PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie Comments On Anderson's Future


Lip Man 1
09-06-2006, 12:00 AM
Some of them seem a little strong to me. I don't think Brian's the guy Ozzie should be upset about this season... at least he shouldn't be at the top of the list.

Anyway here's the link:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060905soxbrite,1,130249.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Lip

samram
09-06-2006, 12:03 AM
Yeah, I read those. He says BA needs more ABs. Well, guess who controls that, Ozzie? Maybe he could have got more if you weren't busy sacrificing the outfield defense every other day by putting Mack in CF.

hi im skot
09-06-2006, 12:04 AM
"He's got to get more at-bats," Guillen said. "He has only [306] at-bats this year."

Ummm...who writes the line-up card?

Chicken Dinner
09-06-2006, 12:04 AM
Has Ozzie been nipping on the sauce?

MeteorsSox4367
09-06-2006, 12:05 AM
Yep. That's it. BA is the reason why the Sox pitching hasn't been good or the reason why the heart of the order can't come through once against two guys Boston exhumed from who knows where. That's exactly right, Ozzie. Play Mackowiak more in center field.

ilsox7
09-06-2006, 12:05 AM
I really hope Ozzie has much, much more on his mind than BA's role next year at this moment in time. One of Ozzie's two or three critical errors this year has been his handling of BA, IMO. I hope in the off season KW sits down and has a chat with Ozzie about a few things.

Patrick134
09-06-2006, 12:05 AM
Ummm...who writes the line-up card?

He majorly earned a ton of sit down time early in the season with his own batwork.

hi im skot
09-06-2006, 12:07 AM
He majorly earned a ton of sit down time early in the season with his own batwork.

Point taken...but how do you explain the fluctuating line-up throughout the second half?

Trav
09-06-2006, 12:08 AM
He majorly earned a ton of sit down time early in the season with his own batwork.


I agree. But what about when he started hitting for a respectable average? I'm a huge Guillen fan but I can't even explain this. Unless he is trying to solidify Anderson's choice about playing winter ball it just doesn't make sense.

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 12:15 AM
Some of them seem a little strong to me. I don't think Brian's the guy Ozzie should be upset about this season... at least he shouldn't be at the top of the list.

Anyway here's the link:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060905soxbrite,1,130249.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Lip

"He's got to get more at-bats," Guillen said. "He has only [306] at-bats this year. Even if he doesn't want to play winter ball, he has to play winter ball. I demand him to play winter ball."

gee...I have an idea, PLAY HIM EVERY DAY!

We don't lose any games because of him, but he has to be better. I'd like for him to be better offensively.

But we have lost games cause he wasnt in CF with his defense.

Chicken Dinner
09-06-2006, 12:20 AM
Those comments are sure a great way to rally behind your players and get them to pull this thing out. Ozzie has lost the edge and should turn in his wings. What a moron. Hopefully he didn't ruin Anderson for good.

JB98
09-06-2006, 12:27 AM
Ozzie is certainly right about one thing: Anderson needs to play winter ball. I realize he is not pathetic like he was early in the season, but he is still not a good offensive player. He needs to get as much experience as possible, as quickly as possible.

And if these comments "ruin Anderson for good" then Brian wasn't ever going to be a good player anyway.

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 12:29 AM
Ozzie says Brian needs more at bats, yet Ozzie continually, and inexplicably, sits him for Mack to play butcher in Centerfield. Does that make sense to anyone?

And please note he did point out Brian hasn't cost us any games. Sadly the same can't be said about the guy Ozzie insists on playing instead of Brian.

Chicken Dinner
09-06-2006, 12:32 AM
And please note he did point out Brian hasn't cost us any games. Sadly the same can't be said about the guy Ozzie insists on playing instead of Brian.

Or Ozzie himself.

MadetoOrta
09-06-2006, 12:46 AM
Chicken Dinner's right: time for Ozzie to go. This is perhaps the 3rd or 4th time he's put his foot in his mouth rapping one of his players. Whatever happened to keeping things "in-house?" When the heck is he gonna rip his 3d base coach who has blown at least 2 or 3 games? Let's review: 1. Instead of calling Barrett a punk, he says that's what he wants to see in his players; 2. Rips Jon Garland publicly [yes, he knows where the cameras in the dugout are] for not hitting a player with a pitch. The same Garland who - at the time and since - has almost singlehandedly kept us with a flicker of a playoff shot. If Garland hits the guy and gets suspended, is that smart?; 3. Publicly rips his own team but lauding the team most hated in the division - the Twins; 4. Publicly embarasses Sean Tracey; and 5. Makes comments like "BA needs more at-bats" that show me [and I hope you] that the guy is clueless. He lost this team a long time ago. This isn't the first Chicago coaching icon whose ever lost a team and won't be the last. It took Ditka about 4 years, it took Guillen less than one.

DaleJRFan
09-06-2006, 01:49 AM
I am 100% convinced that Ozzie isn't filling out the lineup cards. While he's been busy filming spanish-language documentaries and Chevy commercials, Bob Foley, Sales Manager from Stasek Chevrolet, has been handling the daily lineups - as part of the Manager Exchange Program.

http://www.stasekchevy.com/img/staff/bobFoley.jpg

"I'm a big Rob Mackowiak fan. He bought a Chevy Venture Van from me a few years back and helped me make my quota. I'll never forget it. Thanks Rob."

QCIASOXFAN
09-06-2006, 02:09 AM
I am 100% convinced that Ozzie isn't filling out the lineup cards. While he's been busy filming spanish-language documentaries and Chevy commercials, Bob Foley, Sales Manager from Stasek Chevrolet, has been handling the daily lineups - as part of the Manager Exchange Program. I am also %100 convinced that Southpaw got his paws on it also. Hey its possible, he was in the commercial. What the hell is Southpaw anyway?

Grzegorz
09-06-2006, 05:56 AM
Just play Anderson and let him learn...

He'll be alright unless the White Sox pull a Scot Thompson and screw him around on his swing.

BeviBall!
09-06-2006, 08:37 AM
If only I watched A Mi Manera, then maybe I could make heard or tales out of this. How can he possibly be railing on Anderson for 2006?

We'd all like him to be better offensively but you know what? He's a ROOKIE. I think he's shown some monster poise the way he's been treated this year.

Law11
09-06-2006, 08:55 AM
Yeah, I read those. He says BA needs more ABs. Well, guess who controls that, Ozzie? Maybe he could have got more if you weren't busy sacrificing the outfield defense every other day by putting Mack in CF.

BINGO...We have the post of the week...

jenn2080
09-06-2006, 09:01 AM
Ozzie has know one to blame but himself. Not only has the pitching blew some games but so has Ozzie.

The Immigrant
09-06-2006, 09:09 AM
This has been one awful year for Ozzie all around, both on and off the field.

Rooney4Prez56
09-06-2006, 09:14 AM
Ozzie, Ozzie, Ozzie, think before you speak!

Brian Anderson is a rookie and one of the better defensive players on your team. The reason that he hasn't had many at-bats is because you want to play Mackowiak in centerfield (for the record, I love Mack, but not in centerfield). Are you some kind of hypocrite? Your shortstop has batted under .250 for most of the season, Your leadoff hitter is batting under .260 and can no longer do his job, which is to steal bases. You constanstly shuffle players in the batting order and on defense so nobody has many at-bats, and you decide to rip on the future centerfielder on your organization, a ROOKIE who has batted incredibly this past month. Ozzie, you are a moron who needs to shut up.

dickallen15
09-06-2006, 09:19 AM
Ozzie, Ozzie, Ozzie, think before you speak!

Brian Anderson is a rookie and one of the better defensive players on your team. The reason that he hasn't had many at-bats is because you want to play Mackowiak in centerfield (for the record, I love Mack, but not in centerfield). Are you some kind of hypocrite? Your shortstop has batted under .250 for most of the season, Your leadoff hitter is batting under .260 and can no longer do his job, which is to steal bases. You constanstly shuffle players in the batting order and on defense so nobody has many at-bats, and you decide to rip on the future centerfielder on your organization, a ROOKIE who has batted incredibly this past month. Ozzie, you are a moron who needs to shut up.

Ozzie is also a guy who said prior to spring training that he didn't care what Anderson hit, he was only concerned about his defense.

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 09:23 AM
What happened to the patients the Sox (and Ozzie the begining of last year) showed Crede? he struggled for over 2 years and we'd always hear how he's going to break out...and finally does last year. Anderson may not be hitting .300 but he plays great defense and isnt the automatic out he was the begining of the year. I checked last week and Anderson was batting about .300 the last 30 days.

I dont get some of the things Ozzie is doing and saying this year. It's like he's out to prove how smart he is and how dumb everyone else is.

I swear, if Ozzie had Anderson out there instead of Mack when Javy was pitching earlier in the year, his ERA would be at least 2 lower. I remember in multiple games where a ball hit to Mack when Javy was pitching that Anderson would have made and Mack didnt. Then once Mack blew the play, Javy would go in to thermonuclear meltdown.

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 09:24 AM
Ozzie is also a guy who said prior to spring training that he didn't care what Anderson hit, he was only concerned about his defense.

:ozzie
"Defense? We dont need no stinking defense!"

jdm2662
09-06-2006, 09:41 AM
I was convinced earlier this year Ozzie is not a big fan of Anderson for some reason. Whether it's attitude, work ethic, who knows? Ozzie had a reason to play Mack in CF before July, but it hasn't been justified since. This is despite the fact Mack continues to suck it up in CF and everyone has been screaming about it.

The Sox where playing much better before Anderson started to hit well. You think it had anything to do with the defense Anderson played? It sure looks that way.

If Ozzie keeps this up, I won't be disappointed if he is replaced in the next couple of years. Last year, I said he was a great motiviator and an above average manager. Now, I'm not so sure what to think.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2006, 09:43 AM
**** YOU Ozzie! (I never though the language filters would have to censor me!)

You are the #1 reason this team has underachieved this year.

Your team is right at .500 when you start Mackowiak in CF. Your team is much better than .500 when you start Anderson in CF. Yet you make the ****ing lineups. You are the POS manager who won't give Anderson the ABs he needs, inexplicably and repeatedly playing corner infielder Rob Mackowiak in CF.

You've managed the bullpen like cross between a pony league pipsqueak and a L/R matchup slave.

You're the idiot and you're to blame if the Sox fail to make the playoffs.

:angry:

ondafarm
09-06-2006, 09:49 AM
Ozzie is pushing Anderson to improve and become the next lead-off hitter. Center is a more traditional position for lead-off hitter than left and I think that Ozzie wants BA to work on his base-stealing and bunting and hopefullykeep his swing fresh so that come spring training, he'll already be sharp and ready to go next season. While Anderson may not have Pods speed, a good lead-off hitter can get by with 20-25 SBs a year.

I think it's more interesting that Haeger is going to play winter ball. I expect him to be in the starting rotation next year.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2006, 09:53 AM
Hey Ozzie, you say you don't want to signal a "panic" by deviating from your obsessive and inexplicable pattern of starting Mackowiak in CF at least 2-3 times per week, even though Mackowiak himself at least TWICE this year has been quoted as saying that he's not the best choice to play CF.

Well, Ozzie, you aren't going to managing in the playoffs if you keep benching Brian Anderson, who has been one the best hitters on the Sox during the second half, and for the entire season has provided the very best CF defense in the American League.

Stupid Ozzie. Just plain stupid.
:angry:

I really hope that ondafarm is right.

Baby Fisk
09-06-2006, 09:53 AM
I agree with calm, gentle Frater here. It's like Ozzie's comments are coming from some alternate Bizarroland.

kevingrt
09-06-2006, 10:02 AM
These kids also need to perform. Not every loss is Ozzie's fault.

Baby Fisk
09-06-2006, 10:04 AM
These kids also need to perform. Not every loss is Ozzie's fault.
The point here is that Ozzie is making threatening noises towards BA, referring to a lack of at-bats and such, when Ozzie himself is responsible for BA's insufficient number of at-bats. BIZARRO! BIZARRO!

Paulwny
09-06-2006, 10:20 AM
The point here is that Ozzie is making threatening noises towards BA, referring to a lack of at-bats and such, when Ozzie himself is responsible for BA's insufficient number of at-bats. BIZARRO! BIZARRO!

Well, we've come full circle with Ozzie. Many people, fans, sports' writers, etc claimed that Ozzie's greatest asset as a manager was creating a fun atmosphere in the club house. ~ " He's able to make the game fun for the players."
I no longer see happy smiling faces in the dugout, stress negates fun.

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 10:22 AM
I wonder if there isn't something going on between Ozzie and BA that we don't know about, and Ozzie's comments are a reaction to that.

A lot of people have speculated this year that BA is KW's pet project, which would not necessarily make Anderson Ozzie's choice for the position. Ozzie loves bench players anyway, because he was one at the end of his career (or so a columnist opined recently) -- he likes Mack better than he likes BA, it seems, and I don't think we have all the info to know why.

I've been an Anderson fan since day one, but one thing that disturbs me greatly is BA's refusal or inability to TAKE CHARGE in center field. Again last night, Uribe caught a fly ball that was Anderson's; BA never ran flat-out for the ball and never called it. The center-fielder is in charge of the outfield. Brian isn't doing that part of his job, IMO.

And for the faith in him that the club showed this summer, by not sending him to Charlotte when he was batting .160, Anderson can play winter ball and **** about it.

soxfanatlanta
09-06-2006, 10:40 AM
I wonder if there isn't something going on between Ozzie and BA that we don't know about, and Ozzie's comments are a reaction to that.

Don't care.

That **** needs to stay in the clubhouse - period. Ozzie's complete lack of professionalism by airing out his dirty laundry has left me flummoxed all season. If he wants BA to play winter ball, then go to Kenny West, for ****'s sake; leave the media out of it. Anderson has agreed to play in Venezuela - fine. Perhaps Guillen can take a class in media relations, of at least Toastmasters.

What the hell is this guy thinking?

cheezheadsoxfan
09-06-2006, 10:46 AM
Ozzie is pushing Anderson to improve and become the next lead-off hitter. Center is a more traditional position for lead-off hitter than left and I think that Ozzie wants BA to work on his base-stealing and bunting and hopefullykeep his swing fresh so that come spring training, he'll already be sharp and ready to go next season. While Anderson may not have Pods speed, a good lead-off hitter can get by with 20-25 SBs a year.

I think it's more interesting that Haeger is going to play winter ball. I expect him to be in the starting rotation next year.

I hope you're right and it's just some kind of motivational thing with Ozzie. Still, I don't see how he could make that statement about at-bats with a straight face. And Ozzie's stubborness about Mack in CF has cost us at least three games.

BainesHOF
09-06-2006, 11:43 AM
Perhaps Ozzie should consider winter ball himself.

cheezheadsoxfan
09-06-2006, 11:47 AM
Perhaps Ozzie should consider winter ball himself.

LOL:smile:

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 11:52 AM
Perhaps Ozzie should consider winter ball himself.

Or force him to watch and rewatch the games his managerial decisions have cost us games and see if he can learn from his mistakes.

Or, because I am starting to think his pride is getting in the way of his baseball sense, perhaps the same game scenarios should be typed up with fake teams and players and see if he would see the mistakes if they didn't involve him.

BainesHOF
09-06-2006, 12:03 PM
Or force him to watch and rewatch the games his managerial decisions have cost us games and see if he can learn from his mistakes.

Or, because I am starting to think his pride is getting in the way of his baseball sense, perhaps the same game scenarios should be typed up with fake teams and players and see if he would see the mistakes if they didn't involve him.

Idea excellente.

MarySwiss
09-06-2006, 12:15 PM
I wonder if there isn't something going on between Ozzie and BA that we don't know about, and Ozzie's comments are a reaction to that.
When I read the comments, this was the first thought that occurred to me as well. It sure looks as if BA is in Ozzie's doghouse for some reason, which could also explain the platooning.

