year and I'm scratching my head as to why this is. I don't really buy the lack of killer instinct argument but it's really strange how the Sox dominate the first two games and are significantly worse at the end of a series. They are a combined 32-8 in the first two games of a series!:o:

ShoelessJoeS
06-08-2005, 11:53 AM
Here are the records the Sox have in each game of a series:
1st game: 15-5
2nd game: 17-3
3rd game: 7-9
4th game: 0-2
Last game: 6-10 (8-11 if you count the second game of a 2-game series)

The Sox really can't close out series this year and I'm scratching my head as to why this is. I don't really buy the lack of killer instinct argument but it's really strange how the Sox dominate the first two games and are significantly worse at the end of a series.
i think the fact that ozzie puts every replacement/utility player in the lineup after we win the first two has something to do with it, not a lack of killer instinct. the 15-5 record in game 1's shows the killer instinct to draw first blood.

alohafri
06-08-2005, 12:07 PM
As Shoeless pointed out, Ozzie always puts the "2nd string" lineup out there for the 3rd game of a series if we win the first two. It's as if Ozzie doesn't care about the 3rd game, he just wants to win the series. It makes me mad--I would like to see us sweep as many series as we can. Last Sunday we went to the game and were disappointed to see the lineup that Burly (sp.) was stuck with--we wanted him to win but knew the Sox would lose the game.

--Mrs. Aloha

na_na_na_na
06-08-2005, 12:08 PM
I agree with the idea it's more of a line-up thing. Than a killer intinct problem. Ozzie committed to getting the subs playing time and most of it seems to be coming in game 3.

kevingrt
06-08-2005, 12:11 PM
We will see if Ozzie sticks with that when he puts the lineup out today. Is Widger, Pabs, Timo, or Willie going to get playing time or is the starting lineup going to be out there. Willie did get some PT yesterday so I wouldn't be surprised if we see the regular starting lineup, but Carl may see some playing time for Dye or Aaron or Pods.

I agree with all the others though in that since Ozzie agreed to get everyone playing time that it can costs us some games. But hopefully the rests helps out all the guys when we have to grind in August, September, and yeah you know the other month.

I think in the end the rest will help the team out more then it will hurt the team.

ShoelessJoeS
06-08-2005, 12:17 PM
but Carl may see some playing time for Dye or Aaron.
i understand that carl is hot right now, but how hot has dye been the past couple weeks and aaron is on a 12-game hitting streak or something like that. i think those two NEED to be in the lineup today

iwcup
06-08-2005, 12:19 PM
hmmm, what cliches to use...

Its a marathon not a sprint? lose the battle but win the war?

If I recall correctly, the past few years, the Sox played their butts off to get within striking distance and then petered out down the strectch...maybe something to do with playing your "A" squad til they dropped?

I am more than fine with Ozzies effort to get palyers playing time.
A) players who play are happy.
B) god forbid soemone goes down long term, we have people to step in.
3) games off here and there in may-june-july, give the regulars that added energy to turn it up a notch come stretch time....

Palehose13
06-08-2005, 12:22 PM
hmmm, what cliches to use...

Its a marathon not a sprint? lose the battle but win the war?

If I recall correctly, the past few years, the Sox played their butts off to get within striking distance and then petered out down the strectch...maybe something to do with playing your "A" squad til they dropped?

I am more than fine with Ozzies effort to get palyers playing time.
A) players who play are happy.
B) god forbid soemone goes down long term, we have people to step in.
3) games off here and there in may-june-july, give the regulars that added energy to turn it up a notch come stretch time....

I agree with you 100%. I don't think it's becuase Ozzie doesn't want a sweep, ut that he is trying to give guys PT and it makes more sense to me to put your second stringers in when the series is already won.

chisox06
06-08-2005, 12:25 PM
As Shoeless pointed out, Ozzie always puts the "2nd string" lineup out there for the 3rd game of a series if we win the first two. It's as if Ozzie doesn't care about the 3rd game, he just wants to win the series. It makes me mad--I would like to see us sweep as many series as we can. Last Sunday we went to the game and were disappointed to see the lineup that Burly (sp.) was stuck with--we wanted him to win but knew the Sox would lose the game.

