PDA

View Full Version : Same old story - no respect from ESPN for our bench


mweflen
03-22-2006, 04:35 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2376779

Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, Mets and CUBS are the teams this hack cites as having the deepest benches.

Umm, maybe I've lost count, but don't we have three legitimate starters in Mackowiack, Widge and Cintron, and two proven subs in Ozuna and Gload?

Not to mention our wealth of reserve pitching.

Sigh. Under the radar...

MrRoboto83
03-22-2006, 05:01 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2376779

Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, Mets and CUBS are the teams this hack cites as having the deepest benches.

Umm, maybe I've lost count, but don't we have three legitimate starters in Mackowiack, Widge and Cintron, and two proven subs in Ozuna and Gload?

Not to mention our wealth of reserve pitching.

Sigh. Under the radar...

Well, at least our bench is under the radar, I wish the rest of the team was as well.

Frontman
03-22-2006, 08:17 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2376779

Dodgers, Rangers, Blue Jays, Mets and CUBS are the teams this hack cites as having the deepest benches.

Umm, maybe I've lost count, but don't we have three legitimate starters in Mackowiack, Widge and Cintron, and two proven subs in Ozuna and Gload?

Not to mention our wealth of reserve pitching.

Sigh. Under the radar...

And all 5 teams did oh so much last year. And the year before that. And the year before that. LOL.

Let them doubt our depth. Commentary like that is just to fill air time.

The Cubs have depth? The Cubs?

Sure.

Front

SouthsideFathead
03-22-2006, 08:37 AM
The Cubs have depth? The Cubs?

Sure.

Front

The cubs have a lot of depth...at the beer lines and urinals.

Tragg
03-22-2006, 09:04 AM
I have to agree with their assessment. Not a real hitter in the bunch. 2 utility infielders. And really no power at all - it would be nice to have someone who could pinch hit with power when it's needed.

Widger is a journeyman backup. Ozuna, well, opinions differ, but no power and poor OBP = bad hitter in my book. I never understood the reason for giving him a big contract.

Cintron's okay, but another hitter with limited power who refuses to walk (and this team is OBP challenged in general).
RM is a good player.
Gload's a dime a dozen

Last year, at this time, we had Carl Everett on the bench...nothing close to a hitter of his caliber on this bench. Now, he didn't stay on the bench for long. Let's hope Gload enjoys his time on the pine, although Ozzie will play him a couple of times a week (which is smart to keep the starters fresh). Now overall this bench is better than that bench; but that bench wasn't very good.

FedEx227
03-22-2006, 09:31 AM
^ But its not about comparing last year to this year, its about ranking us against other benches in the league.

I do agree we don't have much power off the bench and the OBP is not great, but I think its been proven that speed off the bench is much more of a key assett over power/OBP (can anybody say Dave Roberts ALCS/Pablo Ozuna in Game 2 ALCS).

I think our bench is one of the tops in the league not because of stats but because of guys who have starting experience, speed and defense. You have to remember that Mack and Cintron are proven starters, albiet on crappy teams, but starters none-the-less.

I'm find going under the radar, helped us last year. I just have a hard time thinking Gerald Laird is better then anyone on our bench.

Chicken Dinner
03-22-2006, 10:26 AM
All I'll say is that it's much better than last years.....and oh yeah, who won the World Series?

Chez
03-22-2006, 11:05 AM
We really don't have any glaring "weak sticks" in our line-up who are obvious choices to be pinch-hit for on a regular basis -- maybe Crede against a nasty righty out of the pen or Pods if we need a homer run to win or tie a game late. So a big-time pinch-hitter off the bench is not really crucial.

Given the number of plodders in our line-up (Konerko, Thome, A.J. and Crede), I like the fact that we've got two burners on the bench that we can use as pinch-runners late in the game. The fact that Ozuna, Mack and Cintron can all play multiple positions gives us lots of flexibility.

All a long way of saying that our bench is an excellent compliment to our everyday players. We're in good shape -- better than last year.

batmanZoSo
03-22-2006, 11:10 AM
I don't see how we could've been overlooked. Well, ESPN are idiots, so maybe that's it.

We have Mackowiak on the bench--a guy who'd start on most teams...and be a pretty decent starter at that. The same could almost be said for Cintron. For an AL team, we have an outstanding bench, period. There may be some as good...

:hawk
But there ain't no one better...

miker
03-22-2006, 11:58 AM
Because ESPN's predictions had such an effect on last year's team...:rolleyes:

Rooney4Prez56
03-22-2006, 12:15 PM
We have Mackowiak on the bench--a guy who'd start on most teams...and be a pretty decent starter at that.


I thought he did start for the Pirates.

Anyway, what's wrong with the bench? We have solid players, and they can play anywhere (unlike Alfonso Soriano). I trust our bench in a tight game.

Flight #24
03-22-2006, 12:33 PM
The Cubs have depth? The Cubs?



I think it's probably a true statement that the Cubs do not have to worry about a significant dropoff in production when subbing in a bench player for a starter (pitchers excepted). ESPN may define that as a strong bench, I define it as a piss-poor starting lineup.