Regardless, this is NOT what this team needs right now. :angry:

infohawk
09-06-2006, 12:24 PM
I really hope Ozzie has much, much more on his mind than BA's role next year at this moment in time. One of Ozzie's two or three critical errors this year has been his handling of BA, IMO. I hope in the off season KW sits down and has a chat with Ozzie about a few things. I don't blame Ozzie for some of the sub-par performances of certain players (particularly the pitchers). I do think that he made three mistakes regarding roster utilization this year that likey cost the team at least a few games. The first was not putting Brandon in the rotation when it became apparent back in May or so that Vazquez was consistently struggling and running-up high pitch counts early in the game. That would have been early enough to stretch Brandon out. The rest of the rotation wasn't doing well enough for the team to absorb Javy's bad starts and the strain he was putting on the bullpen having to come in so early in games. The second was continuing to run Politte out there when he was really struggling (and apparently in need of surgery). The team would have likely been better off with a minor league call up early in the season (before KW made the Riske and MacDougal trades). Finally, it was pretty evident early in the season that Pods wasn't the same player he was during the first half last year. Mackowiak should have been made the everyday leftfielder and Pods should have been the fourth outfielder or pinch runner off the bench. I know this is 20/20 hindsight because Ozzie probably wanted to give each struggling player the benefit of the doubt that they'd come around and I understand that.

viagracat
09-06-2006, 12:26 PM
I wonder if there isn't something going on between Ozzie and BA that we don't know about, and Ozzie's comments are a reaction to that.

A lot of people have speculated this year that BA is KW's pet project, which would not necessarily make Anderson Ozzie's choice for the position. Ozzie loves bench players anyway, because he was one at the end of his career (or so a columnist opined recently) -- he likes Mack better than he likes BA, it seems, and I don't think we have all the info to know why.

I've been an Anderson fan since day one, but one thing that disturbs me greatly is BA's refusal or inability to TAKE CHARGE in center field. Again last night, Uribe caught a fly ball that was Anderson's; BA never ran flat-out for the ball and never called it. The center-fielder is in charge of the outfield. Brian isn't doing that part of his job, IMO.

And for the faith in him that the club showed this summer, by not sending him to Charlotte when he was batting .160, Anderson can play winter ball and **** about it.


Excellent post.

Seemed to me that even when Anderson was struggling early on, he still was kind of cocky, and maybe that poisoned BA's relationship with Ozzie, a situation that persists to this day. If so, his apparent reluctance to play winter ball at first probably reinforced his "bad attitude" reputation in the eyes of his manager. Like a lot of others in this thread, I was saying "what the hell" when Ozzie said Anderson needed more at-bats but I see Mack in the lineup often.

Guillen would have been better off saying that he wants Anderson to play winter ball and leave it at that. And Anderson should, and apparently will, go to Venezuela this winter. Anderson is not always as smart as he should be in the field, and although he's come around, a .227 or whatever average in September for an outfielder is hard to abide by. It would have been better PR for Guillento say BA could "faster reach his considerable potential" or something like that by playing winter ball.

Then again, PR is not one of Ozzie's strong points. Not this year anyway.

JB98
09-06-2006, 12:44 PM
I wonder if there isn't something going on between Ozzie and BA that we don't know about, and Ozzie's comments are a reaction to that.

A lot of people have speculated this year that BA is KW's pet project, which would not necessarily make Anderson Ozzie's choice for the position. Ozzie loves bench players anyway, because he was one at the end of his career (or so a columnist opined recently) -- he likes Mack better than he likes BA, it seems, and I don't think we have all the info to know why.

I've been an Anderson fan since day one, but one thing that disturbs me greatly is BA's refusal or inability to TAKE CHARGE in center field. Again last night, Uribe caught a fly ball that was Anderson's; BA never ran flat-out for the ball and never called it. The center-fielder is in charge of the outfield. Brian isn't doing that part of his job, IMO.

And for the faith in him that the club showed this summer, by not sending him to Charlotte when he was batting .160, Anderson can play winter ball and **** about it.

At least there is someone else in this thread who isn't fawning over BA and completely kissing his ass. I agree that Ozzie has played Mackowiak way too much. But let's remember that BA still has A LOT to work on. We've had way too many near collisions in the outfield this year because of BA's inability to take charge. And there's not much question BA is an unfinished product as a hitter. He needs at-bats, and winter ball will give him that.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2006, 01:01 PM
At least there is someone else in this thread who isn't fawning over BA and completely kissing his ass. I agree that Ozzie has played Mackowiak way too much. But let's remember that BA still has A LOT to work on. We've had way too many near collisions in the outfield this year because of BA's inability to take charge. And there's not much question BA is an unfinished product as a hitter. He needs at-bats, and winter ball will give him that.

I too agree that Brian can and should improve and should accelerate his maturation by playing Winter Ball.

But Ozzie is either too proud or too stupid to realize that playing the imperfect Anderson (who despite his flaws is still recording one more putout per game than Mackowiak and is the best defensive CF in the MLB) gives his team a better chance to win than playing the quite limited and defensively challenged Rob Mackowiak in CF. For Ozzie to blame Anderson for not having enough ABs this year, when Ozzie alone is the one responsible for not giving Anderson those ABs, is completely and utterly stupid.

It's the same as me blaming my wife for me overeating, not exercising, and getting fat.

Too proud or too stupid? Doesn't matter. The results are the same.

It's Ozzie's own damn fault!

Ozzie seems to think that because he won a World Series, he's now Mr. Teflon and can't be blamed when everything he touches doesn't turn to gold.

I got news for you, King Midas, keep making the same really stupid decisions and you will have no one to blame but yourself when they bite you in the butt.

**** OZZIE! :angry:

samram
09-06-2006, 01:08 PM
At least there is someone else in this thread who isn't fawning over BA and completely kissing his ass. I agree that Ozzie has played Mackowiak way too much. But let's remember that BA still has A LOT to work on. We've had way too many near collisions in the outfield this year because of BA's inability to take charge. And there's not much question BA is an unfinished product as a hitter. He needs at-bats, and winter ball will give him that.

I'm not sure it's a matter of kissing BA's ass as much as questioning Ozzie's statement about his needing more at-bats when Ozzie is the one making out the lineup cards.

There's no doubt that BA needs to go to winterball, but I also think there's no doubt that Brian in CF gives this team the best chance to win and he hasn't been out there enough.

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 01:15 PM
I don't disagree, but I am also wondering if Ozzie hasn't sat BA sometimes -- maybe quite a few times -- because of defensive lapses that BA made that Ozzie didn't like, such as letting another fielder make his catch for him. It would explain, if so, why Anderson does get more bench time than his hitting would warrent.

Just a wild guess, since we really only ever hear about 5% of what's actually going on in the clubhouse or with the team.

I do know this, though-- Ozzie is a scrappy ballplayer who came out of a Latin country and worked his way into the majors -- and stayed in the majors -- by playing as hard as he could every single day (not unlike many who come from that background).

Anderson, in contrast, is a kid from a fairly well-off family (well, not poor, certainly) who played high-school ball and college ball and baseball on the Cape for one or two summers; he had all the advantages that Ozzie did not. BA is also confident to the point of being cocky, sometimes (or so we've read), and I wonder if Ozzie isn't a bit bothered by that and thinks that Anderson hasn't earned the right to that cockiness just yet.

Pure speculation on my part, but the two of them may have a personality clash that we don't know about.

Law11
09-06-2006, 01:17 PM
These kids also need to perform. Not every loss is Ozzie's fault.

They also need to play to perform. Ozzie claiming Ba only has 300+ Abs.
And playing Mack in Cf does what for BA?

ilsox7
09-06-2006, 01:26 PM
I don't blame Ozzie for some of the sub-par performances of certain players (particularly the pitchers). I do think that he made three mistakes regarding roster utilization this year that likey cost the team at least a few games. The first was not putting Brandon in the rotation when it became apparent back in May or so that Vazquez was consistently struggling and running-up high pitch counts early in the game. That would have been early enough to stretch Brandon out. The rest of the rotation wasn't doing well enough for the team to absorb Javy's bad starts and the strain he was putting on the bullpen having to come in so early in games. The second was continuing to run Politte out there when he was really struggling (and apparently in need of surgery). The team would have likely been better off with a minor league call up early in the season (before KW made the Riske and MacDougal trades). Finally, it was pretty evident early in the season that Pods wasn't the same player he was during the first half last year. Mackowiak should have been made the everyday leftfielder and Pods should have been the fourth outfielder or pinch runner off the bench. I know this is 20/20 hindsight because Ozzie probably wanted to give each struggling player the benefit of the doubt that they'd come around and I understand that.

Agree with most of this. Ozzie cannot be blamed for sub-par pitching from most of the staff. But his handling of BA, Mack, and Pods has not been good. Regarding Brandon, I could go either way. I can see how/why the left the rotation as is. But with regard to the outfield, he has done an extremely poor job as a manager.

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 01:26 PM
I could be mistaken, but I thought in the beginning of the season, when Brian was struggling, his attitude, or his cockiness was sighted as a good thing by Ozzie. It was said that although he is struggling, he isn't let it drag him down like rookies are prone to do. Brian believed he should be a major league player, and Kenny and Ozzie agreed and didn't send him down.

And if this is a case of Ozzie feeling Brian has been too privileged, has had it easy, and that gives Ozzie a reason to rip him in the press and sit him at the detriment of the team, well that is a real problem with Ozzie.

I realized earlier, Ozzie made these comments after a game where he took Anderson out of the game, taking away his last at bat, so that Gload could pinch hit. Not saying that was good or bad, but just ironic that then he went to bitch about the lack of AB Brian has had.

Lastly, does anyone else think after saying BA needs at bats, he will sit him tonight? I do. I bet Sweeney is in center.

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 01:38 PM
I could be mistaken, but I thought in the beginning of the season, when Brian was struggling, his attitude, or his cockiness was sighted as a good thing by Ozzie. It was said that although he is struggling, he isn't let it drag him down like rookies are prone to do. Brian believed he should be a major league player, and Kenny and Ozzie agreed and didn't send him down.

And if this is a case of Ozzie feeling Brian has been too privileged, has had it easy, and that gives Ozzie a reason to rip him in the press and sit him at the detriment of the team, well that is a real problem with Ozzie.

I realized earlier, Ozzie made these comments after a game where he took Anderson out of the game, taking away his last at bat, so that Gload could pinch hit. Not saying that was good or bad, but just ironic that then he went to bitch about the lack of AB Brian has had.

Lastly, does anyone else think after saying BA needs at bats, he will sit him tonight? I do. I bet Sweeney is in center.

Confidence/cockiness is very good in some situations; yes, we did read earlier in the year about how it was BA's attitude that kept him up here when he might have been sent to AAA in May or June.

But -- and again, this is total wild speculation on my part -- is that cockiness getting in the way of his playing at other times, i.e., in the field? Is Anderson NOT taking charge in the outfield and figuring that it doesn't matter, since Pods caught the ball, or Uribe caught the ball? That, if it were happening, would drive Ozzie into a rant.

I bet you're right, I bet Anderson does not start tonight. Now -- will that be because of the ball that he failed to call/play last night? Or for some other reason??

We really need to get Ozzie on here and have him answer these questions! :tongue:

wassagstdu
09-06-2006, 01:52 PM
Let me get this straight. Ozzie had nothing to do with the most spectacularly successful Sox team in four generations. But this year he is responsible for their (relative) failure because they are not playing his kind of ball.

And this is not complicated. Ozzie meant that Anderson needs more AB, but not for a Sox team that is fighting for a pennant. However well he did after the break, remember that he hit way below the Mendoza line in the first half. And yet Ozzie stuck with him.

I hope that some of you people regret the BS that you have posted.

.

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 02:03 PM
Let me get this straight. Ozzie had nothing to do with the most spectacularly successful Sox team in four generations. But this year he is responsible for their (relative) failure because they are not playing his kind of ball.

And this is not complicated. Ozzie meant that Anderson needs more AB, but not for a Sox team that is fighting for a pennant. However well he did after the break, remember that he hit way below the Mendoza line in the first half. And yet Ozzie stuck with him.

I hope that some of you people regret the BS that you have posted.


I don't believe in blind faith. When Ozzie does well, I have no problems giving him credit, as a matter of fact I would love to give him more credit. But I do have an issue when he makes mistakes, and instead of admitting them, or at very least correcting them, he continues on the wrong direction (ie. Mack in center).

No one wants Ozzie to be right as much as I do, but he is not infalliable, which, at times, he acts like he is. And when he makes totally stupid comments, like saying BA needs more at bats, when he is the one taking them away, I think it is everyones right to complain if the want to.

We all know he brought us a World Series title and we are all grateful, but that doesn't mean he is perfect and we are all lemmings that have to cheer, even when he is wrong.

And I can honestly, I will not regret anything I have posted.

tstrike2000
09-06-2006, 02:06 PM
Don't care.

That **** needs to stay in the clubhouse - period. Ozzie's complete lack of professionalism by airing out his dirty laundry has left me flummoxed all season.

Not exactly the kind of thing that's gonna help keep the team united during the stretch run. Reminds me of a few lines from Dirty Laundry.

"Well I could have been an actor
But I wound up here
I just have to look good,
I don't have to be clear
Come and whisper in my ear
Give us dirty laundry" - Don Henly

Law11
09-06-2006, 02:10 PM
Ozzie isnt the worlds greatest manager we all know this. Last year things went our way this year they arent. We took advantage of a lot of breaks, this year not happening.

Ozzie had his moments last year when he put marte in time after time before finally realizing he was useless.

Ozzie wasnt the reason we won the series last year.
Ozzie had a lot to do with that no doubt, instilling an attitude, but that
attidude has dissapeared.

Even when we get a lead I know I'm saying to myself how long before the pitching gives it right back up. A team with a foot on your throat attitude
takes care of business and for the past 40 games we have had no such
attitude.

I mean look at these guys next time at a game. No emotion, no nothing.
they look un-enthused to even be there. And that same pre-game going through the motions garbage has been exactly how we've been playing for months now. Wouldnt it be nice to see a 5-0 lead after 1 or 2 innings.


anyway.

bluestar
09-06-2006, 02:18 PM
I have been saying for weeks now that there must be more to the Anderson in CF thing than we see as fans. Whatever Ozzie's reasons, it is obvious that he thinks the team has a better chance of winning some games with Mackowiak in CF. I happen to disagree (rather vehemently, actually), but I am not privvy to what is said and done in the clubhouse.

Somewhat in Ozzie's defense, it looks like he was angry when he heard BA was reluctant to play winter ball. I think his comments about BA needing more at-bats need to be viewed in that light. He is basically saying if Anderson doesn't want to do what it takes to improve his game, then he (Ozzie) doesn't want him on the team.

On the other hand, I have never liked Ozzie's tendency to call out players publicly. I think those things belong in the clubhouse, and there is nothing to be gained from his public criticism and, at times, even ridiculing of players in the public forum. I remember earlier in the season when Ozzie made some comments concerning Anderson where he said something along the lines that the Sox couldn't afford to be developing players at the major league level. Also there was the comment he made about McCarthy when he said if McCarthy didn't want to pitch out of the bullpen, he could go to AAA and start. This was in response to a reporter's assumption that McCarthy did not like to pitch out of the bullpen.

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 02:26 PM
Also there was the comment he made about McCarthy when he said if McCarthy didn't want to pitch out of the bullpen, he could go to AAA and start. This was in response to a reporter's assumption that McCarthy did not like to pitch out of the bullpen.

And I think something similar is happening in this situation. Anderson never said he wouldn't go play winter ball. What he said was he would rather go home and relax, but he would do whatever the Sox want him to do. He then went on to talk about how he would concentrate on his baserunning and hitting. I am not sure how this became "Brian said he didn't want to go!" Most people would rather be on vacation than work, but at no point did he seem like he was acting like an ass about it.

It almost seems like another Uribe situation, where Ozzie adopted this "He needs to talk to me about it" thing. Maybe he wants Brian to come up and tell him how excited he is to spend the off season in winter ball. Who knows.

But this really, really seems like a soap opera that this team doesn't need right now.

Lip Man 1
09-06-2006, 02:29 PM
Wassag:

You bring up some interesting points. I'd just like to add that four times this season Ozzie has been publicly quoted as lamenting the team's lack of fundamentals, going so far as to say one time that he can't play the game the way he wants to because his guys can't execute what he wants.

What does that say about the team? and perhaps more importantly what does that say about Ozzie since he is either unwilling or unable to change the mindset, force fundamentals, bench players for not executing and so forth.

Lip

Beer Can Chicken
09-06-2006, 02:39 PM
Yeah, I read those. He says BA needs more ABs. Well, guess who controls that, Ozzie? Maybe he could have got more if you weren't busy sacrificing the outfield defense every other day by putting Mack in CF.

This is exactly the first thing I thought when I read the article. Even when BA does play he gets yanked in the 7th inning.

34 Inch Stick
09-06-2006, 02:40 PM
. BA is also confident to the point of being cocky, sometimes (or so we've read), and I wonder if Ozzie isn't a bit bothered by that .