--Mrs. Aloha

Agreed. Ozzie seems to put the subs in all at once, when series have already been closed out. I would like to see more spot starts during games for the bench players rather than getting them all time in the same game. I was at the game Sunday and it was weird to see our actual starting lineup in the 12th inning.

ShoelessJoeS
06-08-2005, 12:26 PM
im not saying sittings players from time to time is a bad idea, all im saying is that a couple of our guys are of fire right now and need to be in the lineup, especially if ozzie wants to play his "sunday" lineup

urbanhack
06-08-2005, 01:42 PM
How many series have we won now and what is our record in one-run games? I've been searching all morning, but can't find the stats anywhere.

Thanks.

Iwritecode
06-08-2005, 01:49 PM
How many series have we won now and what is our record in one-run games? I've been searching all morning, but can't find the stats anywhere.

Thanks.

You could go to just about any website (ESPN, Chicagosports, Whitesox.com) and click on schedule/results and count it up yourself...

mweflen
06-08-2005, 01:56 PM
I would much rather he put one second-stringer in per day than have one grand "Jerry Manuel Getaway Day" with 3 or 4 subs.

And I guess I would much rather Timo never played at all. But that's another story.

SoxWillWin
06-08-2005, 02:10 PM
hmmm, what cliches to use...

Its a marathon not a sprint? lose the battle but win the war?

If I recall correctly, the past few years, the Sox played their butts off to get within striking distance and then petered out down the strectch...maybe something to do with playing your "A" squad til they dropped?

I am more than fine with Ozzies effort to get palyers playing time.
A) players who play are happy.
B) god forbid soemone goes down long term, we have people to step in.
3) games off here and there in may-june-july, give the regulars that added energy to turn it up a notch come stretch time....

Completely (and utterly) agree. It's not just about resting the starters, butkeeping the bench sharp. You never know when you'll need someone in a pinch situation, and if they haven't played in a month how effective would they be. I for one don't mind taking most of our series 2-1 this year....it's part of the reason we're 20 over .500 right now.

MisterB
06-08-2005, 02:17 PM
Agreed. Ozzie seems to put the subs in all at once, when series have already been closed out. I would like to see more spot starts during games for the bench players rather than getting them all time in the same game. I was at the game Sunday and it was weird to see our actual starting lineup in the 12th inning.

Cool. Then we can see this pop up more often:

:ozzie
*TINKER*TINKER*TINKER*

Some people make way too much out of the bench players getting the occasional start. None of us know every ache and twinge the players have that may be influencing Ozzie's lineup decisions.

We just need to remember:

:ozzie
"I make out the ****ing lineup card."

mjharrison72
06-08-2005, 02:21 PM
Completely (and utterly) agree. It's not just about resting the starters, butkeeping the bench sharp. You never know when you'll need someone in a pinch situation, and if they haven't played in a month how effective would they be. I for one don't mind taking most of our series 2-1 this year....it's part of the reason we're 20 over .500 right now.
These are great reasons to get guys playing time, but I also don't understand why even with replacements we can't win a game... it should have a lot more to do with who's pitching, and even with all bench-warmers in the lineup, we still have, what, 5-6 starters in the game? We should still have a shot to win those last games of the series in those situations.

wilburaga
06-08-2005, 02:28 PM
Interestingly (or not), we have not had a one game winning streak all year. We have always won at least 2 consecutive games before our next loss.