Hangar18
03-22-2006, 12:49 PM
I guess the Cubs deserve mention, they have 3 second-basemen
and about to add a 4th. Cant touch that can we?

chaerulez
03-22-2006, 12:56 PM
I like Chris Widger as much as the next guy here, but I wouldn't classify him as a legit starter elsewhere in MLB... maybe Florida but that's about it.

Domeshot17
03-22-2006, 01:18 PM
The nice thing is we may not have a GREAT bench, but we have the right bench. We dont have that big time power in the bench, but Gload can fill in PK and maybe give us a a 2-4 with a double day once in a while, Mackowiak is solid anywhere (although I dont think hes MUCH of an everday player, career .258 hitter, great utility guy though) and Ozuna who probably is the reserve at 3rd and maybe a corner of, can give us some speed. We have a lot of pinch runners which is nice. Widger in no way shape or form is an everday catcher, but hes a future bullpen coach which is great to have in the dugout. Our lineup is stacked, and minus the handful of interleague NL games, we won't use many pinch hitters. We have a team built around the right role players and situational guys off the bench.

Lip Man 1
03-22-2006, 01:20 PM
With respect folks....

WHO CARES.

It's ESPN remember? Why get worked up over this garbage either way?

Lip

FedEx227
03-22-2006, 01:54 PM
maybe Florida but that's about it.
Widge is over their age limit of 20 and his $650,000 would really hurt the team financially.

soxtalker
03-22-2006, 02:37 PM
I must be missing something here. The fellow lists five teams that he believes have the best benches in the game. And that is supposed to be an insult to the White Sox and their fans? Come on ... we don't have to be ranked first in everything. Other teams are trying pretty hard to come up with good teams of their own, and my first assumption would be that some of them actually succeed in bettering us in some aspects of the game.

Jjav829
03-22-2006, 03:06 PM
I like Chris Widger as much as the next guy here, but I wouldn't classify him as a legit starter elsewhere in MLB... maybe Florida but that's about it.

There aren't many backup catchers in baseball who would start elsewhere. That's usually why they are backups. Look at the catchers mentioned in that article: Henry Blanco, Gerald Laird, Sandy Alomar Jr. - not exactly worldbeaters.

gosox3072
03-22-2006, 03:57 PM
The cubs have a lot of depth...at the beer lines and urinals.

I dont think the cubs have urinals at wrigley!:redneck

Banix12
03-22-2006, 04:22 PM
I have to agree with their assessment. Not a real hitter in the bunch. 2 utility infielders. And really no power at all - it would be nice to have someone who could pinch hit with power when it's needed.

Widger is a journeyman backup. Ozuna, well, opinions differ, but no power and poor OBP = bad hitter in my book. I never understood the reason for giving him a big contract.

Cintron's okay, but another hitter with limited power who refuses to walk (and this team is OBP challenged in general).
RM is a good player.
Gload's a dime a dozen

Last year, at this time, we had Carl Everett on the bench...nothing close to a hitter of his caliber on this bench. Now, he didn't stay on the bench for long. Let's hope Gload enjoys his time on the pine, although Ozzie will play him a couple of times a week (which is smart to keep the starters fresh). Now overall this bench is better than that bench; but that bench wasn't very good.


Who in the lineup are you gonna pinch hit for, especially for power reasons? The bench needed speed more than anything. Much greater need for pinch runners than pinch hitters.

And anyway, while they might not have the power you seek. Gload, Ozuna and Cintron all have a history of being good pinch hitters and putting the ball in play.

At this time last year, Carl Everett was the starting DH. The only time Carl wasn't a starter was when Frank came back. And the only reason he was on the team at all was because he enacted his player option.

Anyway, Gload was crushing the ball at AAA. Maybe his power developed late? Who knows?

mweflen
03-22-2006, 06:52 PM
I must be missing something here. The fellow lists five teams that he believes have the best benches in the game. And that is supposed to be an insult to the White Sox and their fans? Come on ... we don't have to be ranked first in everything. Other teams are trying pretty hard to come up with good teams of their own, and my first assumption would be that some of them actually succeed in bettering us in some aspects of the game.
I don't take it as some personal foil-hat insult. I just think we objectively speaking have one of the better benches out there, probably easily in the top 5. I wouldn't have said so last year (Timo and Willie both really got on my nerves), but this year it's simply a fact.

These are the same people who were picking the Sox 4th in the division last year. Anyone with any baseball smarts could have seen that KW filled all our holes last season, and that we'd be competitive with a shot at making some noise in the playoffs. I'm not saying we were WS favorites, but getting legitimate starters at 2nd, C, RF, SP, as well as a real leadoff man, that was obviously huge.

It just really makes me wonder what these guys smoke in their cushy offices. Methinks they all get high on 2 or 3 teams and really know nothing about the rest of MLB.

BanditJimmy
03-22-2006, 07:07 PM
ESPN?

:whocares

Beer Can Chicken
03-22-2006, 07:39 PM
I like our bench, especially Machs and Ozuna. Probably not the best in the league but it's above average. I'd like to see a little more power coming off the bench but that's probably my only complaint.