Ozzie was "cocky" to the point of annoyance for many of his teammates from the moment he set foot in the Sox locker room as a player.

I think the comments were made simply to ensure that Anderson goes and stays in winter ball. KW and Ozzie highlighted the priority they place on winter ball in their treatment of Owens last year.

mccoydp
09-06-2006, 02:41 PM
It seems to me as if Ozzie has something personal against Brian, given his comments about him this season.

If I were manager, Brian would be the least of my concerns right now.

champagne030
09-06-2006, 02:41 PM
Let me get this straight. Ozzie had nothing to do with the most spectacularly successful Sox team in four generations. But this year he is responsible for their (relative) failure because they are not playing his kind of ball.

And this is not complicated. Ozzie meant that Anderson needs more AB, but not for a Sox team that is fighting for a pennant. However well he did after the break, remember that he hit way below the Mendoza line in the first half. And yet Ozzie stuck with him.

I hope that some of you people regret the BS that you have posted.

.

This whole fiasco with Mack started in the second game of the season. BA hit fine during the spring and had two hits opening night. Mack starts game 2 and promptly botches two fly balls and makes a weak throw. It was clear then he couldn't judge the ball in CF, but stubborn Ozzie had a plan in his head and it hasn't changed even with the disastrous results. It was clear from the beginning that it wasn't Ozzie's goal to get BA 450+ AB's this season. So, shut your trap Ozzie.

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 02:46 PM
This is exactly the first thing I thought when I read the article. Even when BA does play he gets yanked in the 7th inning.

I think that Ozzie pinch-hit for BA because Brian looked just awful at bat in last night's game -- he was 0 for 2, and struck out both times.

Anderson needs more at-bats, but not when the Sox need a run to tie the Red Sox and the kid's already whiffed twice that day. If Ozzie had left him in and BA had struck out for a third time, Ozzie'd be getting roasted for that.

Realistically, Anderson would have done better to spend another season at Charlotte, but the Rowand trade (cue sobs and loud lamenting, wailing and rending of garments) cut off that option. So I think what Ozzie is saying is that BA really isn't quite ready for the majors yet. That seems like an accurate assessment to me.

kobo
09-06-2006, 02:46 PM
Let me get this straight. Ozzie had nothing to do with the most spectacularly successful Sox team in four generations. But this year he is responsible for their (relative) failure because they are not playing his kind of ball.

And this is not complicated. Ozzie meant that Anderson needs more AB, but not for a Sox team that is fighting for a pennant. However well he did after the break, remember that he hit way below the Mendoza line in the first half. And yet Ozzie stuck with him.

I hope that some of you people regret the BS that you have posted.

.
Ozzie helped get us to the promise land last year, no doubt, but he wasn't the main reason why we got there. This year he has been given a team that should have been even better than last year's team. Players have underperformed, however, and some moves that Ozzie has made have hurt the team. Last year he didn't seem to have trouble benching certain players, Shingo, Hermanson, and El Duque come to mind. This year though, he has been very stubborn when it comes to playing certain guys or putting players into a position where that player knows he is not helping the team.

His comments on BA are way off. He said BA needs more at bats, he didn't say anything that had to do with the Sox going for a pennant. he knew Anderson was going to be in CF as soon as Rowand was traded. Yes, BA struggled earlier in the year, but he has been one of the most consistent hitters over the last 2 months for this team. Yet Ozzie still platoons him with Mack, and platoons Mack in horrible situations. Why? Because he doesn't want to upset anyone? He didn't have that attitude last year, so what's happened?

Ozzie is digging his grave here. I've always thought of him as a slightly above average manager, but the comments he has been making lately and the attitude he has I think are affecting the team. He is going to end up running his mouth too much and running himself out of town. It's one thing to have pride and to feel like you are doing your best, it's another to take a step back, analyze the situation and then try to improve it. I don't see Ozzie doing that, and as long as he doesn't, this team isn't going to go anywhere.

SoxShirt
09-06-2006, 02:47 PM
**** YOU Ozzie! (I never though the language filters would have to censor me!)

You are the #1 reason this team has underachieved this year.

Your team is right at .500 when you start Mackowiak in CF. Your team is much better than .500 when you start Anderson in CF. Yet you make the ****ing lineups. You are the POS manager who won't give Anderson the ABs he needs, inexplicably and repeatedly playing corner infielder Rob Mackowiak in CF.

You've managed the bullpen like cross between a pony league pipsqueak and a L/R matchup slave.

You're the idiot and you're to blame if the Sox fail to make the playoffs.

:angry:
Perfect. Exactly what I've been thinking.

In response to other people's comments:
I don't think we'll see BA starting tonight either.
and.... I can't remember what else I was going to say. :?::(:
Is there any way to get Ozzie to read all of these comments?! Maybe it would help. :tongue:

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 02:50 PM
Perfect. Exactly what I've been thinking.

I second that.

southwstchi4life
09-06-2006, 02:55 PM
Ozzie is pushing Anderson to improve and become the next lead-off hitter. Center is a more traditional position for lead-off hitter than left and I think that Ozzie wants BA to work on his base-stealing and bunting and hopefullykeep his swing fresh so that come spring training, he'll already be sharp and ready to go next season. While Anderson may not have Pods speed, a good lead-off hitter can get by with 20-25 SBs a year.

I think it's more interesting that Haeger is going to play winter ball. I expect him to be in the starting rotation next year.

I agree about what Ozzie is doing. PLUS everyone who defending BA, he has a reputation of being arrogant and cocky. AND he has not proved himself enough to tell a coach he does not want to play winter ball.

0o0o0
09-06-2006, 02:56 PM
**** YOU Ozzie! (I never though the language filters would have to censor me!)

You are the #1 reason this team has underachieved this year.

Your team is right at .500 when you start Mackowiak in CF. Your team is much better than .500 when you start Anderson in CF. Yet you make the ****ing lineups. You are the POS manager who won't give Anderson the ABs he needs, inexplicably and repeatedly playing corner infielder Rob Mackowiak in CF.

You've managed the bullpen like cross between a pony league pipsqueak and a L/R matchup slave.

You're the idiot and you're to blame if the Sox fail to make the playoffs.

:angry:

You are the one constantly giving up 5 or 6 runs a game. Oh wait...

SoxShirt
09-06-2006, 03:38 PM
I realized earlier, Ozzie made these comments after a game where he took Anderson out of the game, taking away his last at bat, so that Gload could pinch hit. Not saying that was good or bad, but just ironic that then he went to bitch about the lack of AB Brian has had.

Lastly, does anyone else think after saying BA needs at bats, he will sit him tonight? I do. I bet Sweeney is in center.
You're right. Boers and Bernstein just said Sweeney is leading off and playing center, and Podsednik is hitting 8th...

samram
09-06-2006, 03:54 PM
You're right. Boers and Bernstein just said Sweeney is leading off and playing center, and Podsednik is hitting 8th...

Well, nothing like breaking the kid in slowly....

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 04:02 PM
You're right. Boers and Bernstein just said Sweeney is leading off and playing center, and Podsednik is hitting 8th...

It is sad that I predicted the least logical line up after his comments in the paper, only to have it actually come true. I can understand wanting to see what Sweeney can do but how is Brian the one sitting and not Pods?

But at least I can be grateful that Mack isn't in center.

MadetoOrta
09-06-2006, 04:10 PM
Sweeney's in CF? In the middle of what's left of an pennant race? A position he's just learning? He's a corner outfiedler. THIS ALONE PROVES FOR ME ONCE AND FOR ALL GUILLEN IS CLUELESS AND SHOULD BE FIRED. What a joke he is.

By the way, I can see why Guillen wouldn't like BA. BA is everything Guillen wasn't - fast, strong arm, big, strong, power hitter, quiet and confident. BA is a star in the making unless this loud-mouthed fool of a manager undermines his confidence. I wrote a few months ago that BA will be hitting 3d for the Sox in '08 or the latest '09. Hopefully, its for manager Tom Kelly or someone with a clue.

SoxShirt
09-06-2006, 04:15 PM
At least Pods is finally out of the lead off spot...

DaleJRFan
09-06-2006, 04:39 PM
At least Pods is finally out of the lead off spot...

I take it you heard the same thing I did???

The Score is reporting that Sweeney is batting leadoff in CF tonight with Pods batting 8th in LF.

IlliniSox4Life
09-06-2006, 04:47 PM
I take it you heard the same thing I did???

The Score is reporting that Sweeney is batting leadoff in CF tonight with Pods batting 8th in LF.


Wow. Maybe Ozzie is just throwing this out there to shake things up. Something needs to happen.

stl_sox_fan
09-06-2006, 04:47 PM
I take it you heard the same thing I did???

The Score is reporting that Sweeney is batting leadoff in CF tonight with Pods batting 8th in LF.

Well at least BA will get AB's this winter in Venezuela. Maybe that's what Ozzie meant.

CaptainBallz
09-06-2006, 04:48 PM
This brings up the quotes from KW brought up the other day that said that Ozzie gave him "reasons" for playing Mack in CF with no other elaboration. There has to be some sort of pissing contest between Oz and BA that we, the ticket buying rabble, just don't know about. We're now going to have to play the "Guess Which Underqualified Player Will Start in Center Today" game for the rest of this god-awful pennant race.

Well Sweeney, you have very small Mackowiack sized shoes to fill out there so there's no real pressure. That goes for Pods leadoff spot as well.

The Dude
09-06-2006, 04:49 PM
He majorly earned a ton of sit down time early in the season with his own batwork.
Yeah but missed tons in the second half because of Mack and also is always taken out in the 8th and 9th!
Ozzie lay off the :bong: because it's mainly your fault!

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2006, 04:54 PM
I think Ozzie is a good motivator and manages with his gut. Last year, his gut was right most of the time, even when he wanted the intentional unintentional walk, the intentional HBP, the intentional hard-hit extra-base hit or the intentional wild pitch. That's when he called in Marte.

Ozzie is not infallible. He's not perfect. He's not made of teflon. When he makes a stupid move - especially when it's the same stupid move over and over and over ad nauseum - Sox fans have the right to call him on it. When he says something stupid - like his comment that BA hasn't gotten enough ABs - he ought to be told that he just made a stupid comment.

Just because I'm grateful for him managing the Sox to a World Series championship does not deprive us of the right to criticize him when he says or does something stupid (like play Mackowiak in CF when Anderson has been playing better defense for the whole year and has hit better than Mack for the last two months).

EDIT: And before anyone accuses me of practicing "Ozzie hate," just know that my most prized Sox possession is the ball that Ozzie autographed for me after I threw out the opening pitch before a game in 1987. Furthermore, a photo of me, my dad and Ozzie (from that same game in 1987) is perched on the shelf immediately above my office desk.

To be honest, it hurts to have to criticize Ozzie for his stupidity in his handling of Anderson. But his stupidity, combined with his gross mismanagement of the bullpen, makes it obvious to all but the legally blind and deaf that Ozzie has made some really stupid decisions this year and backed them up with even more insipid rhetoric.

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 04:58 PM
I agree about what Ozzie is doing. PLUS everyone who defending BA, he has a reputation of being arrogant and cocky. AND he has not proved himself enough to tell a coach he does not want to play winter ball.

I think I agree with you.

I do think it's kind of funny that 3 months ago there were pretty regular "get rid of BA IMMEDIATELY if not sooner!" threads, and now he's the poor picked-on little rookie who's being abused by his insane, demented manager. :redneck Shades of Sean Tracey!

Clearly, there is much more to this Ozzie/Anderson story than we know or are getting -- or are likely to get -- from the papers and radio. Without all the facts, I don't have an opinion, but I do think that Anderson needs some more seasoning at the plate and in the field. Ozzie just need seasoning.

samram
09-06-2006, 05:05 PM
I think I agree with you.

I do think it's kind of funny that 3 months ago there were pretty regular "get rid of BA IMMEDIATELY if not sooner!" threads, and now he's the poor picked-on little rookie who's being abused by his insane, demented manager. :redneck Shades of Sean Tracey!

That's only relevant if the same people who started those threads or advocated getting rid of him (which I don't think happened anyway) are now saying he's the poor, picked-on little rookie. I doubt the two groups of people are the same.

Clearly, there is much more to this Ozzie/Anderson story than we know or are getting -- or are likely to get -- from the papers and radio. Without all the facts, I don't have an opinion, but I do think that Anderson needs some more seasoning at the plate and in the field. Ozzie just need seasoning.

There could be more to this, but that doesn't mean that Ozzie can hurt the team to carry out a personal vendetta (assuming there is a problem). Mackowiak has certainly affected our pitching staff to some extent this season- is that worth Ozzie trying to teach BA a lesson?

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 05:10 PM
Oh, I know, I just find it funny that nowadays BA does not lack for supporters, and that was not the case in May or early June, IIRC.

I'm not at all a fan of Mack in CF. I always think that it is harder for the Sox to win a game when Mack is in CF -- although I like Mack, think he's a very good bench player, and would like to see him fill in more in LF and RF. I think the Sox need another decent CF, the same way they need another decent catcher.

As for the "lesson -- was it worth it?" question, I'd have to say no, especially since the impression we're getting from the papers now is that if there was a lesson, BA didn't learn it.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2006, 05:15 PM
Oh, I know, I just find it funny that nowadays BA does not lack for supporters, and that was not the case in May or early June, IIRC.

Throughout this season I consistently have argued that Anderson should start and finish as many games as possible in CF and that Mackowiak should play as few games as possible in CF and instead should get ABs at other positions (backing up Dye, Pods, Crede and even Konerko).

JB98
09-06-2006, 05:53 PM
I'm not sure it's a matter of kissing BA's ass as much as questioning Ozzie's statement about his needing more at-bats when Ozzie is the one making out the lineup cards.

There's no doubt that BA needs to go to winterball, but I also think there's no doubt that Brian in CF gives this team the best chance to win and he hasn't been out there enough.

I personally think that BA is the best of a host of poor options we have in CF. Mackowiak can't catch the ball and should never play CF. But the reality is BA is hitting .225, strikes out a ton and supplies little power. I can understand why Ozzie wants another option out there. It's frustrating to watch Anderson and Uribe make so many weak outs. Mind you, Mackowiak is a horrible alternative to Anderson. But because Mackowiak is a horrible alternative, I think many WSI posters have an inflated view of Anderson.

I didn't take any offense at all to Ozzie's remarks in the paper today. Brian should not be guaranteed a starting spot for next season. He hasn't earned it.

Ol' No. 2
09-06-2006, 05:56 PM
Throughout this season I consistently have argued that Anderson should start and finish as many games as possible in CF and that Mackowiak should play as few games as possible in CF and instead should get ABs at other positions (backing up Dye, Pods, Crede and even Konerko).Here's a thought (not just for you but for anyone who thinks Ozzie's an idiot for playing Mackowiak): Maybe Ozzie isn't stupid. Maybe he sees something you don't. There's always plenty going on behind the scenes that no one ever hears about, but I'm sure he's getting input from Walker and the other coaches. Just because you don't see a reason to play Mackowiak doesn't mean there isn't one. He obviously had a reason that was good enough for Kenny Williams.

You can crow about Anderson's batting average all you want, but he still seems to me to be mostly a mistake hitter. He can't hit a good curve ball or changeup. Playing Mackowiak protects him from some of the better pitchers (e.g. Halladay, Santana) and those who are toughest on righties (e.g. Padilla), which means BA's average wouldn't be so high if Mackowiak weren't starting those games. Look over the last month at the guys he's hit well. He had four multi-hit games in August:

Aug 27 v. Carlos Silva
Aug 24 v. Nate Robertson
Aug 14 v. Mark Redman
Aug 6 v. AJ Burnett

FWIW, I didn't interpret Ozzie's "Anderson needs more AB" comment as referring to this year, but to his need to play winter ball.

JB98
09-06-2006, 06:00 PM
Here's a thought (not just for you but for anyone who thinks Ozzie's an idiot for playing Mackowiak): Maybe Ozzie isn't stupid. Maybe he sees something you don't. There's always plenty going on behind the scenes that no one ever hears about, but I'm sure he's getting input from Walker and the other coaches. Just because you don't see a reason to play Mackowiak doesn't mean there isn't one. He obviously had a reason that was good enough for Kenny Williams.

You can crow about Anderson's batting average all you want, but he still seems to me to be mostly a mistake hitter. He can't hit a good curve ball or changeup. Playing Mackowiak protects him from some of the better pitchers (e.g. Halladay, Santana) and those who are toughest on righties (e.g. Padilla), which means BA's average wouldn't be so high if Mackowiak weren't starting those games. Look over the last month at the guys he's hit well. He had four multi-hit games in August:

Aug 27 v. Carlos Silva
Aug 24 v. Nate Robertson
Aug 14 v. Mark Redman
Aug 6 v. AJ Burnett

FWIW, I didn't interpret Ozzie's "Anderson needs more AB" comment as referring to this year, but to his need to play winter ball.

I interpreted it the same way. Really, BA would have benefitted from going down to Charlotte, playing every single day and getting plenty of at-bats. Unfortunately, we don't have that luxury because we don't have another soul capable of handling CF at the big-league level.

Brian simply isn't ready to play every day in the major leagues. That's a reality. The other reality is we don't have a better option in CF. Reality bites sometimes.

MadetoOrta
09-06-2006, 06:03 PM
Throughout this season I consistently have argued that Anderson should start and finish as many games as possible in CF and that Mackowiak should play as few games as possible in CF and instead should get ABs at other positions (backing up Dye, Pods, Crede and even Konerko).

I've made the same point all year. The Baltimore Orioles in the early '70's lived with a weak hitting and tremendous fielding outfielder named PAUL BLAIR. At the time, the Curt Gowdys of the world would remind us that Blair won as many games with his glove as Lee May won with his bat. We've lost 5-10 games because of Mackowiak. And, for the record, I don't blame him I blame our egocentric manager.

samram
09-06-2006, 06:04 PM
I personally think that BA is the best of a host of poor options we have in CF. Mackowiak can't catch the ball and should never play CF. But the reality is BA is hitting .225, strikes out a ton and supplies little power. I can understand why Ozzie wants another option out there. It's frustrating to watch Anderson and Uribe make so many weak outs. Mind you, Mackowiak is a horrible alternative to Anderson. But because Mackowiak is a horrible alternative, I think many WSI posters have an inflated view of Anderson.

I didn't take any offense at all to Ozzie's remarks in the paper today. Brian should not be guaranteed a starting spot for next season. He hasn't earned it.
Ok, I can buy that, and it appears they're grooming Sweeney to at least be an option in CF, if not to be the CF. You're right that no one who hits .225 should be guaranteed anything. I just found it strange that Ozzie wanted him to have more at-bats when he has complete control over the amount of at-bats he gets. While I understand that Brian was at times unplayable at points earlier in the season, he still seems to be getting days off for no reason other than Mack needs at-bats when Mack could get those at-bats playing LF.

JB98
09-06-2006, 06:12 PM
Ok, I can buy that, and it appears they're grooming Sweeney to at least be an option in CF, if not to be the CF. You're right that no one who hits .225 should be guaranteed anything. I just found it strange that Ozzie wanted him to have more at-bats when he has complete control over the amount of at-bats he gets. While I understand that Brian was at times unplayable at points earlier in the season, he still seems to be getting days off for no reason other than Mack needs at-bats when Mack could get those at-bats playing LF.

I think Ozzie tried to play Mack against pitchers that he thought would be bad matchups for BA. He's tried to protect BA's weaknesses, but in the process, he made a scapegoat out of Mack by asking him to play a position he can't handle.

The Sox miscalculated horribly on Mackowiak. They thought his glove would be good enough that he could be a fallback option for Anderson. They were proven incorrect, and that mistake has been costly.

SOXandILLINI
09-06-2006, 06:18 PM
"maybe ozzie isn't stupid"...... we agree to disagree.

Martinigirl
09-06-2006, 06:22 PM
The Sox miscalculated horribly on Mackowiak. They thought his glove would be good enough that he could be a fallback option for Anderson. They were proven incorrect, and that mistake has been costly.

But the thing is, Ozzie still hasn't figure that out. He still keeps rolling him out to center. Hopefully Sweeney is a viable option in center, but even if he is, Mack will still be at that position far more than he should this last month.

SOXandILLINI
09-06-2006, 06:22 PM
"our egocentric manager".... who? ozzie?:smile:

JB98
09-06-2006, 06:26 PM
But the thing is, Ozzie still hasn't figure that out. He still keeps rolling him out to center. Hopefully Sweeney is a viable option in center, but even if he is, Mack will still be at that position far more than he should this last month.

I think Ozzie knows Mackowiak's limitations. Like I said earlier, he keeps running Rob out there because he's trying to protect BA from unfavorable matchups.

I'm not saying I agree with that, but I do think that's what is taking place.

Malgar 12
09-06-2006, 06:50 PM
Your team is right at .500 when you start Mackowiak in CF. Your team is much better than .500 when you start Anderson in CF. Yet you make the ****ing lineups. You are the POS manager who won't give Anderson the ABs he needs, inexplicably and repeatedly playing corner infielder Rob Mackowiak in CF.




Anybody actually have the numbers?

SoxGurl44
09-06-2006, 07:24 PM
Looks like he won't get any at bats tonight either. :mad:

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 07:38 PM
Looks like he won't get any at bats tonight either. :mad:

At least Mack isnt playing CF. lol

southside rocks
09-06-2006, 08:02 PM
I interpreted it the same way. Really, BA would have benefitted from going down to Charlotte, playing every single day and getting plenty of at-bats. Unfortunately, we don't have that luxury because we don't have another soul capable of handling CF at the big-league level.

Brian simply isn't ready to play every day in the major leagues. That's a reality. The other reality is we don't have a better option in CF. Reality bites sometimes.
Yes, yes, and yes.

I mean no disparagement to Anderson -- I'm a huge BA fan and have been all year, but I am not under the impression that he is a finished product yet. Long way from it. But I also think that when he is all grown up into a CF, he will be worth the wait.

DickAllen72
09-06-2006, 09:30 PM
I just hope the Sox/Ozzie don't ruin Anderson by forcing him to try to hit for power. Let the power develop naturally. I do agree that he should concentrate on his running game, however.

Iguana775
09-06-2006, 10:06 PM
I just hope the Sox/Ozzie don't ruin Anderson by forcing him to try to hit for power. Let the power develop naturally. I do agree that he should concentrate on his running game, however.

I thought Ozzie wanted him to develop his speed and contact making?

Grzegorz
09-06-2006, 10:08 PM
BA playing winter ball is a good idea. I am hoping this organization does not screw around with his swing; let him develop naturally, correct mechanical issues, but don't force a particular style on him.

He'll be fine and he'll produce provided he's not toyed with.

DickAllen72
09-06-2006, 10:10 PM
I thought Ozzie wanted him to develop his speed and contact making?

Ozzie said that Brian MUST either develop his speed/base stealing OR his power. I hope they don't mess with Brian's mind and cause him to start trying to hit home runs. Let the power develop naturally.

I would like to see Brian work on his base stealing.

DickAllen72
09-06-2006, 10:11 PM
BA playing winter ball is a good idea. I am hoping this organization does not screw around with his swing; let him develop naturally, correct mechanical issues, but don't force a particular style on him.

He'll be fine and he'll produce provided he's not toyed with.

Amen.

TornLabrum
09-06-2006, 10:40 PM
Why am I reminded of the Sox ruining Kenny Williams' career by trying to make a freaking third baseman out of him?

ondafarm
09-06-2006, 10:56 PM
A couple of things I want to add from the player's perspective on BA.

First, hitting major league pitching requires good fundamentals, a certain amount of natural talent, a certain amount of intelligence and a certain attitude (which several people are referring to as "cockiness" here, IMO a poor word choice.) To hit consistently, you really have to go up with a certain nonchalance about it. Other people call this, taking the hits as they come. Brian had that attitude when he first came up last year and early this year, but then he started to press and Ozzie was trying to get BA back to the 'nonchalance' he needed. PK seemed to help him alot there.

I see Ozzie's public comments in this same light: just reading them straight up may sound hypocritical. Left to himself, BA might have been tempted to say "Hey, I made the majors and I hit .280 in the second half of the season, I deserve a little time off." Ozzie wants everyone to know that BA has not met his potential yet and that he needs to keep working to improve. I'm sure Ozzie told this to BA, but sometimes you gotta make the message crystal clear so that everyone knows your expectation of a player.

IMO, BA has not reached his potential. Given some better woodwork (bunting, learning how/when to slap the ball, etc.) he could be a dandy lead-off hitter. He has not show great woodwork this season. He needs the prod, he needs the work and the advantages that winter ball will provide. i hope the Sox send Rock Raines down to work with him in Venezuela.

Is Ozzie being stupid? Is ozzie being a hypocrit? Perhaps, but he's trying to motivate his player.

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2006, 09:49 AM
Anybody actually have the numbers?

Numbers as of August 27 (scroll down) (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=77803&highlight=Anderson+Mackowiak)

Here's the Sox record of games when Mackowiak starts in CF:
April 4 - L
April 10 - W
April 15 - W
April 16 - W
April 19 - W
April 22 - W
April 30 - W

May 3 - W
May 5 - L
May 12 - L
May 13 - L
May 17 - W
May 19 - W
May 21 - L
May 24 - W
May 27 - L
May 28 - W
May 31 - L

June 1 - L
June 3 - W
June 7 - W
June 8 - L
June 14 - L
June 18 - W
June 21 - W
June 23 - W
June 27 - W

July 2 - L
July 5 - W
July 8 - L
July 16 - L
July 19 - L
July 23 - W
July 26 - L
July 30 - L

August 4 - W
August 8 - W
August 16 - L
August 19 - W
August 21 - L
August 23 - W
August 25 - L
August 26 - L

23-20 Overall as of 8-27

Since then:

September 1 - L

Overall, the Sox are 23-21 when Mackowiak starts in CF.
The Sox are 1-0 when Sweeney starts in CF.
Therefore, the Sox are 56-38 when Anderson starts in CF.

This statistical measure agrees with the difference in the range factors between Anderson and Mackowiak, where Anderson generates one more putout per game than Mackowiak.

Both statistcs also are affirmed by the qualitative judgement that Mackowiak has been unable to catch a significant number of balls - in important situations that ultimately led to runs that led to Sox losses - that Anderson would have been able to catch.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

FACT: the Sox winning percentage is greater when Brian Anderson plays CF. It is lower when Mackowiak plays CF.

Of course Anderson needs to improve. Ondafarm's suggestions for working on bunting and running are great and hopefully the Sox provide the coaching advice he needs and Anderson follows their coaching. Still, even in his unfinished state, Anderson clearly is the best option to start and finish every game in CF for the duration of the season.

maurice
09-07-2006, 01:25 PM
Face it . . . Mackowiak is the new Timo Perez (with a better bat but much worse defense). The reason Ozzie plays Mack is because he "likes" him. That's good enough for Ozzie. Production is irrelevant.

Ozzie's claim that he's protecting Anderson with favorable matchups is BS. With the exception of the most recent game against Santana, Anderson overwhelmingly plays against the toughest pitchers in the league (especially lefties) and gets benched against the flubs. That's been true all year. (Mack started against Santanta once, while Anderson started against him the other 4 times.) Ozzie plays Anderson against lefties, but Anderson hits righties BETTER. Mack's the one who can't hit lefties at all, so he gets fed a steady diet of crappy righties while Anderson sits. In other words, Anderson's AVE probably would be much HIGHER if Ozzie simply played him every day.

Finally, it's ridiculous to criticize Anderson for failing to hit a good change or curve. That describes most of the VETERAN players on this team for the past several years, including Paul Konerko. That's why we get our brains beat in by random soft tossers and rake against FB pitchers. BTW, if everybody knows that Anderson can't hit soft tossers, why did Ozzie start him against Redman? That's right, the ever-important righty-lefty matchup which, in reality, helps Mack and hurts Anderson. Starting Anderson ahead of Mack v. a soft-tossing lefty is the best possible thing for Mack and the worst possible thing for Anderson, so who's really being "protected" here?

Tragg
09-07-2006, 01:59 PM
Great job, guys.
Case closed.

Williams needs to step in.

PhillipsBubba
09-07-2006, 02:10 PM
I think Ozzie sees a bright upside for BA and wants him to keep working to improve. I give the kid credit, when he was hitting a buck-50 he kept going out there doin his best.

.230 is a little anemic but from where he came from, its good to see...I think Ozzie wants him to keep working hard...tough love, I guess:?:

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2006, 03:00 PM
Numbers as of August 27 (scroll down) (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=77803&highlight=Anderson+Mackowiak)



Since then:

September 1 - L

Overall, the Sox are 23-21 when Mackowiak starts in CF.
The Sox are 1-0 when Sweeney starts in CF.
Therefore, the Sox are 56-38 when Anderson starts in CF.

This statistical measure agrees with the difference in the range factors between Anderson and Mackowiak, where Anderson generates one more putout per game than Mackowiak.

Both statistcs also are affirmed by the qualitative judgement that Mackowiak has been unable to catch a significant number of balls - in important situations that ultimately led to runs that led to Sox losses - that Anderson would have been able to catch.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

FACT: the Sox winning percentage is greater when Brian Anderson plays CF. It is lower when Mackowiak plays CF.

Of course Anderson needs to improve. Ondafarm's suggestions for working on bunting and running are great and hopefully the Sox provide the coaching advice he needs and Anderson follows their coaching. Still, even in his unfinished state, Anderson clearly is the best option to start and finish every game in CF for the duration of the season.You don't have to get that complicated. Every time Mack starts and they lose it's always entirely his fault they lost. So if they'd started Joe Dimaggio Jr. every game they would now be 101-38 and comfortably ahead.

spiffie
09-07-2006, 03:18 PM
You can crow about Anderson's batting average all you want, but he still seems to me to be mostly a mistake hitter. He can't hit a good curve ball or changeup. Playing Mackowiak protects him from some of the better pitchers (e.g. Halladay, Santana) and those who are toughest on righties (e.g. Padilla), which means BA's average wouldn't be so high if Mackowiak weren't starting those games. Look over the last month at the guys he's hit well. He had four multi-hit games in August:

Aug 27 v. Carlos Silva
Aug 24 v. Nate Robertson
Aug 14 v. Mark Redman
Aug 6 v. AJ Burnett

Interesting. 4 multi-hit games in August. Considering he only had 71 AB's during the month that's not too shabby. As for who he had them against

Aug 27 v. Carlos Silva 6.30 ERA
Aug 24 v. Nate Robertson 3.93 ERA
Aug 14 v. Mark Redman 5.26 ERA
Aug 6 v. AJ Burnett 4.26 ERA

So two of his games were against guys who are basically among the top 20 pitchers in the AL right now. (Burnett doesn't qualify for IP due to injury). Hardly a statement that he cannot hit against the more skilled pitchers.

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2006, 03:30 PM
Interesting. 4 multi-hit games in August. Considering he only had 71 AB's during the month that's not too shabby. As for who he had them against

Aug 27 v. Carlos Silva 6.30 ERA
Aug 24 v. Nate Robertson 3.93 ERA
Aug 14 v. Mark Redman 5.26 ERA
Aug 6 v. AJ Burnett 4.26 ERA

So two of his games were against guys who are basically among the top 20 pitchers in the AL right now. (Burnett doesn't qualify for IP due to injury). Hardly a statement that he cannot hit against the more skilled pitchers.Robertson is nowhere near the top 20 pitchers in the AL right now. His ERA is mostly due to early season success. That Aug 24 game he gave up 10 ER in 6.2 IP. They also lit up Redman on Aug 14 (3.2 IP, 8 ER).

For reference, Podsednik had the same number of multi-hit games that month.

Randar68
09-07-2006, 03:40 PM
You don't have to get that complicated. Every time Mack starts and they lose it's always entirely his fault they lost. So if they'd started Joe Dimaggio Jr. every game they would now be 101-38 and comfortably ahead.

You're still grasping at straws and trying to make some red herring case that Anderson is not our best option in CF?

Every stat and every observable indicator is that he IS, yet you're still sticking to your April analysis like a shipwrecked sailor to his life vest?

:darkcloud:

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2006, 03:45 PM
You're still grasping at straws and trying to make some red herring case that Anderson is not our best option in CF?

Every stat and every observable indicator is that he IS, yet you're still sticking to your April analysis like a shipwrecked sailor to his life vest?

I don't disagree that Anderson's the better option. I'm just poking a little fun at the hysterics we hear every time Mackowiak starts, as if they're automatically DOOMED. Anderson's doing a fine job for a rookie, but he's not Joe DiMaggio reincarnated.

spiffie
09-07-2006, 03:57 PM
Robertson is nowhere near the top 20 pitchers in the AL right now. His ERA is mostly due to early season success. That Aug 24 game he gave up 10 ER in 6.2 IP. They also lit up Redman on Aug 14 (3.2 IP, 8 ER).

For reference, Podsednik had the same number of multi-hit games that month.
You fail to point out that that was Robertson's only non quality start in his last 8 outings. Yes we lit him up, but let's see his outings since Aug. 1
8/3 - TB 6.1 IP 2 ER
8/8 - MIN 7 IP 3 ER
8/14 - BOS 6 IP 3 ER
8/19 - TEX 8 IP 1 ER
8/24 - CHI 6.2 IP 10 ER
8/30 - NYY 7 IP 2 ER
9/4 - SEA 7 IP, 1 ER

So since August 1, outside of his one awful start against us he has 41.1 IP and 12 ER for a 2.61 ERA. Unless we're calling August "early season" I don't think I can agree with that part of your statement.

And I fail to see what Pods has to do with this argument, unless you're saying that he shouldn't be an everyday player, just as you seem to think with Anderson. If that's the case, well by golly I agree with you on that thought.

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2006, 04:30 PM
You fail to point out that that was Robertson's only non quality start in his last 8 outings. Yes we lit him up, but let's see his outings since Aug. 1
8/3 - TB 6.1 IP 2 ER
8/8 - MIN 7 IP 3 ER
8/14 - BOS 6 IP 3 ER
8/19 - TEX 8 IP 1 ER
8/24 - CHI 6.2 IP 10 ER
8/30 - NYY 7 IP 2 ER
9/4 - SEA 7 IP, 1 ER

So since August 1, outside of his one awful start against us he has 41.1 IP and 12 ER for a 2.61 ERA. Unless we're calling August "early season" I don't think I can agree with that part of your statement.

And I fail to see what Pods has to do with this argument, unless you're saying that he shouldn't be an everyday player, just as you seem to think with Anderson. If that's the case, well by golly I agree with you on that thought.Regardless of what Robertson did in the other games, he obviously didn't have it that day. Every starter in the Sox lineup except Gload had at least one hit. Here's to a few more of those. :gulp:

Randar68
09-07-2006, 04:48 PM
I don't disagree that Anderson's the better option. I'm just poking a little fun at the hysterics we hear every time Mackowiak starts, as if they're automatically DOOMED. Anderson's doing a fine job for a rookie, but he's not Joe DiMaggio reincarnated.

Well, with Sweeney, hopefully we see more of him in there instead of Mack, but Anderson is still the best option of the 3 and the reason he only has 350 or so AB's is Guillen's silly insistence on crazy matchups that make no statistical sense for the players involved and the crazy idea that Mackowiak is somehow a CF'er, when he is so clearly inferior...

My concern is not that we lose every game that Mack starts, but it's how badly some of those "1 extra put-outs per game" have cost us... The balls going over his head, the dropped line drives, the mis-reads...

Many of you know how badly I was digusted by Rowand's defense for most of his career here, and he was a far superior defender to Mack, so that should tell you how pissed I get every time I look at the line-up card and see Mack playing CF in places like Detroit or Fenway or Cleveland...

MadetoOrta
09-07-2006, 04:53 PM
I don't disagree that Anderson's the better option. I'm just poking a little fun at the hysterics we hear every time Mackowiak starts, as if they're automatically DOOMED. Anderson's doing a fine job for a rookie, but he's not Joe DiMaggio reincarnated.

No one is saying he's Joe D. I've been saying "I want a Paul Blair-type CF" - good glove + average bat which, by the way, is Brian Anderson. It's the lack of defense [not offense] that's lost games. Many games.

Ol' No. 2
09-07-2006, 05:07 PM
Well, with Sweeney, hopefully we see more of him in there instead of Mack, but Anderson is still the best option of the 3 and the reason he only has 350 or so AB's is Guillen's silly insistence on crazy matchups that make no statistical sense for the players involved and the crazy idea that Mackowiak is somehow a CF'er, when he is so clearly inferior...

My concern is not that we lose every game that Mack starts, but it's how badly some of those "1 extra put-outs per game" have cost us... The balls going over his head, the dropped line drives, the mis-reads...

Many of you know how badly I was digusted by Rowand's defense for most of his career here, and he was a far superior defender to Mack, so that should tell you how pissed I get every time I look at the line-up card and see Mack playing CF in places like Detroit or Fenway or Cleveland...I've said many times that for all his shortcomings, the number of losses attributed to Mackowiak's inferior defense is vastly overblown. A perfect case-in-point was the game in Minnesota a few weeks ago that Contreras started and basically threw batting practice for 2.2 innings. Two balls went over Mackowiak's head, which prompted many to scream that he's the reason they lost the game. Nothing could be further from the truth. They lost for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is Contreras stunk. Had Mack caught those balls, that would have just meant that Ozzie wouldn't have pulled Contreras in the 3rd inning, and he would have continued to throw meatballs until the Twinks eventually scored 5 runs anyway, and then he would have been pulled. It might have taken an inning longer, but the result would have been the same. It's a team game, and you rarely win or lose because of one player, no matter how good or bad.

I also think that just because Anderson is the better overall player, that doesn't necessarily mean he's the better choice in every game. Matchups do matter, and depending on what pitcher they're facing and who the Sox have on the mound, Mack might be a better choice in some games.

Finally, bench players still need to get AB to stay sharp. If you're not going to give them the AB they need, why have them at all? It's a case of a short-term sacrifice for a long-term gain. Some players can sit on the bench for two weeks and still be effective at the plate. Some can't.

I don't think Mack's shortcomings are lost on Ozzie. He obviously feels that in certain situations the gains outweigh the losses. You might not agree with him, and in many cases, I don't agree with him, but I'm sure I don't have to tell you this game is not so simple as to be always black and white.

Martinigirl
09-07-2006, 05:23 PM
I've said many times that for all his shortcomings, the number of losses attributed to Mackowiak's inferior defense is vastly overblown. A perfect case-in-point was the game in Minnesota a few weeks ago that Contreras started and basically threw batting practice for 2.2 innings. Two balls went over Mackowiak's head, which prompted many to scream that he's the reason they lost the game. Nothing could be further from the truth. They lost for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is Contreras stunk. Had Mack caught those balls, that would have just meant that Ozzie wouldn't have pulled Contreras in the 3rd inning, and he would have continued to throw meatballs until the Twinks eventually scored 5 runs anyway, and then he would have been pulled. It might have taken an inning longer, but the result would have been the same. It's a team game, and you rarely win or lose because of one player, no matter how good or bad.




The fact of the matter is you don't know what the outcome would have been, but what did actually happen was two balls went over his head and 3 runs scored. Jose didn't have great stuff, but when you get two batters to fly out, and instead of getting outs you give up three runs, well that isn't going to do anything good for a pitcher's confidence.

Mack costs us runs in that game, and others. I don't see how that can be disputed. He is a liability in the field, and when your pitchers are struggling, you should give them the best defense possible, and that is not Mack in center.

maurice
09-07-2006, 08:30 PM
There's really no defending Ozzie here, even if (for whatever reason) you have an extreme pro-Mackowiak / anti-Anderson bias. Conceding for the sake of argument that Mackowiak might be a better choice in some games, Ozzie nontheless badly mishandles the situation, because he does a really bad job of identifying which games and how many games are "bad matchups" for Anderson. He has shown absolutely no ability to properly evaluate this issue on a consistent basis either offensively (by looking at the opposing pitcher) or defensively (by looking at the Sox starter & the size of CF). As a result, he benches Anderson too often and in the wrong games.

ondafarm
09-07-2006, 09:10 PM
There's really no defending Ozzie here, even if (for whatever reason) you have an extreme pro-Mackowiak / anti-Anderson bias. Conceding for the sake of argument that Mackowiak might be a better choice in some games, Ozzie nontheless badly mishandles the situation, because he does a really bad job of identifying which games and how many games are "bad matchups" for Anderson. He has shown absolutely no ability to properly evaluate this issue on a consistent basis either offensively (by looking at the opposing pitcher) or defensively (by looking at the Sox starter & the size of CF). As a result, he benches Anderson too often and in the wrong games.

Ozzie may announce he's protecting BA but his dominant action is that he's trying to teach BA. While Ozzie wants to win today, he's not all 'win this year at all cost'. BA is a developing player and no I don't think I'm showing an anti-Anderson bias.

He's still a kid, he's still learning to be a major leaguer. When he makes a mistake in the field or at the plate, Ozzie wants to get him some time during a game to talk with the coaches and get some instruction.

Ozzie is saying, "I want you to sit here and think about that bad play you made last night." That determines when Ozzie sits Anderson more than the pitching matchup.

maurice
09-07-2006, 09:46 PM
Sweeney rides the pine today--further proof that what Ozzie says bears absolutely no relationship to what he actually does. Thus, fans of Mackowiak and Anderson can rejoice. They both started today and currently have the only 2 hits in the game for the Sox.
:cool:

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2006, 10:04 PM
Ozzie may announce he's protecting BA but his dominant action is that he's trying to teach BA. While Ozzie wants to win today, he's not all 'win this year at all cost'. BA is a developing player and no I don't think I'm showing an anti-Anderson bias.

He's still a kid, he's still learning to be a major leaguer. When he makes a mistake in the field or at the plate, Ozzie wants to get him some time during a game to talk with the coaches and get some instruction.

Ozzie is saying, "I want you to sit here and think about that bad play you made last night." That determines when Ozzie sits Anderson more than the pitching matchup.

Onda, I trust your analysis better than my own. But I just think that Anderson can learn more - lots more - by actually playing and perhaps sitting just one game per week, no more. Can't the lessons that Ozzie wants him to learn be taught to him each half-inning when the Sox are at bat and Anderson is in the dugout? And futhermore, what can Anderson learn about playing CF by watching Mackowiak play CF?

Wouldn't it be better if Ozzie quietly (of course this is academic since Ozzie seems to be unable to do anything quietly) told Anderson to come to the park early every single day to work on fundamentals, like, say, bunting? Wouldn't that be better than lamenting to a pack of reporters that Anderson doesn't get enough ABs?

Or is Ozzie too busy making TV commercials and flapping his gums to any and every reporter within shouting distance?

Frater Perdurabo
09-07-2006, 10:06 PM
Sweeney rides the pine today--further proof that what Ozzie says bears absolutely no relationship to what he actually does. Thus, fans of Mackowiak and Anderson can rejoice. They both started today and currently have the only 2 hits in the game for the Sox.
:cool:

I'm actually OK with Mackowiak in LF. He can't be worse defensively than Pods.

ondafarm
09-07-2006, 10:50 PM
Onda, I trust your analysis better than my own. But I just think that Anderson can learn more - lots more - by actually playing and perhaps sitting just one game per week, no more. Can't the lessons that Ozzie wants him to learn be taught to him each half-inning when the Sox are at bat and Anderson is in the dugout? And futhermore, what can Anderson learn about playing CF by watching Mackowiak play CF?

Wouldn't it be better if Ozzie quietly (of course this is academic since Ozzie seems to be unable to do anything quietly) told Anderson to come to the park early every single day to work on fundamentals, like, say, bunting? Wouldn't that be better than lamenting to a pack of reporters that Anderson doesn't get enough ABs?

Or is Ozzie too busy making TV commercials and flapping his gums to any and every reporter within shouting distance?

Two things here.
1) All of the players and coaches have been going pretty much solid at this point for the past seven and a half to eight months. Every day, ten to twelve hours for most of the guys, mental, physical and to be honest emotional. Showing up early to do anything extra, and it isn't just BA but a couple of coaches, etc. is really beyond cruel.

2) It's not really watching Mack. And I'd give a months pay to do this for one game: it's sitting next to Rock Raines and watching all of the outfielders play and the pitchers and hitters and the baserunners. Sitting close enough to hear the fine points that get exchanged among the coaching staff.

On that first point, that is why I respect two historical players and one current one. Ted Williams and Nellie Fox are the two historical figures I know who both put the extra time in regularly. Williams was regarded as lazy because he did his running ahead of time and watched the opposing pitcher warm-up every day when his teammates were doing their running. Williams and Fox coached the Washington expansion team together because they shared the work ethic. Frank Thomas is always at the park early, something most Frank haters don't care about.

Lip Man 1
09-07-2006, 11:44 PM
Onda:

I'm not sure what to make of your comments.

I understand the mental and physical grind...I also understand the absolutely atrocious fundamental baseball being played.

Yet they are still 'in the race...' they still have a chance to get in. No matter how tired, how beat up you are that overrides everything. Therefore in my opinion if guys like Uribe and Posednik can't bunt. MAKE THEM. There are still 22 games left... any one play can win a game and perhaps put you in the post season.

If the Sox were ten out with 22 left I'd agree with you.

But that doesn't explain Ozzie demanding 13 players go to 'bunting school' in July then stopping it after a week does it? Were they as beat up then? They haven't imporved one iota at doing the little things. Ozzie has gone on record as saying that he's going to demand more time for fundamentals next spring.

Which brings up two questions.

1. What the hell has he been doing in spring training for the past three years?

2. How does a team (by and large) that thrived on bunting, running, stealing bases, hitting the other way in 2005 SUDDENLY en masse FORGET how to do these things over the winter.

Explain please.

Bunting is like riding a bike. You do it, it's there...you don't 'forget' how to bunt...or steal bases, or execute the hit and run.

These guys are as bad at this as Manager Gandhi and his doofuses were 'back in the day.' Remember that moron Carlos Lee, not once, not twice but three times trying to steal 3rd base with the tying run at the plate (and being thrown out EVERY time...).

Like I said I understand the physical nature of the game. I also understand this is a pennant race and that takes priority. If there is ANYTHING that can be done to win a few extra games then do it.

Lip

Chicken Dinner
09-08-2006, 12:25 AM
Like I said I understand the physical nature of the game. I also understand this is a pennant race and that takes priority. If there is ANYTHING that can be done to win a few extra games then do it.

Lip

I don't think they want it. They just don't show any love for wanting it. They seem dead. (and if they don't do something soon, they will be)

ondafarm
09-08-2006, 01:10 AM
Onda:

I'm not sure what to make of your comments.

I understand the mental and physical grind...I also understand the absolutely atrocious fundamental baseball being played.

Yet they are still 'in the race...' they still have a chance to get in. No matter how tired, how beat up you are that overrides everything. Therefore in my opinion if guys like Uribe and Posednik can't bunt. MAKE THEM. There are still 22 games left... any one play can win a game and perhaps put you in the post season.

If the Sox were ten out with 22 left I'd agree with you.

But that doesn't explain Ozzie demanding 13 players go to 'bunting school' in July then stopping it after a week does it? Were they as beat up then? They haven't imporved one iota at doing the little things. Ozzie has gone on record as saying that he's going to demand more time for fundamentals next spring.

Which brings up two questions.

1. What the hell has he been doing in spring training for the past three years?

2. How does a team (by and large) that thrived on bunting, running, stealing bases, hitting the other way in 2005 SUDDENLY en masse FORGET how to do these things over the winter.

Explain please.

Bunting is like riding a bike. You do it, it's there...you don't 'forget' how to bunt...or steal bases, or execute the hit and run.

These guys are as bad at this as Manager Gandhi and his doofuses were 'back in the day.' Remember that moron Carlos Lee, not once, not twice but three times trying to steal 3rd base with the tying run at the plate (and being thrown out EVERY time...).

Like I said I understand the physical nature of the game. I also understand this is a pennant race and that takes priority. If there is ANYTHING that can be done to win a few extra games then do it.

Lip

Lip,
sorry, I guess I haven't been really clear.

1) I agree that Pods and co should be bunting more, tomorrow, the day after and the day after that. And they are playing fundamentally atrocious baseball.

2) What I am against right now is trying to take BA to bunting school right now. It is too late in the season for him to be learning it.

Bunting is more complex than riding a bike. I actually think good bunting is harder (and more exciting) than hitting homers. [Lots of people will disagree with that.] Major league hitters work very hard on their swing to keep their head absolutely still. Your brain may be able to figure out how to make two moving objects come together (baseball and bat) but if your viewpoint (your eyes) is moving it becomes three and that is very hard to coordinate. A big difference between my nephew's Little League team and big league hitters is how still major leaguers are and how kids bob their heads around etc.

When you bunt, you have to move your head along with body and a lot of major leaguers just aren't comfortable doing it.

When I spoke to Aaron Rowand in the minors about the possibility of him playing in Japan, he asked me the biggest difference between plaing Japanese ball and US. I told him he'd have to bunt a lot. He said he could sacrifice okay. I said "No, with your speed they would all ask why you can't bunt for a hit."

I doubt Anderson had to bunt much at all at U of A. It's not a skill that is taught. He has shown he can hit major league pitching decently (.270 during second half) now he needs to fulfill his potential and learn all the little stuff to be a very good lead-off man. He has the talent, does he have the moxy. Ozzie obviously thinks he does, but that he needs to keep working.

Should proven bunters be bunting? Yes.

The All-Star break (in July) is your last big chance to rest up and practice that one thing you haven't been getting done. I learnt how to throw out base-stealers over my first AS break. I also practiced my bunting every day of the season. I was asked to pinch hit and bunt several times a year (a very great shame to most Japanese hitters to be replaced in a bunt situation.) Ozzie's bunting school was to take advantage of that, but I think his guys didn't perform so he pulled the plug and said, "next spring."


Honestly, I think Ozzie is pulling his hair out trying to get his team to play better fundamental baseball. But he's got several things working against him. The troops are dead tired. Several guys just aren't responding to little smacks on the butt and turing in a good performance afterwards. Last year, Pods, Uribe, Rowand and several pitchers came back after days off with a lot of fire. This year, they just look like zombies.

This is a critcal time for Anderson. If he remembers he's got competition and can finish up strong he'll be great next year. If he lets the malaise wash over him, not so.

Dye, Konerko, Thome and Crede will all be around next year and all should produce good power numbers. Buehrle, Contreras and Garland should be solid again. McCarthy should be solid in the rotation. Those guys will make the Sox a good team, but not a great team. What will determine if the Sox can win: a) next year and b) for the remaining 22 games this year are the small guys. Iguchi will be good again and now. Who will lead-off? Can he bunt and get on? Can he steal bases? Can he disrupt the opposing pitcher? Will SS remain an offensive black hole for the Sox? Can Garcia and Vazquez turn in 3 more quality starts each this year? If so, the Sox should make the playoffs. If not, they will both be gone next year.

Wsoxmike59
09-08-2006, 07:27 AM
The fact of the matter is you don't know what the outcome would have been, but what did actually happen was two balls went over his head and 3 runs scored. Jose didn't have great stuff, but when you get two batters to fly out, and instead of getting outs you give up three runs, well that isn't going to do anything good for a pitcher's confidence.

Mack costs us runs in that game, and others. I don't see how that can be disputed. He is a liability in the field, and when your pitchers are struggling, you should give them the best defense possible, and that is not Mack in center.

http://static.flickr.com/25/94393263_1d20dc8ce9_o.gif

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2006, 04:12 PM
There's really no defending Ozzie here, even if (for whatever reason) you have an extreme pro-Mackowiak / anti-Anderson bias. Conceding for the sake of argument that Mackowiak might be a better choice in some games, Ozzie nontheless badly mishandles the situation, because he does a really bad job of identifying which games and how many games are "bad matchups" for Anderson. He has shown absolutely no ability to properly evaluate this issue on a consistent basis either offensively (by looking at the opposing pitcher) or defensively (by looking at the Sox starter & the size of CF). As a result, he benches Anderson too often and in the wrong games.I can't quite see how you can make the statements I've bolded above. For the last few months, Mackowiak plays pretty much exclusively against RHP, and especially those with very large LH-RH splits or those like Santana who are particularly hard on righties. Aren't these "bad matchups for Anderson"?? What am I missing? Also, Mackowiak plays a significant majority of his games when either Contreras or Garland is on the mound. I hope I don't need to point out the reasons for this. How is that not considering the Sox starter?

Ol' No. 2
09-08-2006, 04:18 PM
The fact of the matter is you don't know what the outcome would have been, but what did actually happen was two balls went over his head and 3 runs scored. Jose didn't have great stuff, but when you get two batters to fly out, and instead of getting outs you give up three runs, well that isn't going to do anything good for a pitcher's confidence.

Mack costs us runs in that game, and others. I don't see how that can be disputed. He is a liability in the field, and when your pitchers are struggling, you should give them the best defense possible, and that is not Mack in center.A model of contradiction. In one breath you tell me that I don't know what the outcome would have been if Contreras had stayed in the game. In the next, you posit what the outcome would have been Mack had caught those balls.:o:

I can tell you for sure one outcome that would NOT have occured. If those three runs had not scored that inning, then Ozzie would NOT have pulled Contreras with two outs in the third inning down 2-1.

Good fielders make good pitchers better. But they can't make bad pitchers into good ones. When you're throwing meatballs, you're going to get pounded, and having Willie Mays in CF isn't going to change that.

Frater Perdurabo
09-08-2006, 09:02 PM
I can't quite see how you can make the statements I've bolded above. For the last few months, Mackowiak plays pretty much exclusively against RHP, and especially those with very large LH-RH splits or those like Santana who are particularly hard on righties. Aren't these "bad matchups for Anderson"?? What am I missing? Also, Mackowiak plays a significant majority of his games when either Contreras or Garland is on the mound. I hope I don't need to point out the reasons for this. How is that not considering the Sox starter?

You've been grasping at straws on the Mackowiak issue for months.

The stats prove that Anderson has been the better hitter for two months now.

Even you acknowledge that Anderson has been the far superior fielder for the entire season.

The stats prove that the Sox have had a better winning percentage when Anderson starts in CF.

So why does Anderson continue to sit far more than any other regular other than the fact that Ozzie is a stubborn, arrogant fool on this issue? And why do you keep defending him on this issue?

ondafarm
09-08-2006, 09:44 PM
I have to admit, I am shocked that Sweeney is in center tonight.

Ozzie, what the heck is up?

southside rocks
09-08-2006, 10:15 PM
I have to admit, I am shocked that Sweeney is in center tonight.

Ozzie, what the heck is up?

Ozzie said in the pre-game interview with Farmio that he's loaded the lineup with left-handed batters tonight. He more or less said that since the starting pitching is a crapshoot, he feels he has to go with the percentages for offense. And they're facing a pitcher who typically shuts down the White Sox.

I think every lefty on the team is in there tonight, actually.

ondafarm
09-08-2006, 11:59 PM
Ozzie said in the pre-game interview with Farmio that he's loaded the lineup with left-handed batters tonight. He more or less said that since the starting pitching is a crapshoot, he feels he has to go with the percentages for offense. And they're facing a pitcher who typically shuts down the White Sox.

I think every lefty on the team is in there tonight, actually.

Gload?

southside rocks
09-09-2006, 09:37 AM
Gload?

Oops, how could I forget Mr. Bench Stud! :wink:

maurice
09-11-2006, 02:14 PM
I can't quite see how you can make the statements I've bolded above.

I've already supported them with my other posts in this thread and the corresponding statistics. Righties generally are not "bad matchups for Anderson," since he hits righties (.243 AVE) better than he hits lefties (.210 AVE). Ozzie simply is in love with lefty-right matchups and remains willfully ignorant of the relevant stats. Again, to the extent that Santana is a bad matchup for Anderson (or anybody else, really), Anderson has started 4 times against Santana. For reasons obvious to everybody but Ozzie, Mackowiak in CF in Comerica is a really bad matchup, yet he has started 4 games there this year.

Ol' No. 2
09-11-2006, 04:08 PM
I've already supported them with my other posts in this thread and the corresponding statistics. Righties generally are not "bad matchups for Anderson," since he hits righties (.243 AVE) better than he hits lefties (.210 AVE). Ozzie simply is in love with lefty-right matchups and remains willfully ignorant of the relevant stats. Again, to the extent that Santana is a bad matchup for Anderson (or anybody else, really), Anderson has started 4 times against Santana. For reasons obvious to everybody but Ozzie, Mackowiak in CF in Comerica is a really bad matchup, yet he has started 4 games there this year.But you're treating it as if Mackowiak starts randomly against righty pitchers. Not so. He tends to start against righties who are particularly hard on right handed hitters. These are cases where Anderson would be at a particular disadvantage. He'd sure as hell not hit .243 against these guys. Also, while you're just looking at the parks, you're neglecting to consider the Sox pitcher on the mound. Mackowiak gets a disproportionately large share of starts when Contreras and Garland are pitching, for reasons that should be obvious. Given the large preponderance of ground balls these guys get, that far outweighs the effect of the size of the field.

Randar68
09-11-2006, 05:01 PM
But you're treating it as if Mackowiak starts randomly against righty pitchers. Not so. He tends to start against righties who are particularly hard on right handed hitters. These are cases where Anderson would be at a particular disadvantage. He'd sure as hell not hit .243 against these guys. Also, while you're just looking at the parks, you're neglecting to consider the Sox pitcher on the mound. Mackowiak gets a disproportionately large share of starts when Contreras and Garland are pitching, for reasons that should be obvious. Given the large preponderance of ground balls these guys get, that far outweighs the effect of the size of the field.

If you're going to keep making this point, why not do the statistical analysis and look up his starts and base Mack's starts vs which pitcher was on the mound by %...

Sorry, but "preponderance" does nothing for me when others present factual statistical data.

Ol' No. 2
09-11-2006, 05:15 PM
If you're going to keep making this point, why not do the statistical analysis and look up his starts and base Mack's starts vs which pitcher was on the mound by %...

Sorry, but "preponderance" does nothing for me when others present factual statistical data.OK, but right now I have time to go through only August's starts:

Garland: 2
Contreras: 5
Garcia: 2
Vazquez: 1
Buehrle: 0

7 out of 10 starts were with either Garland or Contreras starting.

The Wimperoo
09-11-2006, 09:22 PM
GB% for White Sox pitchers and MLB Ranking among qualified pitchers
Contreras - 45.4%/31st
Buehrle - 44.5%/37th
Garland - 42.8%/51st
Garcia - 41.6%/57th
Vazquez - 40.5%/64th

Top 5 GB% pitchers
D. Lowe - 67%
B. Webb - 66.2%
Wang - 63.7%
J. Westbrook - 61.2%
Jamey Wright - 58.4%

http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=pitching&linesToDisplay=200&orderBy=gbPcnt&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2006&league_filter%5B%5D=All&team_filter%5B%5D=All&Submit=Submit

RKMeibalane
09-11-2006, 11:21 PM
That comment is disturbingly similar to one that Jerry Manuel might have made. I hope that Ozzie realizes it's his responsibilty to put Anderson in the lineup.

maurice
09-12-2006, 03:31 PM
GB% for White Sox pitchers and MLB Ranking among qualified pitchers

In other words, none of the Sox starters have been extreme groundball pitchers this year...or even 50+% groundball pitchers. However, Mackowiak continued to start in CF with flyball pitchers on the mound during a month when he hardly should have been starting at all.

Now, Ozzie's previous BS excuse that he only played Mackowiak because he "had no other backup CF" has been proven bogus, since he continues to start Mackowiak and leave 3 better defensive CFers on the bench. Yesterday's game also involed an opposing starter with rather ordinary lefty-righty splits and a stadium with a fairly large LCF gap.
:rolleyes:

So, the relevant data do not support the pro-Mack-in-CF arguments, which is not surprising since Ozzie is willfully ignorant of even basic stats.

southside rocks
09-12-2006, 03:34 PM
In other words, none of the Sox starters have been extreme groundball pitchers this year...or even 50+% groundball pitchers. However, Mackowiak continued to start in CF with flyball pitchers on the mound during a month when he hardly should have been starting at all.

Now, Ozzie's previous BS excuse that he only played Mackowiak because he "had no other backup CF" has been proven bogus, since he continues to start Mackowiak and leave 3 better defensive CFers on the bench. Yesterday's game also involed an opposing starter with rather ordinary lefty-righty splits and a stadium with a fairly large LCF gap.
:rolleyes:

And Mackowiak drove in what proved to be the winning run in last night's game, which will do nothing to convince Ozzie that he was wrong to have Mack in the lineup.

I'm just saying.

maurice
09-12-2006, 03:48 PM
Mackowiak did a pretty good job of getting a runner in from 3B with less than 2 outs, though he did fail to advance the runner from 1B to 2B (a much harder thing to do, IMO). The next batter GIDP, ending the rally. He also was hitless in 3 chances with 1 K and 1 LOB (making him 2-for-his-last-16 since 8/26).

I'm just saying.
:cool:

maurice
09-12-2006, 08:42 PM
Southside rocks was right. Another start for Mackowiak in CF today according to Reifert (http://whitesoxpride.mlblogs.com/inside_the_white_sox/), though the Sox starter is not "either Garland or Contreras," though 3 better defensive CFers are on the bench, though the Sox are facing a mediocre starter with ordinary lefty-righty splits, and though the Sox are playing in a stadium with a fairly large LCF gap.
:rolleyes:

JB98
09-12-2006, 08:58 PM
Mackowiak did a pretty good job of getting a runner in from 3B with less than 2 outs, though he did fail to advance the runner from 1B to 2B (a much harder thing to do, IMO). The next batter GIDP, ending the rally. He also was hitless in 3 chances with 1 K and 1 LOB (making him 2-for-his-last-16 since 8/26).

I'm just saying.
:cool:

I was pleased that Mackowiak was in the lineup last night. That sacrifice fly proved to be the winning run. Given the slider that Lackey was featuring, I'm not sure BA would have made contact in that situation.

Grzegorz
09-12-2006, 09:22 PM
Ozzie should make his wishes known to Anderson about playing winter ball and that is it; end of story.

Instead of keeping this BA story going and worrying whether Jerry Owens will lead off in 2007 Ozzie should worry about who is leading off and playing center field tonight. He should also focus on his starters and whether they've turned the corner in addition to his bullpen which has turned the wrong corner.

Focus on making the playoffs because if the White Sox do not make the playoffs the first person everyone looks at is the manager.

maurice
09-13-2006, 02:33 PM
2-for-his-last-16 since 8/26

Now 3-for-his-last-20. As I've said many times, I don't paricularly mind Mackowiak in the lineup, I just don't want him starting in CF 40% of the time.

hi8is
09-13-2006, 02:46 PM
http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j146/sschaaf/thorntonaj.jpg

this picture cracks me up, the look on thortons face is priceless.... "you mean.... i accually can succeed??? WOW!"

Lprof
09-14-2006, 05:14 PM
I suppose you are correct, but he hasn't helped a lot, either. Far too often, he was an automatic out or a rally killer. People compare him to Crede, but why not to Borchard? Anderson never had the minor league success that Crede had. At the very least, I think we need a Plan B for next year--something Kenny didn't have for this year.
Some of them seem a little strong to me. I don't think Brian's the guy Ozzie should be upset about this season... at least he shouldn't be at the top of the list.

Anyway here's the link:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060905soxbrite,1,130249.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Lip

maurice
09-14-2006, 05:42 PM
People compare him to Crede, but why not to Borchard? Anderson never had the minor league success that Crede had.

Borchard?!? First, Borchard never had the major-league success that Anderson currently is having (batting something like .285 in 204 ABs since 6/11). Second, Borchard never had the AAA success that Anderson had (Borch hit .263 over 4 seasons at Charlotte; Anderson hit .295 in his first and only try). Third, Crede was a minor-league MVP, because the Sox left him down there for 7 years to repeat levels and to develop. Even after Crede came to MLB, it took him more than 3 years and about 1,700 MLB ABs to develop at age 28 (Anderson is 24 and has about 350 MLB ABs). People forget that Crede's OBP last year was about the same as Anderson's OBP in his rookie season.

Essentially, Anderson struggled for about 150 ABs and has been really good since then, including 5 hits in his last 16 ABs.

Madscout
09-14-2006, 08:55 PM
People compare him to Crede, but why not to Borchard?
People also compare him to Crede, because all those years that Crede couldn't hit, we played him for a reason...his defense. Anderson's at bats lately have looked one hell of a lot better than Crede's did at the begining of last season, after being concidered a veteran.

TomBradley72
09-14-2006, 09:18 PM
Borchard?!? First, Borchard never had the major-league success that Anderson currently is having (batting something like .285 in 204 ABs since 6/11). Second, Borchard never had the AAA success that Anderson had (Borch hit .263 over 4 seasons at Charlotte; Anderson hit .295 in his first and only try). Third, Crede was a minor-league MVP, because the Sox left him down there for 7 years to repeat levels and to develop. Even after Crede came to MLB, it took him more than 3 years and about 1,700 MLB ABs to develop at age 28 (Anderson is 24 and has about 350 MLB ABs). People forget that Crede's OBP last year was about the same as Anderson's OBP in his rookie season.

Essentially, Anderson struggled for about 150 ABs and has been really good since then, including 5 hits in his last 16 ABs.

Best BA analysis I've seen yet...add that to a close to Gold Glove season with the glove...I think we might be set there for the next 5 years or so before BA is free agent eligible. Rookie years are almost always rough...I think alot of Ozzie's comments are around his work ethic, discipline, etc....he's giving him a kick in the butt as part of his development.

Jaffar
09-15-2006, 09:26 AM
Borchard?!? First, Borchard never had the major-league success that Anderson currently is having (batting something like .285 in 204 ABs since 6/11). Second, Borchard never had the AAA success that Anderson had (Borch hit .263 over 4 seasons at Charlotte; Anderson hit .295 in his first and only try). Third, Crede was a minor-league MVP, because the Sox left him down there for 7 years to repeat levels and to develop. Even after Crede came to MLB, it took him more than 3 years and about 1,700 MLB ABs to develop at age 28 (Anderson is 24 and has about 350 MLB ABs). People forget that Crede's OBP last year was about the same as Anderson's OBP in his rookie season.

Essentially, Anderson struggled for about 150 ABs and has been really good since then, including 5 hits in his last 16 ABs.

Best BA analysis I've seen yet...add that to a close to Gold Glove season with the glove...I think we might be set there for the next 5 years or so before BA is free agent eligible. Rookie years are almost always rough...I think alot of Ozzie's comments are around his work ethic, discipline, etc....he's giving him a kick in the butt as part of his development.

I think you guys just summed up the whole situation. I agree.

southside rocks
09-15-2006, 10:37 AM
Best BA analysis I've seen yet...add that to a close to Gold Glove season with the glove...I think we might be set there for the next 5 years or so before BA is free agent eligible. Rookie years are almost always rough...I think alot of Ozzie's comments are around his work ethic, discipline, etc....he's giving him a kick in the butt as part of his development.

I agree too ... the comments that Ozzie made were nothing that a minor-league manage at Birmingham or Charlotte wouldn't have made if Anderson were down there. The difference is, comments made by those managers wouldn't have turned into a crap-storm in the newspapers. This is all much ado about nothing, IMO. Anderson's future with the White Sox is in his own hands.

hawkjt
09-15-2006, 02:00 PM
again, since june 11, BA has hit 57 of 199 which is .286

For a rookie that plays a solid to very good centerfield, I think he has proven he belongs in the major leagues.

Wish ozzie would just leave him alone and play him everyday.

Sox-o-matic
09-15-2006, 07:18 PM
Borchard?!? First, Borchard never had the major-league success that Anderson currently is having (batting something like .285 in 204 ABs since 6/11). Second, Borchard never had the AAA success that Anderson had (Borch hit .263 over 4 seasons at Charlotte; Anderson hit .295 in his first and only try). Third, Crede was a minor-league MVP, because the Sox left him down there for 7 years to repeat levels and to develop. Even after Crede came to MLB, it took him more than 3 years and about 1,700 MLB ABs to develop at age 28 (Anderson is 24 and has about 350 MLB ABs). People forget that Crede's OBP last year was about the same as Anderson's OBP in his rookie season.

Essentially, Anderson struggled for about 150 ABs and has been really good since then, including 5 hits in his last 16 ABs.

Right on.

I don't get all the Anderson hate here. He is NOT the reason this team has played as poorly as they have and he is NOT a guy that you just write off after a bad couple of months.

When most organizations develop a player that they see fitting into the longterm picture of the franchise, they give that player at least 150 or so major league AB's before inserting him in the lineup as the everyday starter for the season. Usually when a player struggles like Brian did, he is sent down and brought back up later. Vernon Wells for example made his major league debut in 1999 but did not become an everyday starter until 2002. And just off the top of my head, how many times has Corey Patterson been bumped around from the minors to the big leagues and back? It takes some time for these things to happen, people. Brian was thrown into the fire of a pennant race and even still it already looks like he is adjusting well.

If Ozzie thinks there is any problem with a rookie developing then he doesn't remember anything about himself. It took Ozzie seven full major league seasons combined to hit 10 home runs, three full seasons to post an OBP above .300, and six full major league seasons combined to collect 100 walks. Ozzie should also remember that even though it took some time to put up offensive numbers, he did have the benefit of playing under managers who didn't pull him out of the lineup every few days and dick around with his develepment.

OzzyTrain
09-16-2006, 01:15 AM
Wish ozzie would just leave him alone and play him everyday.

Same here, I don't get it. I understand he wants to play the bench players but come on, he said it himself he needs more at bats, and maybe benching him every other start is messing with him more. Ever hear of letting people play and falling in a groove, how does Anderson acheive this when he plays every other game.

JB98
09-16-2006, 01:55 AM
Same here, I don't get it. I understand he wants to play the bench players but come on, he said it himself he needs more at bats, and maybe benching him every other start is messing with him more. Ever hear of letting people play and falling in a groove, how does Anderson acheive this when he plays every other game.

Ozzie has said that at this point they have to play the best lineup, and right now, they feel Mackowiak is the best guy. Now is not the time to try to develop young players. The manager is going to go with the guy who he thinks gives the club the best chance to win. Right now, Ozzie thinks that is Mackowiak. This isn't about giving bench players more ABs, I assure you.

WSox597
09-16-2006, 08:26 AM
Thinking Mack is the best option in CF speaks volumes about Ozzie as a manager. More and more it looks like we got lucky last year with this guy as a manager.

I'm not a Mack-hater, he just doesn't belong in CF. Period. Even he says it out loud, he's been horrible out there.

If Ozzie can't see Anderson is our CF, now and in the future, maybe the change that needs to be made isn't on the field.

ode to veeck
09-16-2006, 11:25 AM
Ozzie has said that at this point they have to play the best lineup, and right now, they feel Mackowiak is the best guy. Now is not the time to try to develop young players. The manager is going to go with the guy who he thinks gives the club the best chance to win. Right now, Ozzie thinks that is Mackowiak. This isn't about giving bench players more ABs, I assure you.

So I guess defence doesn't count as part of being the best lineup, nor does Brain's BA since mid June. Nice catch there last night by Mack-a-hack by the way, enabling the A's winning runs on subsequent sac flies. I have nothing against Mack, just as long as he's not out there all the time in CF where he doesn't belong.

jenn2080
09-16-2006, 11:32 AM
So I guess defence doesn't count as part of being the best lineup, nor does Brain's BA since mid June. Nice catch there last night by Mack-a-hack by the way, enabling the A's winning runs on subsequent sac flies. I have nothing against Mack, just as long as he's not out there all the time in CF where he doesn't belong.


I am very disappointed that Ozzie feels Rob is the best fit right now. Brian's defense is awesome and is only going to get better. Rob should not be playing center. He should not even be catching balls out there during batting practice. I wanted to be sick when I saw him in the line up and new it would only be a matter of time before Rob managed to drop a ball or misjudge a fly ball and sure enough he found a way to **** it up. I do not agree with the few people in the post game who said we dont know if Brian would have had it. Yes we do that ball Rob should have had. Brian has made harder catches then that. We need Brian's defense plain and simple and apparently we are going to wait until next year.

Homerun or no homerun I dont care. That does not help Robs defense.

Martinigirl
09-16-2006, 11:55 AM
Homerun or no homerun I dont care. That does not help Robs defense.

What good is a solo homerun when the same person who hit it costs you two runs later in the game?

Frater Perdurabo
09-16-2006, 01:07 PM
Brian Anderson's career as a center fielder will be far longer than Ozzie's career as a manager if he keeps being so inexplicably stupid.

Flight #24
09-16-2006, 01:11 PM
At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if Ozzie's ego isn't causing problems for this team. After the various midseason issues, he's beginning to exhibit decisionmaking that seems to be at least colored by if not dominated by "I know better than you, so I'll do what I want regardless of the results or lack of logic behind the decision".

WSox597
09-16-2006, 01:44 PM
Brian Anderson's career as a center fielder will be far longer than Ozzie's career as a manager if he keeps being so inexplicably stupid.

You nailed it with this one. Maybe laying off the beer is a good idea for Ozzie, and before the game not after it. :D:

DickAllen72
09-16-2006, 02:13 PM
Thinking Mack is the best option in CF speaks volumes about Ozzie as a manager. More and more it looks like we got lucky last year with this guy as a manager.

I'm not a Mack-hater, he just doesn't belong in CF. Period. Even he says it out loud, he's been horrible out there.

If Ozzie can't see Anderson is our CF, now and in the future, maybe the change that needs to be made isn't on the field.

You are correct on all counts.

samram
09-16-2006, 02:20 PM
At this point, I'm beginning to wonder if Ozzie's ego isn't causing problems for this team. After the various midseason issues, he's beginning to exhibit decisionmaking that seems to be at least colored by if not dominated by "I know better than you, so I'll do what I want regardless of the results or lack of logic behind the decision".

This is pretty much exactly what I was going to post. Ozzie seems to be taking the "I make the ****ing lineup" thing to an extreme just to prove he's a genius. Furthermore, among all the things he's been upset about this year, the fact that his team has never put it all together and is increasingly likely to miss the postseason seems to be way down on his list.

FedEx227
09-16-2006, 02:21 PM
What good is a solo homerun when the same person who hit it costs you two runs later in the game?

Exactly. The Sox should really keep record of Rob's ERA, it has to be somewhere in the 3.45-4.50 range.

ondafarm
09-16-2006, 02:22 PM
The only explanation I can think of for the way Ozzie plays Mack and not BA.

Ozzie has given up on this season and is trying to convince BA that he needs to work this off-season in order to be the CF next year.

Awfully ham-handed if you ask me.

samram
09-16-2006, 02:24 PM
Ozzie has said that at this point they have to play the best lineup, and right now, they feel Mackowiak is the best guy. Now is not the time to try to develop young players. The manager is going to go with the guy who he thinks gives the club the best chance to win. Right now, Ozzie thinks that is Mackowiak. This isn't about giving bench players more ABs, I assure you.

I agree with that philosophy, but he's not actually practicing it because he isn't putting the best players on the field.

OzzyTrain
09-16-2006, 02:26 PM
This is pretty much exactly what I was going to post. Ozzie seems to be taking the "I make the ****ing lineup" thing to an extreme just to prove he's a genius.

Sure seems like it, its like he pulls some crazy things out of his hat hoping they work, and if they do yeah he looks like a genius but I mean honestly, who elese believes Rob should be in center field besides Ozzie. Anyone could see it.

Martinigirl
09-16-2006, 02:33 PM
The only explanation I can think of for the way Ozzie plays Mack and not BA.

Ozzie has given up on this season and is trying to convince BA that he needs to work this off-season in order to be the CF next year.

Awfully ham-handed if you ask me.

If that is what he is doing, Ozzie is a lost cause. You don't give up on your team while they still have a realistic shot at the playoffs.

But if that is his excuse, it is inexcusable.

JB98
09-16-2006, 03:21 PM
I agree with that philosophy, but he's not actually practicing it because he isn't putting the best players on the field.

Here's my feeling: If you have Uribe/Anderson hitting eighth and ninth and Pods leading off, you have three almost automatic outs in a row when it's time for the lineup to turn over.

We can talk about BA's batting average in the second half all we want. I've heard that argument ad nauseum, but the reality is he does not hit good pitchers well. Neither does Uribe. Both BA and Uribe can hit mistakes, but if a guy makes a halfway decent pitch on them, chances are they aren't going to do much. Make a good pitch on them, and they can't even foul it off or put the ball in play. Throw a slider in the dirt, and they'll chase it. After them comes Pods, who has been a train wreck and a busted leg ever since the All-Star break. Three easy outs in a row. Ozzie needs to put either Mack or Cintron in there somewhere to break that mess up. Lately, BA has been the odd man out. Maybe it should be one of those two other guys riding the pine, but right now, that person is BA. I imagine Uribe and Pods are getting the benefit of the doubt because they were starters on a World Series champion last year. BA is a rookie and has less of a track record. Personally, I wouldn't care if Ozzie benched all three of them.

To summarize my thoughts on this overanalyzed topic, the 2006 White Sox do not have a good CF, and it has cost them repeatedly throughout the year. Mack has no business out there defensively. BA can field the position, but he is a triple-A hitter. Neither option is acceptable for a team that is striving to win a championship. Contrary to popular opinion here, BA is not a poor, innocent victim of Ozzie's ego. He's on the bench because he's a lousy hitter, and KW miscalculated last offseason when he thought BA was ready to handle the everyday job.

Martinigirl
09-16-2006, 03:28 PM
Here's my feeling: If you have Uribe/Anderson hitting eighth and ninth and Pods leading off, you have three almost automatic outs in a row when it's time for the lineup to turn over.

We can talk about BA's batting average in the second half all we want. I've heard that argument ad nauseum, but the reality is he does not hit good pitchers well. Neither does Uribe. Both BA and Uribe can hit mistakes, but if a guy makes a halfway decent pitch on them, chances are they aren't going to do much. Make a good pitch on them, and they can't even foul it off or put the ball in play. Throw a slider in the dirt, and they'll chase it. After them comes Pods, who has been a train wreck and a busted leg ever since the All-Star break. Three easy outs in a row. Ozzie needs to put either Mack or Cintron in there somewhere to break that mess up. Lately, BA has been the odd man out. Maybe it should be one of those two other guys riding the pine, but right now, that person is BA. I imagine Uribe and Pods are getting the benefit of the doubt because they were starters on a World Series champion last year. BA is a rookie and has less of a track record. Personally, I wouldn't care if Ozzie benched all three of them.

To summarize my thoughts on this overanalyzed topic, the 2006 White Sox do not have a good CF, and it has cost them repeatedly throughout the year. Mack has no business out there defensively. BA can field the position, but he is a triple-A hitter. Neither option is acceptable for a team that is striving to win a championship. Contrary to popular opinion here, BA is not a poor, innocent victim of Ozzie's ego. He's on the bench because he's a lousy hitter, and KW miscalculated last offseason when he thought BA was ready to handle the everyday job.

Even if this is true, as last night proved, whatever benefit you may (or may not) gain from Mack's bat, you lose with his glove in center. He may have scored a run, but he cost us two.

How many times did we hear 'Pitching and Defense wins championships'? Yet Ozzie continually puts someone who, by Mack's own admission, is not a good centerfielder in the line up. At this point a 'triple A' bat, as you call Brian, is better, and more important, than a 'single A' centerfielder.

ondafarm
09-16-2006, 03:29 PM
Here's my feeling: If you have Uribe/Anderson hitting eighth and ninth and Pods leading off, you have three almost automatic outs in a row when it's time for the lineup to turn over.

We can talk about BA's batting average in the second half all we want. I've heard that argument ad nauseum, but the reality is he does not hit good pitchers well. Neither does Uribe. Both BA and Uribe can hit mistakes, but if a guy makes a halfway decent pitch on them, chances are they aren't going to do much. Make a good pitch on them, and they can't even foul it off or put the ball in play. Throw a slider in the dirt, and they'll chase it. After them comes Pods, who has been a train wreck and a busted leg ever since the All-Star break. Three easy outs in a row. Ozzie needs to put either Mack or Cintron in there somewhere to break that mess up. Lately, BA has been the odd man out. Maybe it should be one of those two other guys riding the pine, but right now, that person is BA. I imagine Uribe and Pods are getting the benefit of the doubt because they were starters on a World Series champion last year. BA is a rookie and has less of a track record. Personally, I wouldn't care if Ozzie benched all three of them.

To summarize my thoughts on this overanalyzed topic, the 2006 White Sox do not have a good CF, and it has cost them repeatedly throughout the year. Mack has no business out there defensively. BA can field the position, but he is a triple-A hitter. Neither option is acceptable for a team that is striving to win a championship. Contrary to popular opinion here, BA is not a poor, innocent victim of Ozzie's ego. He's on the bench because he's a lousy hitter, and KW miscalculated last offseason when he thought BA was ready to handle the everyday job.

BA has made huge strides this year and is hitting considerably better than either Uribe or Pods.

I agree with the thrust of your arguement, but not your conclusion. Pods would be the best one to bench. No contest.

QCIASOXFAN
09-16-2006, 03:35 PM
BA has made huge strides this year and is hitting considerably better than either Uribe or Pods.
How has he made "huge strides"? Obviously he hasn't or else he would have the winter off.

batmanZoSo
09-16-2006, 03:47 PM
How has he made "huge strides"? Obviously he hasn't or else he would have the winter off.

That's kind of a glib way to look at it. To make huge strides from where he was--i.e. essentially an automatic out--doesn't require all that much. He has gotten a great deal better over the course of the season, but that doesn't mean he's arrived at his potential. He's at least getting hits now, but he still needs to get some presence and command of the strike zone. He's got some power and RBI potential that he has yet to reach here.

JB98
09-16-2006, 03:48 PM
BA has made huge strides this year and is hitting considerably better than either Uribe or Pods.

I agree with the thrust of your arguement, but not your conclusion. Pods would be the best one to bench. No contest.

BA has made strides this year, but to me, he's still not good enough to play every day on a team that has a stated goal of winning a world championship. If this were a developmental year for the organization, I would be siding with the people who want to see Brian in there each game.

I certainly understand why you think Pods is the best one to bench. He sucks both offensively and defensively. At least BA and Uribe play the defensive side of the ball well. But as I stated, I believe Ozzie is giving Pods and Uribe the benefit of the doubt because of their track record from last year. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I understand it. Managers tend to go with guys who have delivered for them in the past.

Essentially, I'm trying to make the point that there are actual baseball reasons for Mackowiak's presence in the lineup. A lot of people here think Ozzie is playing Rob to satisfy his own ego. To be honest, I think that's bull****, and I think a lot of people are posting foolish things because of their frustration with the underachieving second half we've seen. I believe Mack is giving his best effort, and that he has been unfairly scapegoated here at WSI.

IMO, Ozzie is playing Mack because he's trying to get something going offensively. We HAVE TO get something going offensively now. Our season depends on it. This isn't about anybody's ego. It's about trying to win games and get into the playoffs.

TomBradley72
09-16-2006, 03:54 PM
We HAVE TO get something going offensively now. Our season depends on it. This isn't about anybody's ego. It's about trying to win games and get into the playoffs.

This is where I disagree with Ozzie's strategy...we're playing good baseball teams/contenders with pretty good starting pitching...by definition that means close/low scoring games. I'd prefer Anderson in CF in that situation vs. Mac (other than the occasional rest vs. a very tough RH).

doctorlecter
09-16-2006, 04:05 PM
Here's my feeling: If you have Uribe/Anderson hitting eighth and ninth and Pods leading off, you have three almost automatic outs in a row when it's time for the lineup to turn over.

We can talk about BA's batting average in the second half all we want. I've heard that argument ad nauseum, but the reality is he does not hit good pitchers well. Neither does Uribe. Both BA and Uribe can hit mistakes, but if a guy makes a halfway decent pitch on them, chances are they aren't going to do much. Make a good pitch on them, and they can't even foul it off or put the ball in play. Throw a slider in the dirt, and they'll chase it. After them comes Pods, who has been a train wreck and a busted leg ever since the All-Star break. Three easy outs in a row.

BA vs:

Curt Schilling 2/2, 1 2B
Barry Zito 0/2, 1 BB
Kenny Rogers 4/7, 2 RBI
Verlander 1/3
Mussina 2/3, 2 2B

So he doesn't "own" these guys, but these are definitely not "automatic out" numbers. And these guys are pretty good pitchers.

ondafarm
09-16-2006, 04:10 PM
BA has made strides this year, but to me, he's still not good enough to play every day on a team that has a stated goal of winning a world championship. If this were a developmental year for the organization, I would be siding with the people who want to see Brian in there each game.

I certainly understand why you think Pods is the best one to bench. He sucks both offensively and defensively. At least BA and Uribe play the defensive side of the ball well. But as I stated, I believe Ozzie is giving Pods and Uribe the benefit of the doubt because of their track record from last year. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I understand it. Managers tend to go with guys who have delivered for them in the past.

Essentially, I'm trying to make the point that there are actual baseball reasons for Mackowiak's presence in the lineup. A lot of people here think Ozzie is playing Rob to satisfy his own ego. To be honest, I think that's bull****, and I think a lot of people are posting foolish things because of their frustration with the underachieving second half we've seen. I believe Mack is giving his best effort, and that he has been unfairly scapegoated here at WSI.

IMO, Ozzie is playing Mack because he's trying to get something going offensively. We HAVE TO get something going offensively now. Our season depends on it. This isn't about anybody's ego. It's about trying to win games and get into the playoffs.

I agree that it is not about ego.

Ozzie abandonded Politte and he was, arguably, as important a player to last year's run as Pods. Cotts has all but been abandonded.

I also have, at least always have attempted to, give Mack credit for giving his all. Mack is a player and a definate plus on this team. I think he is being missused and out of position. McCarthy is out of position as a reliever, but he'll be starting soon.

thomas35forever
09-16-2006, 04:35 PM
The only explanation I can think of for the way Ozzie plays Mack and not BA.

Ozzie has given up on this season and is trying to convince BA that he needs to work this off-season in order to be the CF next year.

Awfully ham-handed if you ask me.
I'm not sure about that, but he must think everything he tries works. Obviously, it dosn't. Ozzie's the reason Mackowiak will be back on the roster next season.

QCIASOXFAN
09-16-2006, 04:36 PM
That's kind of a glib way to look at it. To make huge strides from where he was--i.e. essentially an automatic out--doesn't require all that much. He has gotten a great deal better over the course of the season, but that doesn't mean he's arrived at his potential. He's at least getting hits now, but he still needs to get some presence and command of the strike zone. He's got some power and RBI potential that he has yet to reach here.
Hey I'm not sending him to winterball.:tongue: I agree he has gotten better though.

JB98
09-16-2006, 05:05 PM
I agree that it is not about ego.

Ozzie abandonded Politte and he was, arguably, as important a player to last year's run as Pods. Cotts has all but been abandonded.

I also have, at least always have attempted to, give Mack credit for giving his all. Mack is a player and a definate plus on this team. I think he is being missused and out of position. McCarthy is out of position as a reliever, but he'll be starting soon.

You think he's abandoned Cotts? I think he's giving Neal fewer opportunities in pressure situations, but he's still getting his appearances.

Politte wasn't healthy, and apparently didn't tell people how much pain he was in. He's just a different case, in my view.

Jjav829
09-16-2006, 05:19 PM
Here's my feeling: If you have Uribe/Anderson hitting eighth and ninth and Pods leading off, you have three almost automatic outs in a row when it's time for the lineup to turn over.

We can talk about BA's batting average in the second half all we want. I've heard that argument ad nauseum, but the reality is he does not hit good pitchers well. Neither does Uribe. Both BA and Uribe can hit mistakes, but if a guy makes a halfway decent pitch on them, chances are they aren't going to do much. Make a good pitch on them, and they can't even foul it off or put the ball in play. Throw a slider in the dirt, and they'll chase it. After them comes Pods, who has been a train wreck and a busted leg ever since the All-Star break. Three easy outs in a row. Ozzie needs to put either Mack or Cintron in there somewhere to break that mess up. Lately, BA has been the odd man out. Maybe it should be one of those two other guys riding the pine, but right now, that person is BA. I imagine Uribe and Pods are getting the benefit of the doubt because they were starters on a World Series champion last year. BA is a rookie and has less of a track record. Personally, I wouldn't care if Ozzie benched all three of them.

To summarize my thoughts on this overanalyzed topic, the 2006 White Sox do not have a good CF, and it has cost them repeatedly throughout the year. Mack has no business out there defensively. BA can field the position, but he is a triple-A hitter. Neither option is acceptable for a team that is striving to win a championship. Contrary to popular opinion here, BA is not a poor, innocent victim of Ozzie's ego. He's on the bench because he's a lousy hitter, and KW miscalculated last offseason when he thought BA was ready to handle the everyday job.

I kind of agree with what you're saying, but I also kind of disagree. :smile:

I think the batting average thing is overblown and I understand why Ozzie wants to see improvement. Here's the thing, we can talk about BA's average all day - and don't get me wrong, .280 in the 2nd half is nice - but he's doing nothing else. His 2nd half OPS is a subpar .737. His HR rate in the 2nd half is down. His walks are down in the 2nd half. His RBI rate is down in the 2nd half. He's even stolen less bases (1 to 3) and been caught more (3 to 2) in the 2nd half as compared to the 1st half. So while the significant batting average increase is very nice, everything else has fallen off.

Now there's an obvious reason for that. He's cut down on his stroke to try to make better contact, thus taking away from his power. RBIs are largely team dependent, so that's not too worrysome. And the stolen bases are nothing major. But it does help to make you understand where Ozzie is coming from when he says he wants BA to work on his hitting and become either a power or speed guy. Of course, you figure the power will come once BA adjusts to the league. Once he is comfortable enough in just being able to make contact, he'll start to turn it loose a bit more and the power will come.

Still, I think some people are focusing a little too much on BA's 2nd half average and ignoring that fact that the rest of his 2nd half production hasn't been that much better. Don't get me wrong, .192 to .280 is a big improvement. But there is still a long ways to go for BA.

I said I disagree with you because I think you're being a little hard on BA. I'm not sure if you're just talking about this year (which you might), but I do think BA can be a good player at this level and not simply a Triple-A hitter.

Frater Perdurabo
09-16-2006, 05:36 PM
Awfully ham-handed if you ask me.

Ham-handed? You're being too kind.

IMHO, when it comes to managing young, talented center fielders, Ozzie has been modeling himself on the Dusty Baker model.
:angry:

CLR01
09-16-2006, 05:44 PM
I think the batting average thing is overblown and I understand why Ozzie wants to see improvement. Here's the thing, we can talk about BA's average all day - and don't get me wrong, .280 in the 2nd half is nice - but he's doing nothing else. His 2nd half OPS is a subpar .737. His HR rate in the 2nd half is down. His walks are down in the 2nd half. His RBI rate is down in the 2nd half. He's even stolen less bases (1 to 3) and been caught more (3 to 2) in the 2nd half as compared to the 1st half. So while the significant batting average increase is very nice, everything else has fallen off.

Anderson's second half numbers are still as good or almost as good as Mackowiak's first half numbers which supposedly earned him all of the playing time he receives. His second half numbers are also as good or better than Mackowiak's second half numbers. Add in the defense and he should be starting all the time.

JB98
09-16-2006, 07:11 PM
I kind of agree with what you're saying, but I also kind of disagree. :smile:

I think the batting average thing is overblown and I understand why Ozzie wants to see improvement. Here's the thing, we can talk about BA's average all day - and don't get me wrong, .280 in the 2nd half is nice - but he's doing nothing else. His 2nd half OPS is a subpar .737. His HR rate in the 2nd half is down. His walks are down in the 2nd half. His RBI rate is down in the 2nd half. He's even stolen less bases (1 to 3) and been caught more (3 to 2) in the 2nd half as compared to the 1st half. So while the significant batting average increase is very nice, everything else has fallen off.

Now there's an obvious reason for that. He's cut down on his stroke to try to make better contact, thus taking away from his power. RBIs are largely team dependent, so that's not too worrysome. And the stolen bases are nothing major. But it does help to make you understand where Ozzie is coming from when he says he wants BA to work on his hitting and become either a power or speed guy. Of course, you figure the power will come once BA adjusts to the league. Once he is comfortable enough in just being able to make contact, he'll start to turn it loose a bit more and the power will come.

Still, I think some people are focusing a little too much on BA's 2nd half average and ignoring that fact that the rest of his 2nd half production hasn't been that much better. Don't get me wrong, .192 to .280 is a big improvement. But there is still a long ways to go for BA.

I said I disagree with you because I think you're being a little hard on BA. I'm not sure if you're just talking about this year (which you might), but I do think BA can be a good player at this level and not simply a Triple-A hitter.

I also think BA will be a good player at this level, but he is NOT a good player at this level RIGHT NOW. He would have benefitted from another year in Charlotte to hone his offensive skills, IMO.

When I describe him as a Triple-A hitter, yes, I'm talking about this year. Over the long haul, I like his talent. But he was thrust into a situation he wasn't ready for this season. I hope he does develop into a good hitter because he has excellent instincts in CF.

A. Cavatica
09-16-2006, 07:18 PM
BA's not one of our problems. Frankly, I'd more interested to read a thread titled "BA Comments on Ozzie's Future".

Beautox
09-16-2006, 09:11 PM
BA's not one of our problems. Frankly, I'd more interested to read a thread titled "BA Comments on Ozzie's Future".

agreed, if ozzie is going to defend his choice for Mackowiak in CF, why is pods not on the bench? and why isn't cintron our starting SS? oh i know why, because it will cause "panic".

southside rocks
09-17-2006, 10:09 AM
Brian Anderson's average with RISP: .208
Anderson with RISP and 2 out: .189

Rob Mackowiak's average with RISP: .286
Mackowiak with RISP and 2 out: .241

With the bases loaded, they both suck, batting .000.

While Anderson has improved his overall hitting, he still does not hit in the clutch. Mackowiak is far more likely to get a hit in the clutch than is Anderson. That's probably why Ozzie plays Mack more than he plays BA.

ode to veeck
09-17-2006, 10:22 AM
I also think BA will be a good player at this level, but he is NOT a good player at this level RIGHT NOW. He would have benefitted from another year in Charlotte to hone his offensive skills, IMO.

When I describe him as a Triple-A hitter, yes, I'm talking about this year. Over the long haul, I like his talent. But he was thrust into a situation he wasn't ready for this season. I hope he does develop into a good hitter because he has excellent instincts in CF.

I strongly disagree. While Brian had certainly lost his way at the plate in late spring, since mid-season, he has more than recovered his way with the stick in his hand. OK his HRs, Ribbies aren't the same as before he shortened his swing, but then we need more hits not just HRs or we're a remake of the fastball hitting HR club that one one division title in several years, vs last year's Ozzie Ball (defence, speed, play for the runs) style that took us to a new level.

Why doesn't Anderson's vastly superior D and comparable (to Mac's) offence get him back the regular starting job!?

I agree it's not an ego thing with Ozzie, the man doesn't know how to do anything else other than try all out to win, just even confuses most of us some of the time.

peeonwrigley
09-17-2006, 10:29 AM
While Anderson has improved his overall hitting, he still does not hit in the clutch. Mackowiak is far more likely to get a hit in the clutch than is Anderson. That's probably why Ozzie plays Mack more than he plays BA.

Then Ozzie should pinch hit Mack for BA in big late game situations. I have no problem w/ putting Mackowiak in if we need the offense. But his defense in CF means he shouldn't be starting games there.

maurice
09-18-2006, 02:15 PM
Brian Anderson's average with RISP (edit: over 77 ABs): .208
Anderson with RISP and 2 out (edit: over only 37 ABs): .189

There are serious sample-size problems here. It's easy to ignore this, cherry pick stats, and make them say whatever you want. The reality is that they don't predict anything. (For example, Anderson hit .353 with a man on 3B and less than 2 outs so far this year. What does that mean? Absolutely nothing.)

Even good players with several times more ABs in these situations oscillate from season to season. (For example, Konerko hit .176 w/ RiSP + 2 out last year, but .308 this year. His AVE w/ RiSp is more than 100 points higher this year. He didn't improve at this "skill," it's just a statistical quirk.)

Finally, Ozzie has no idea what the splits are. He has said that, as soon as he receives the printout containing this information, he tosses it in the trash. This should not surprise anybody who watches him manage on a daily basis.

maurice
09-18-2006, 02:32 PM
I don't disagree with J's post, but just want to make a couple of specific points.

His 2nd half OPS is a subpar .737.

You have to put this in context. A .737 OPS essentially is average for a starting CF in MLB . . . better than Kotsay, Pierre, Figgins, Clark, Tavares, etc. Some of those guys steal bases well, but none have more power than Anderson, none play better defense, none throw better, and none are rookies.

But it does help to make you understand where Ozzie is coming from when he says he wants BA to work on his hitting and become either a power or speed guy.

I agree that he should work on his hitting and base-stealing in winter ball. Apparently, so does Anderson but, like you said, that doesn't mean that he isn't already a MLB CF and already the best CF on the Sox roster. It just means that (like most rookies) he has plenty of room to improve. At his post-June-11th production levels, BA already is a valuable MLB player. If and when he improves, he'll be a very valuable MLB player. IMO, that's one of the few exciting things about the generally disappointing 2006 season.

Finally, nobody has mentioned this, but BA's wrist has prevented him from playing in the winter over the past 2 years. He had pins removed this past offseason and appears to be 100% healthy. More good news.