W

DumpJerry
06-08-2005, 02:56 PM
Ok, gang. It's all cool. If we go .667 the rest of the season (win two, lose one), we finish with 127 wins. That might get us in the Wild Card. If we go .500 for the rest of the season, we win 110 games. We need only 54 wins to get 93 wins on the season, the number considered enough for the division. That would require us to play .519 ball. We still have 12 games against the Royals, a team we own, on the schedule. We have 49 games against AL Central ahead of us. We are currently .800 (20-5) against the AL Central. Should we dip to .500 against the AL Central, that is another 25 wins right there. Are you getting the picture now?

Ozzie pointed out yesterday on the pre-game show that Iguchi played in Japan where the season is much shorter than 162 games. He needs to get plenty of rest so he does not run out of gas in late August. I fully agree with the above posters who feel the bench needs to remain sharp with semi-regular playing time.

Anyway, if it's late in the game and we need one or two runs to win with the "B" or "C" lineup in there, he can always have an "A" lister pinch hit for the win.

Flight #24
06-08-2005, 03:26 PM
Ok, gang. It's all cool. If we go .667 the rest of the season (win two, lose one), we finish with 127 wins. That might get us in the Wild Card. If we go .500 for the rest of the season, we win 110 games. We need only 54 wins to get 93 wins on the season, the number considered enough for the division. That would require us to play .519 ball. We still have 12 games against the Royals, a team we own, on the schedule. We have 49 games against AL Central ahead of us. We are currently .800 (20-5) against the AL Central. Should we dip to .500 against the AL Central, that is another 25 wins right there. Are you getting the picture now?



:?:

39-19 (58 games, 104 remaining)
104/2=52
52+39=91, not 110.

FWIW, if we play .667 ball the rest of the way, we'll get 108wins. IMO it'll be somewhere in between, right around 100.

Ol' No. 2
06-08-2005, 04:10 PM
i think the fact that ozzie puts every replacement/utility player in the lineup after we win the first two has something to do with it, not a lack of killer instinct. the 15-5 record in game 1's shows the killer instinct to draw first blood.Sorry, but that just doesn't hold water. Look at the run production of those "replacement" lineups. The last one was last Wendesday against the LAAAAA Angels: 7 runs scored. Before that it was the Drays on May 11: they won that one 5-2. These "replacement" lineups have been producing at least as well as the regulars.

voodoochile
06-08-2005, 04:16 PM
Ok, gang. It's all cool. If we go .667 the rest of the season (win two, lose one), we finish with 127 wins. That might get us in the Wild Card. If we go .500 for the rest of the season, we win 110 games. We need only 54 wins to get 93 wins on the season, the number considered enough for the division. That would require us to play .519 ball. We still have 12 games against the Royals, a team we own, on the schedule. We have 49 games against AL Central ahead of us. We are currently .800 (20-5) against the AL Central. Should we dip to .500 against the AL Central, that is another 25 wins right there. Are you getting the picture now?

Ozzie pointed out yesterday on the pre-game show that Iguchi played in Japan where the season is much shorter than 162 games. He needs to get plenty of rest so he does not run out of gas in late August. I fully agree with the above posters who feel the bench needs to remain sharp with semi-regular playing time.

Anyway, if it's late in the game and we need one or two runs to win with the "B" or "C" lineup in there, he can always have an "A" lister pinch hit for the win.

You need to check your math. .500 for the rest of the season is 52 more wins and that is 91 victories.

.667 ball is 70 more wins which is 109 wins. (just over .667 for the season as we are above that mark now).

voodoochile
06-08-2005, 04:17 PM
Sorry, but that just doesn't hold water. Look at the run production of those "replacement" lineups. The last one was last Wendesday against the LAAAAA Angels: 7 runs scored. Before that it was the Drays on May 11: they won that one 5-2. These "replacement" lineups have been producing at least as well as the regulars.

And one of those replacement lineups included Everett, Dye, Frank and PK all in the same lineup, hardly giving the game away on paper...

DumpJerry
06-08-2005, 04:32 PM
I guess I lost my job as WSI Accountant. Sorry gang, just got a bit carried away with the possibilities..........:smile: