PDA

View Full Version : Mac Discussion


Lip Man 1
07-19-2006, 10:30 PM
All this talk of Rob in center field set me to cogitating.

Seems like I recall that when he was acquired both Kenny and Ozzie said that he would be playing the corner outfield spots and occasionally third base. (perhaps someone can check this?)

If that's true then everyone knows he's not a center fielder. In some ways he's sticking his neck out for the team because he's playing out of position and not bitching over it.

Anyway those who like to play the 'blame game' seem to have two choices for this situation.

A. Brian Anderson because he can't hit his weight

or

B. Ozzie Guillen because as Hal pointed out, the Sox only have four outfielders (counting Rob) because Ozzie feels it's more important to have someone in case either Konerko or Thome gets hurt, who can play first base (Gload.) So Ozzie thinks the possibility of something happening is more important then the reality of what is happening.

I'd have to pin this one on Ozzie because he refuses to budge in his position. Rob isn't a center fielder but I'm not ripping him that badly because at least he's trying to help the team.

Lip

TaylorStSox
07-19-2006, 10:33 PM
I blame Ozzie for not believing in the kid. It's sad that when one of the most negative fan bases in all of sports rally behind a kid and his manager can't.

NoShoesJoe
07-19-2006, 10:35 PM
Well put, but sometimes helping the team is by not helping them. There's no reason BA shouldn't have played today, especially after the run support yesterday. I think we've moved from small ball to waiting for the homerun ball while pitching is suffering and we're not fielding our best defense. I like Rob, but not as a CF when BA has greater range, speed, and arm. RM & SP collided because of communiations, just like RM & JU on the bloop single. What's the common denomintor?

bluestar
07-19-2006, 10:39 PM
I definitely don't blame Mackowiak. I really like the guy and am glad he is with the Sox. I liked him when he was a Pirate, and was excited when the Sox acquired him.

I blame Ozzie for insisting that Mackowiak play CF so often. As I said in the Gameday thread at the beginning of the game tonight, if Anderson is going to be the centerfielder, then he needs to play there. The guy can't be expected to hit with any consistency when he doesn't get played with any consistency. Maybe BA catches that bloop hit, maybe not, but at least he would have had the chance, and some people wouldn't be blaming Mackowiak for the loss.

Jjav829
07-19-2006, 10:40 PM
I blame Ozzie for not believing in the kid. It's sad that when one of the most negative fan bases in all of sports rally behind a kid and his manager can't.


Hahaha, you're ****ting me. Did you really just call our fan base one of the most negative fan bases in all of sports?

jenn2080
07-19-2006, 10:40 PM
This not putting Brian in is getting old. Ozzie needs to have faith in him and should see by now what a solid CF Brian is and could be. Brian isnt going to get better quicker if Ozzie only lets him 3 days a week. I 110% faith in Brian. Solid Defense is very important....and Brian def proves he has it

SoxSpeed22
07-19-2006, 10:41 PM
Mack is not a centerfielder so there is no reason to make him something he's not. BA is a centerfielder. KW got him to be a utility infielder or corner outfielder. At the beginning of the year, we completely ruled out the idea of him in centerfield. He can hit, but turning outs into hits might be overstated by the numbers because usually when it happens, runs score.

sox230
07-19-2006, 10:47 PM
Can we please have the same lineup 2 nights in a row? It would be nice to create chemistry with an EVERYDAY lineup, because I am not sure if we even have one. We do not need Robby Mack for his offense we have enough, he was brought to BACKUP crede with his back troubles, and spell others in LEFT AND RIGHT FIELD. He has barely even played center before this year. We need Anderson's D. Ozzie needs to stop playing percentages and just put his best team on the field.

Jjav829
07-19-2006, 10:49 PM
Can we please have the same lineup 2 nights in a row? It would be nice to create chemistry with an EVERYDAY lineup, because I am not sure if we even have one. We do not need Robby Mack for his offense we have enough, he was brought to BACKUP crede with his back troubles, and spell others in LEFT AND RIGHT FIELD. He has barely even played center before this year. We need Anderson's D. Ozzie needs to stop playing percentages and just put his best team on the field.

And you felt the need to make the same exact post in two different threads why?

Hitmen77
07-19-2006, 10:55 PM
I blame Ozzie for this. BA is hitting .300 over the last month, so why is he still being benched every 3rd game?

With Javy prone to big inning meltdowns after bloop hits, what was Ozzie thinking by putting Mack in there? Isn't one of Ozzie's main goals to get our starting pitching back on track? Doesn't some solid D go a long way to solving that problem?

Here's what I thought about it before the game tonight:
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1246510#post1246510

If a dope like me saw this coming, then why isn't Ozzie more concerned about defense to try to boost a shakey pitcher?

CLR01
07-19-2006, 10:59 PM
I definitely don't blame Mackowiak.


You can't blame Mack for this. As someone else metioned in the post game thread Mack doesn't fill out the line-up card.

Didn't Ozzie say he was done with the rotating CFer bit back in June when the talk of Anderson getting sent down was going on?

JB98
07-19-2006, 11:00 PM
I don't think Rob is a good CF, but I know he's doing the best he can out there. He's a team player, and he's doing what they're asking him to do. I would have liked to have seen BA in the lineup tonight, but Rob isn't the reason we lost.

Norberto7
07-19-2006, 11:00 PM
For ease of use of this thread:

Main Entry: cog·i·tate http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:popWin%28%27/cgi-bin/audio.pl?cogita02.wav=cogitate%27%29)
Pronunciation: 'kä-j&-"tAt - to meditate deeply or intently

I figured I might not be the only one who has never heard that word before. I kind of like it, though. I will cogitate using it more often.

kevingrt
07-19-2006, 11:01 PM
Totally blame Ozzie here. Mac has nothing to do with it. BA should have been playing today, no doubt. You trusted Aaron in '04 now trust Anderson in '06, PLEASE!

Hitmen77
07-19-2006, 11:02 PM
...this might be a bad comparison, but Ozzie's insistance on constantly running Mack out into CF are sort of reminding me of Jerry Manual and his goofy lineup moves.

I just don't get it. Why starting Mack in CF in one of the most spacious outfields in the AL on a day when Javier "one bloop hit will open the floodgates" Vazquez is pitching.

TornLabrum
07-19-2006, 11:10 PM
As I mentioned somewhere earlier, Ozzie was POed at Anderson last night on that flyball that Podsednik had to chase down all the way into CF. Anderson just kind of trotted in front of him and apparently was laughing about it, which apparently is what set Ozzie off.

At least that the report I heard about what was said on North's show this morning. So apparently Anderson was being punished.

CLR01
07-19-2006, 11:13 PM
As I mentioned somewhere earlier, Ozzie was POed at Anderson last night on that flyball that Podsednik had to chase down all the way into CF. Anderson just kind of trotted in front of him and apparently was laughing about it, which apparently is what set Ozzie off.

At least that the report I heard about what was said on North's show this morning. So apparently Anderson was being punished.


Well that may explain why he was in tonight but Ozzie starting Mack in center is not a one time thing.

bluestar
07-19-2006, 11:13 PM
As I mentioned somewhere earlier, Ozzie was POed at Anderson last night on that flyball that Podsednik had to chase down all the way into CF. Anderson just kind of trotted in front of him and apparently was laughing about it, which apparently is what set Ozzie off.

At least that the report I heard about what was said on North's show this morning. So apparently Anderson was being punished.

So fine the guy and chew him out, but don't punish the whole team.

TheOldRoman
07-19-2006, 11:32 PM
I don't think having Gload is Ozzie's position as much as it's Kenny's. Ozzie's comments and actions in the past have shown that he doesn't like Gload. If Ozzie had a better option, Gload would not be on the team.
Look, Gload is a very good hitter off the bench, but he is not an outfielder. Gload was the best player we had on the fringe of our roster when we broke camp, that's why he is here. I would hate to lose Gload, but we are going to because he is out of options. Ross could be valuable, with his bat and glove, and that is why KW has been hesitant to cut him. Gload is only on the team now because Kenny hasn't been able to find a good backup outfielder. He will get one before the deadline. I don't think it's Ozzie's fault.

FedEx227
07-19-2006, 11:47 PM
As I mentioned somewhere earlier, Ozzie was POed at Anderson last night on that flyball that Podsednik had to chase down all the way into CF. Anderson just kind of trotted in front of him and apparently was laughing about it, which apparently is what set Ozzie off.

At least that the report I heard about what was said on North's show this morning. So apparently Anderson was being punished.

But really how many of us knew that Mackowiak was going to be out there? I remember seeing threads post-game talking about the inevitable Mackowiak start.

BadBobbyJenks
07-19-2006, 11:59 PM
Mack is not a centerfielder so there is no reason to make him something he's not. BA is a centerfielder. KW got him to be a utility infielder or corner outfielder. At the beginning of the year, we completely ruled out the idea of him in centerfield. He can hit, but turning outs into hits might be overstated by the numbers because usually when it happens, runs score.


thats the things its not Mack's fault he goes out and plays wheres he told, and gives it 100% effort but hes just not a good centerfielder. As Lip said in the 1st post we brought rob here to play corner outfield and back up crede. However, we never use him in this role. I loved when Kenny went out and got mack, but really has no role on this team when we use ozuna to back up pods and cintron to play for crede...we need a real back up centerfielder if we are going to refuse to play BA every day

Nellie_Fox
07-20-2006, 12:06 AM
So fine the guy and chew him out, but don't punish the whole team.The best way to get an athlete's attention is to sit him down. They've been chewed out before. Fines only go so far. The best managers have pulled star players during a game for failure to hustle. Anderson has certainly not earned any slack to not hustle on defense.

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 12:56 AM
Well that may explain why he was in tonight but Ozzie starting Mack in center is not a one time thing.


But it had abated a little till BA dogged it. Ozzie's making the lineups that he think gives the team the best chance to win not just today but for the season. I want to see BA out there as much as possible, but Ozzie's got to run the team his own way. I think he's earned that right, to a certain extent. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes on any given day? We just BARELY have some insight as to a situation regarding a mental lapse by BA last night. Who knows what goes into the day to day of making the lineup?

Playah
07-20-2006, 01:29 AM
So then we're all in agreement it seems.

Start BA every day, and let Mack be our awesome utility backup guy and pinch hitter etc

FireMariotti
07-20-2006, 01:47 AM
I blame Ozzie for not believing in the kid. It's sad that when one of the most negative fan bases in all of sports rally behind a kid and his manager can't.

Negative? Hardly.

Passionate? Absolutely!

bluestar
07-20-2006, 07:11 AM
But it had abated a little till BA dogged it. Ozzie's making the lineups that he think gives the team the best chance to win not just today but for the season. I want to see BA out there as much as possible, but Ozzie's got to run the team his own way. I think he's earned that right, to a certain extent. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes on any given day? We just BARELY have some insight as to a situation regarding a mental lapse by BA last night. Who knows what goes into the day to day of making the lineup?

I very much agree with this, and I guess we are really talking about two separate issues here. I trust Ozzie to know what is best for the team, so if BA needed to be disciplined, that's one issue. The other issue is using Mackowiak for his backup, and not just occasionally, but rather frequently. Since everyone seems to agree that Mackowiak is not a good option for a CF backup, then perhaps the people calling for a trade for a CF'er are correct.

jenn2080
07-20-2006, 07:28 AM
Well that may explain why he was in tonight but Ozzie starting Mack in center is not a one time thing.

punish him in another way dont punish him in a way that well hurt the game

jdieter
07-20-2006, 08:17 AM
Ozzy has a big chunk of last night's loss. Going in it looks like a defensive struggle in a park with a huge outfield and we're throwing a pitcher that's been burnt by big innings. Not the situation you start your backup CF. If Ozzy held Andersen out of the lineup for Tuesday nights play we've got bigger problems than the way the lineup card is filled out.
Andersen would have played shallower than Mackowiak and got to Guillen's popup. That leaves 1st base open and the entire pitch sequence to Monroe would have been different.
I'm not saying we still win, but Ozzy didn't give us the best chance at it.

Deuce
07-20-2006, 08:20 AM
I'd have to pin this one on Ozzie because he refuses to budge in his position. Rob isn't a center fielder but I'm not ripping him that badly because at least he's trying to help the team.Word.

rdwj
07-20-2006, 08:26 AM
I love Ozzie and all, but the BA thing is just getting CRAZY. Mac hurts the team in center. With Brian finally hitting, there is NO reason that he shouldn't be playing in the biggest series of the year so far.

If he wanted to punish him for dogging it, no problem - chew him out and fine him. There is NO WAY we should be fielding a TOTAL liability in a HUGE center field.

Ozzie - I usually have your back, but you ****ed up here.

jdieter
07-20-2006, 08:28 AM
Sorry got the base runner situation wrong in my previous post. Runners on 1st & 2nd if the Guillen bloop is caught. Better situation yet for Vasquez.
We let one get away that may have really put some doubt on the Tigers.

Jaffar
07-20-2006, 08:30 AM
Ozzy has a big chunk of last night's loss. Going in it looks like a defensive struggle in a park with a huge outfield and we're throwing a pitcher that's been burnt by big innings. Not the situation you start your backup CF. If Ozzy held Andersen out of the lineup for Tuesday nights play we've got bigger problems than the way the lineup card is filled out.
Andersen would have played shallower than Mackowiak and got to Guillen's popup. That leaves 1st base open and the entire pitch sequence to Monroe would have been different.
I'm not saying we still win, but Ozzy didn't give us the best chance at it.

The funny part is, Anderson wouldn't have to play shallower to get to that. If anybody has the video from the replay, it was a jamshot that was fisted out there and you can see Uribe running out and Rob standing still.

jdm2662
07-20-2006, 08:39 AM
A guy at my work said the same thing before yesterday's game, starting Mac in the that big outfield is bound for trouble. You can get away with it somewhat at Comiskey because the outfield isn't that big. It's huge at Comerica and you need your best guys out there. No way this should be pinned on Rob. It's not his fault he's playing out of position. He's doing what he his told.

Hitmen77
07-20-2006, 08:52 AM
As I mentioned somewhere earlier, Ozzie was POed at Anderson last night on that flyball that Podsednik had to chase down all the way into CF. Anderson just kind of trotted in front of him and apparently was laughing about it, which apparently is what set Ozzie off.

At least that the report I heard about what was said on North's show this morning. So apparently Anderson was being punished.

So, Ozzie put two games in the standings at risk just to discipline Anderson? Wow, I feel much better now.

How about this for a parallel universe version of the game where Anderson starts:
Bottom 6th:
C. Guillen pops out to Anderson, Thames grounds to Uribe who turns a double play. Inning over, Sox 2, Tigers 1.

Instead of give the Sox their best shot to be 2 1/2 games back out, we're now 4 1/2 games out because of the predictable Mackowiak blunder followed by Vazquez meltdown. Instead of a chance to kick the Tigers when their down and make them doubt if they can beat the Sox, they've now got momentum and are all pumped to take the series from us this afternoon.

You know, 4.5 back with 11 to play against Detroit no longer sounds like we can easily take the division from them in our head-to-head matchups. But, I'm glad Brian's been disciplined.

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 09:08 AM
All this talk of Rob in center field set me to cogitating.

Seems like I recall that when he was acquired both Kenny and Ozzie said that he would be playing the corner outfield spots and occasionally third base. (perhaps someone can check this?)

If that's true then everyone knows he's not a center fielder. In some ways he's sticking his neck out for the team because he's playing out of position and not bitching over it.

Anyway those who like to play the 'blame game' seem to have two choices for this situation.

A. Brian Anderson because he can't hit his weight

or

B. Ozzie Guillen because as Hal pointed out, the Sox only have four outfielders (counting Rob) because Ozzie feels it's more important to have someone in case either Konerko or Thome gets hurt, who can play first base (Gload.) So Ozzie thinks the possibility of something happening is more important then the reality of what is happening.

I'd have to pin this one on Ozzie because he refuses to budge in his position. Rob isn't a center fielder but I'm not ripping him that badly because at least he's trying to help the team.

LipDid I miss something? Did Rob Mackowiak throw a hanging curve to Craig Monroe?

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 09:13 AM
So fine the guy and chew him out, but don't punish the whole team.
Ditto. Anderson probably isn't a tough guy to discipline; he seems like he takes instruction more than willingly and I can't imagine that he wouldn't be abashed at being chewed out for something. To sit him for a game and put Mack in center really is punishing the whole team, and that doesn't seem like Ozzie's style to me.

Did Mack start last night because Bonderman was pitching and he's a righty? I believe that Ozzie starts Mack against the right-handed pitchers, and I really wish he would stop that, because Anderson is NOT an automatic out against RHP. And even if he were, they need him in center field!

This is about the only move that Ozzie makes that confuses and frustrates me. I know he knows a thousand times more about baseball than I do, and I wish he'd explain to us why he does it. Mike North on the Score this morning said he wanted to ask Ozzie why he plays Mack in center. Maybe he will be able to ask.

So on this one, I blame Ozzie.

Think if we got up a petition asking him to stop playing Mack in center and start using him in the corners to break Pods and JD and e-mailed it to him, he'd respond?

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 09:15 AM
Did I miss something? Did Rob Mackowiak throw a hanging curve to Craig Monroe?

Can he throw a curveball? Can we switch him with Vasquez? Worth a try!

INSox56
07-20-2006, 09:20 AM
Did I miss something? Did Rob Mackowiak throw a hanging curve to Craig Monroe?

LOL I was just going to say something like that until I read your post. Seriously Ozzie has some issues with some of the tendencies he has. This pulling Anderson for whatever BS reason has to stop, but probably won't. Also, anyone remember last year Ozzie's obsession with putting Marte in? I don't know if anyone noticed it, but he was brought in a LOT in situations where you scratch your head. Then Marte would give up a hit/walk and then ozzie'd pull him. I didn't get it then, don't get it now. Same with Garcia....not too much lately, but especially last year. Garcia looks like garbage an entire game, then ozzie brings him in for just that one more inning and he ends up either putting two men on or giving up a lot of runs. Then you see ozzie bring someone in....why?

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 09:28 AM
punish him in another way dont punish him in a way that well hurt the game

Bull****. That's a dusty baker attitude. It will help the team in the long run if Anderson learns his lesson the hard way. I'd rather lose a game and have Anderson know he can't lollygag than let him keep playing and think that he can get away with giving 70%

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 09:30 AM
So, Ozzie put two games in the standings at risk just to discipline Anderson? Wow, I feel much better now.
.

You're right. I wish Dusty Baker were our manager. He would have just told Anderson "come on dude, don't do that again."

Then he could have even said to the media "yo dude, it's not that he didn't hustle to the fly ball, he hustled at the wrong time"

Because one game's not something you can make up over the course of a 162 game season....

INSox56
07-20-2006, 09:34 AM
You're right. I wish Dusty Baker were our manager. He would have just told Anderson "come on dude, don't do that again."

Then he could have even said to the media "yo dude, it's not that he didn't hustle to the fly ball, he hustled at the wrong time"

Because one game's not something you can make up over the course of a 162 game season....

LOL would you rather it be one game or one play? Take him out in a game like last night to make him "learn a lesson" and we lose it, or let him make the mistake on ONE PLAY and learn a lesson from that. I HIGHLY DOUBT that if Anderson were at fault for a bad bad play in the OF, he'd shrug it off and not learn something from that...

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 09:38 AM
LOL would you rather it be one game or one play? Take him out in a game like last night to make him "learn a lesson" and we lose it, or let him make the mistake on ONE PLAY and learn a lesson from that. I HIGHLY DOUBT that if Anderson were at fault for a bad bad play in the OF, he'd shrug it off and not learn something from that...Obviously, it's all Mackowiak's fault they lost that one last night.:rolleyes:

Hitmen77
07-20-2006, 09:47 AM
You're right. I wish Dusty Baker were our manager. He would have just told Anderson "come on dude, don't do that again."

Then he could have even said to the media "yo dude, it's not that he didn't hustle to the fly ball, he hustled at the wrong time"

Ha! It must be nice to live in such a black and white world where there is Ozzie's way or Dusty's way and absolutely nothing in between.

Because one game's not something you can make up over the course of a 162 game season....

Let's see - we've been saying this since May. Two months later, we're still waiting to make up those games. Let me know if you still feel this way in late September if we're still 2 games behind the Tiggers, and we have to go to the Hump Dome, and the Tiggers get to beat up on KC. If you think pivotal games against the team we're chasing are so unimportant, then I'm glad you're not the Sox manager.

GoSox2K3
07-20-2006, 09:55 AM
Did I miss something? Did Rob Mackowiak throw a hanging curve to Craig Monroe?

His defense led to that ball being thrown. If Anderson catches that ball, then there's a chance that Monroe never even comes up in that inning.

Not that Vazquez is blameless, but I think our struggling pitching could really use some good defense so that they're not put in the position of choking in innings where our poor defense keeps the inning going.

I don't anyone is "blaming" Mackowiak - because we all acknowledge that he's just naturally not a good CF. It's more the decision to play him in CF every 3rd day.

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 09:58 AM
Ha! It must be nice to live in such a black and white world where there is Ozzie's way or Dusty's way and absolutely nothing in between.

Hitmen beat me to it. Proposing a ridiculous extreme and then saying that anyone who disagrees with you is favoring that extreme is a technique that's used in politics and on internet boards. :redneck It's not automatic that if Ozzie doesn't do X, then he has to behave like or become Dusty Baker.

Anyway, I haven't seen one thing that suggests to me that BA was benched last night for anything other than Ozzie playing Mack against RHP. From everything Ozzie has said over the years and the way he's been seen to handle his players, I do not believe that he would bench his best defensive CF in a game against the division leaders just to "teach him a lesson." That's punitive and not educational, and IMO it's not Ozzie's way, and until he says he did that, I don't believe he did.

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 10:00 AM
His defense led to that ball being thrown. If Anderson catches that ball, then there's a chance that Monroe never even comes up in that inning.

Not that Vazquez is blameless, but I think our struggling pitching could really use some good defense so that they're not put in the position of choking in innings where our poor defense keeps the inning going.

I don't anyone is "blaming" Mackowiak - because we all acknowledge that he's just naturally not a good CF. It's more the decision to play him in CF every 3rd day.Huh??? With no outs and the tying and winning runs on base in the most spacious OF in baseball, no one would be playing shallow enough to catch that ball. And even if he had, it would have been only one out. So how does Monroe not come to bat? They would have lost 4-2 instead of 5-2.

Edit: But screw the facts. Let's blame it all on Mackowiak.

Jaffar
07-20-2006, 10:14 AM
Huh??? With no outs and the tying and winning runs on base in the most spacious OF in baseball, no one would be playing shallow enough to catch that ball. And even if he had, it would have been only one out. So how does Monroe not come to bat? They would have lost 4-2 instead of 5-2.

Edit: But screw the facts. Let's blame it all on Mackowiak.

First I just wanted to say that the replay I saw during the game from the camera up above and behind home plate showed Mackowiak misplaying that ball hit by Guillen not because he was playing to deep.

Second, I think everybody is blaming Ozzie for putting a below average center fielder in "the most spacious OF in baseball".

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 10:21 AM
First I just wanted to say that the replay I saw during the game from the camera up above and behind home plate showed Mackowiak misplaying that ball hit by Guillen not because he was playing to deep.

Second, I think everybody is blaming Ozzie for putting a below average center fielder in "the most spacious OF in baseball".I don't necessarily agree that anyone else would have gotten that ball. But there's no point in arguing that point because it really made no difference the outcome of the game. Monroe would have come to bat with two on instead of three. So they lose 4-2 instead of 5-2. Big deal.

Jaffar
07-20-2006, 10:28 AM
I don't necessarily agree that anyone else would have gotten that ball. But there's no point in arguing that point because it really made no difference the outcome of the game. Monroe would have come to bat with two on instead of three. So they lose 4-2 instead of 5-2. Big deal.

We can agree to disagree on the first part because I think Mack could have made that play but I can't say for a fact that anybody would have been able to get to that ball but I agree with you that it doesn't mean the outcome would have been any different, for all we know a hit parade could have followed and we lose by worse. Mack shouldn't have been playing center last night (or ever again) in my opinion though and that's really all I can stand behind.

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 10:29 AM
I don't necessarily agree that anyone else would have gotten that ball. But there's no point in arguing that point because it really made no difference the outcome of the game. Monroe would have come to bat with two on instead of three. So they lose 4-2 instead of 5-2. Big deal.
I may be wrong, but I thought this Mack in CF discussion was about more than just last night's game, was about the general tendency of Ozzie to play Mack in CF.

Which I'm against. It's not fair to Mack, either -- he can't be enjoying this any more than we are.

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 10:34 AM
I may be wrong, but I thought this Mack in CF discussion was about more than just last night's game, was about the general tendency of Ozzie to play Mack in CF.

Which I'm against. It's not fair to Mack, either -- he can't be enjoying this any more than we are.People ranted every time Ozzie played Timo Perez last year. That's what Ozzie does. He plays his bench players. Long-term it pays off in a number of ways. And they really don't have anyone who can sub in CF any better than Mackowiak.

GoSox2K3
07-20-2006, 10:42 AM
Huh??? With no outs and the tying and winning runs on base in the most spacious OF in baseball, no one would be playing shallow enough to catch that ball. And even if he had, it would have been only one out. So how does Monroe not come to bat? They would have lost 4-2 instead of 5-2.

Edit: But screw the facts. Let's blame it all on Mackowiak.

My apologies, I guess you've never heard of this thing in baseball called a "double play"? Maybe this will help: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/double%20play After the play in question, Thames hit a grounder to Uribe which could have been a double play to end the inning. With nobody out, Uribe went for the out at the plate. It's all hypothetical - there's no way to know if the pitch selection by us and hitting approach by Thames would have been the same. But it does point out that, all other things being equal, GOOD DEFENSE COULD HAVE GOTTEN US OUT OF THAT INNING!


Edit: But, screw what other people are saying about not blaming Mackowiak, let's just accuse them of blaming it all Mackowiak.:tongue:

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 10:43 AM
And they really don't have anyone who can sub in CF any better than Mackowiak.
This is true. It concerns me a little. However, BA is very young and very healthy and barring anything unforseen, they shouldn't need a sub for that position the way they do for, say, 3rd base (because Joe's back is a consideration), or the way they might for catcher (Ozzie likes to rest AJ in day games after night games, and with what a catcher's knees and back go through in a game, that's understandable).

ETA: And I'm not against Ozzie playing Mack, just not in CF. I would like Mack to spell Pods in LF, but then who would hit in the leadoff spot. I don't have an answer to that one.

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 10:45 AM
I guess you've never heard of this thing in baseball called a "double play"? Thames hit a grounder to Uribe which could have been a double play to end the inning. Uribe went for the out at the plate. It's all hypothetical - there's no way to know if the pitch selection by us and hitting approach by Thames would have been the same. But it does point out that, all other things being equal, GOOD DEFENSE COULD HAVE GOTTEN US OUT OF THAT INNING!


Edit: But, screw what other people are saying about not blaming Mackowiak, let's just accuse them of blaming it all Mackowiak.:tongue:It was not a hard hit ball and Thames isn't slow. If Uribe could have gotten a DP he would have certainly done so in that situation instead of throwing home. But let's not let facts get in the way of blaming someone we want to blame.

DaleJRFan
07-20-2006, 10:48 AM
This whole conversation seems to stem from the game yesterday and a specific play (bloop to CF) and one pitch (hung slider). You can't blame Ozzie for getting his bench guys playing time and you can't blame Macko-wack for not having CF range when he isn't a CF.

The real story was that the Sox offense was off snoofing ZZZZZZZZZZ.. and lost the game 5-2. When you have the offensive capabilities the Sox offense indeed does have, you should be able to overcome a 3 run deficit. Two solo homers? 2 runs on six hits?? You gotta be kidding me. Don't blame the loss on Mack or Ozzie. Blame the guys sleeping at the dish.

Ol' No. 2
07-20-2006, 10:49 AM
This is true. It concerns me a little. However, BA is very young and very healthy and barring anything unforseen, they shouldn't need a sub for that position the way they do for, say, 3rd base (because Joe's back is a consideration), or the way they might for catcher (Ozzie likes to rest AJ in day games after night games, and with what a catcher's knees and back go through in a game, that's understandable).

ETA: And I'm not against Ozzie playing Mack, just not in CF. I would like Mack to spell Pods in LF, but then who would hit in the leadoff spot. I don't have an answer to that one.That's exactly why he doesn't do it - he'll use Ozuna when he wants to spell Pods. And he's not going to take Dye out of the lineup. The only way Mackowiak gets playing time is in CF, unless you'd rather see him in the IF :o:. Playing Mackowiak has more to do with getting him playing time than it does with getting Anderson rest.

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 10:49 AM
Two solo homers? 2 runs on six hits?? You gotta be kidding me. Don't blame the loss on Mack or Ozzie. Blame the guys sleeping at the dish.

Or maybe give credit where credit is due: to Jeremy Bonderman.

DaleJRFan
07-20-2006, 10:53 AM
Or maybe give credit where credit is due: to Jeremy Bonderman.

That too.

DaleJRFan
07-20-2006, 10:55 AM
And I'm not against Ozzie playing Mack, just not in CF. I would like Mack to spell Pods in LF, but then who would hit in the leadoff spot. I don't have an answer to that one.

Good call, here.

Mack may not have blazing speed like Pods, but he hits very well for average and takes his walks. He wouldn't be a bad spot lead-off guy considering his OBP. Problem is, he is a leftie and just like Pods, hits miserably against lefthanded pitching.

TornLabrum
07-20-2006, 11:32 AM
Can he throw a curveball? Can we switch him with Vasquez? Worth a try!

Anderson actually did pitch in high school.

WSox8404
07-20-2006, 11:38 AM
And you felt the need to make the same exact post in two different threads why?

Duh. He likes consistency.

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 11:53 AM
The only way Mackowiak gets playing time is in CF, unless you'd rather see him in the IF :o:.

No, but maybe if Coop worked with him for a while ...


I guess I would rather see Mack come in late for either Pods or Dye, if the Sox are ahead or behind by a lot. That's an option that Ozzie isn't using, and as I said, I am sure he has good reasons for it, I just don't know them.

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 11:56 AM
Anderson actually did pitch in high school.

I know. But I was talking about Mack.

I am such an Anderson fan that I have no doubt he could pitch, if the team needed him to. Of course, that's a measure of my fanaticism, not of BA's actual abilities. So, teal.

GoSox2K3
07-20-2006, 12:01 PM
It was not a hard hit ball and Thames isn't slow. If Uribe could have gotten a DP he would have certainly done so in that situation instead of throwing home. But let's not let facts get in the way of blaming someone we want to blame. :nuts:


...alas, we'll never know if the Sox could have stopped the flood gates with better defense on the field. That's okay, I'm comfortable with assuming a DP was impossible and we would have lost anyway.

mbwhitesox
07-20-2006, 12:02 PM
I definitely don't blame Mackowiak, just like I wouldn't blame anyone else on the team besides BA if they struggled out in CF, because its not their position.

If we're going to continute to platoon out there then we need to aquire someone who can play and get Mack some starts in LF and RF. Otherwise is should be BA all day, every day.

kobo
07-20-2006, 12:26 PM
I don't blame Mac either. He's just doing what he is asked to do. And we all know Ozzie likes to play his bench to keep them fresh. However, in an outfield like Comerica's, you should be playing your best defensive outfielders. Especially when you are playing the division leaders and are trying to catch them. I am not blaming the loss on Mac, and I don't even know if having BA in the lineup would have made a difference, but with the month BA is having and the fact his defense is leaps and bounds better than Mac's, the choice to start BA would have been an easy one for me.

Sometimes I think Ozzie tries to play the matchups too often instead of just sticking with guys. That's what really gets to me. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. I would love to see him just stick with some guys sometimes instead of playing the matchups. But what do I know, I'm just a fan.

slobes
07-20-2006, 12:31 PM
[quote=Ol' No. 2]The only way Mackowiak gets playing time is in CF, unless you'd rather see him in the IF :o:quote]
When we first got him, wasn't Mack originally supposed to be Crede's primary replacement at third? I think he's played a bunch in the infield in his career. I wouldn't have a problem with it. The only reason he isn't playing there though is because we already have Cintron, Ozuna, and Ross Gload.

MagicNumber22
07-20-2006, 12:42 PM
I blame this on Ozzie as well.

This team needs Jerry Manuel back.

Frater Perdurabo
07-20-2006, 01:52 PM
I have no problem with Ozzie working in all of his bench players. With amphetamines now banned, this makes even more sense than before.

I have no problem with Rob Mackowiak.

I have no problem with Mackowiak getting some ABs at Brian Anderson's expense (even though Anderson has hit very well of late).

However, Mackowiak should not play in center field.

It's not a perfect solution by any means, but I'd rather have Dye or Pods play center when Anderson doesn't start. Neither is a natural center fielder, but at least they have years of OUTFIELD experience, whereas Mack is a utility player who doesn't play great defense at any position (that's why he's a utlity guy - his bat is marginally good enough to be a starter, but his glove isn't starting quality at any position).

TornLabrum
07-20-2006, 02:28 PM
I blame this on Ozzie as well.

This team needs Jerry Manuel back.

:tealtutor:

MagicNumber22
07-20-2006, 02:52 PM
This team needs Jerry Manuel back.

GoSox2K3
07-20-2006, 02:55 PM
You're right. I wish Dusty Baker were our manager. He would have just told Anderson "come on dude, don't do that again."

Then he could have even said to the media "yo dude, it's not that he didn't hustle to the fly ball, he hustled at the wrong time"

Because one game's not something you can make up over the course of a 162 game season... .

I'm glad to hear that the Sox are now only one game back and that we have 162 more to play.

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 03:50 PM
I'm glad to hear that the Sox are now only one game back and that we have 162 more to play.

straw men are fun. Every game is important. Head to head games matter immediately in the games back dpt, but every single game is equally important in W/L record which ultimately (excepting very rare circumstances) determine playoff teams.

Yes, this game SEEMS more important...but it's also important that Ozzie make a statement to his players that bull**** will not be tolerated.

I wonder what false argument is going to come out of your mouth now. I'm genuinely curious.

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 03:53 PM
Ha! It must be nice to live in such a black and white world where there is Ozzie's way or Dusty's way and absolutely nothing in between.



Let's see - we've been saying this since May. Two months later, we're still waiting to make up those games. Let me know if you still feel this way in late September if we're still 2 games behind the Tiggers, and we have to go to the Hump Dome, and the Tiggers get to beat up on KC. If you think pivotal games against the team we're chasing are so unimportant, then I'm glad you're not the Sox manager.

Just call me Michael Jackson. But seriously--what kind of message would that send: "we're going to sit you out AFTER an important game, because you're good enough that although your behavior was bad we can't afford to play without you."

the key to Ozzie (And Lou Piniella and Bobby Cox for that matter)'s style of managing is that NO player is so important that if they pull bull**** the team can't play without them.

What's so hard to understand about this?

If Paulie or Thome pulled bull**** (and they wouldn't, and that's why they're so good) they'd be pulled regardless of game (playoffs notwithstanding). Or at least that's what I assume would happen...

It's called accountability, and one game (as if putting in Mackowiack is CONCEDING a ballgame) is a small price to pay

fquaye149
07-20-2006, 03:54 PM
LOL would you rather it be one game or one play? Take him out in a game like last night to make him "learn a lesson" and we lose it, or let him make the mistake on ONE PLAY and learn a lesson from that. I HIGHLY DOUBT that if Anderson were at fault for a bad bad play in the OF, he'd shrug it off and not learn something from that...

This is so laughable that I only quote this so you might read how ridiculous your words are.

Look at Aramis Ramirez's habitual lack of hustle. If you nip it in the bud it does not become a habit. It's not one play. It's a mentality.

How is this so hard to understand?

southside rocks
07-20-2006, 04:04 PM
This is so laughable that I only quote this so you might read how ridiculous your words are.

Look at Aramis Ramirez's habitual lack of hustle. If you nip it in the bud it does not become a habit. It's not one play. It's a mentality.

How is this so hard to understand?
Brian Anderson is not an Aramis Ramirez. Again, this is the "set up an absurd extreme and accuse those who disagree with you of supporting it" tactic.


BA's error was not a lack of hustle, to begin with; if there was an error on his part, it was over-playing his position and cutting the LF out of a play that was his. You equate BA with Ramirez, who dogs it on the field every single day? That's just silly.

nasox
07-20-2006, 04:06 PM
This team needs Jerry Manuel back.
:roflmao:

Way to follow instructions.