PDA

View Full Version : Why was Anderson not in the OF in the 9th?


Rowandws33
04-11-2007, 11:22 AM
BA should have been in the outfield instead of pods. I put this one on ozzie as much as i do on Jenks. Pods has been taken out many times before in the 9th in a close game. If your not gonna use Anderson then just send him down. The whole point of him making the team was becuase of his stellar D. Not smart baseball ozzie not smart baseball.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 11:26 AM
Anderson no have enough catches to play defense.

Rowandws33
04-11-2007, 11:30 AM
Smart baseball to have your best defensive players in the game with a one run lead.

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 11:32 AM
I asked skottyj that same question. 1-0 in the bottom of the ninth I would think Brian would be out there. If not left, then center, and Erstad in left. I thought that was the reason they kept BA on the roster, for late inning defensive replacement. Who knows? **** happens, cant be too pissed in the second week of April :gulp:

maurice
04-11-2007, 11:34 AM
The OP is right. Though you can't believe anything Ozzie says about BA, when the rosters were finalized, he said they kept Anderson for his defense. I guess you don't need OF defense in the bottom of the 9th in a 1-run game.

Today's print edition of the Trib has an article on how good Podsednik is this year. One snippet claims that Podsednik is throwing better, so Ozzie won't use a defensive replacement. Yesterday's game proves that to be delusional. Maybe Ozzie thinks he's coaching a soccer team and wants guys who can headbutt a fly ball.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 11:35 AM
Why wasn't Bobby Thigpen on the mound?

:rolleyes:

Is Thigpen on the team? Is he here to be the closer? Anderson IS on the team and he is on the team to be a LATE INNING DEFENSIVE REPLACEMENT, and that's from the mouth of Ozzie. I know it's not what he says but what he does. :rolleyes:

TDog
04-11-2007, 11:36 AM
BA should have been in the outfield instead of pods. I put this one on ozzie as much as i do on Jenks. Pods has been taken out many times before in the 9th in a close game. If your not gonna use Anderson then just send him down. The whole point of him making the team was becuase of his stellar D. Not smart baseball ozzie not smart baseball.

The loss was clearly Jenks' fault. I was at the game and he was the only hittable pitcher to appear for either team. And he was very hittable.

If you're going to blame Guillen for the loss, blame him for putting Jenks in.

jenn2080
04-11-2007, 11:36 AM
:rolleyes: Now everyone wants Brian in the game? Shoula Woulda Coulda. If Brian was in the whole game and we lost 2-1 everyone would have been complaining because he went 0/4 and if we would have had someone else in the game we would have won.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 11:37 AM
:rolleyes: Now everyone wants Brian in the game? Shoula Woulda Coulda. If Brian was in the whole game and we lost 2-1 everyone would have been complaining because he went 0/4 and if we would have had someone else in the game we would have won.

Did you bother to read anything in this thread before commenting?

Chicken Dinner
04-11-2007, 11:41 AM
The loss was clearly Jenks' fault. I was at the game and he was the only hittable pitcher to appear for either team. And he was very hittable.

If you're going to blame Guillen for the loss, blame him for putting Jenks in.

That's a fact Jack.

jenn2080
04-11-2007, 11:41 AM
Did you bother to read anything in this thread before commenting?


no I figure I will skip all the posts and straight to typing. Who has time for reading? :rolleyes:

INSox56
04-11-2007, 11:44 AM
Did you bother to read anything in this thread before commenting?

Or the thread title? C'mon Jenn, I know it's early, but..! :wink:

CLR01
04-11-2007, 11:45 AM
no I figure I will skip all the posts and straight to typing. Who has time for reading? :rolleyes:

Must have because I have read the thread a few times and have yet to read a post suggesting Anderson should have played the whole game. Care to point out which poster said that? In fact, the title clearly reads: in the 9th?

jenn2080
04-11-2007, 11:49 AM
Must have because I have read the thread a few times and have yet to read a post suggesting Anderson should have played the whole game. Care to point out which poster said that? In fact, the title clearly reads:



I clearly got what the title said the first time. Thanks. What I was saying was that most people don't want Brian playing at all.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 11:52 AM
I clearly got what the title said the first time. Thanks. What I was saying was that most people don't want Brian playing at all.

:jerry

"I can't think of any reason, short of an emergency, to play our best defensive outfielder in the 9th inning of a 1 run ballgame."

champagne030
04-11-2007, 11:56 AM
I clearly got what the title said the first time. Thanks. What I was saying was that most people don't want Brian playing at all.

I think it would have been an extremely small minority of people that complained had BA entered the game in the 9th inning yesterday. Heck, most people would be calling Ozzie a genius because Erstad threw out Bradley to end the game. Or at least forced extra innings by not letting a fly ball bounce off his head.

Rocky Soprano
04-11-2007, 11:57 AM
Do we really need to find a scape goat for every loss? The Sox lost, there is a next game.

TDog
04-11-2007, 11:58 AM
If it makes anyone feel any better, Anderson will be starting in place of Erstad today, according to what I heard at the ballpark last night.

I know the discussion here isn't about starting, but Konerko and Crede, among others, didn't come close to touching Gaudin. Mackowiak and Pods (and Thome into the teeth of a shift) were the only Sox hitters who hit the ball solidly.

oeo
04-11-2007, 11:58 AM
Regardless of who was in the outfield, JENKS still didn't do his job. He got himself into the jam, he got himself behind 2-1 against Ellis. Jenks lost this one in the ninth. The team lost this game.

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 12:09 PM
Do we really need to find a scape goat for every loss? The Sox lost, there is a next game.

I dont think its a matter of finding a scapegoat. I think its more of a matter of trying to answer the question, If Brian was kept on the roster as a late inning defensive replacement, why wasnt he in the game? When you would think he would be.

soxinem1
04-11-2007, 12:11 PM
Second guessing is hindsight, although I am as big of a BA booster as anyone. I'm more concerned as to why he has not even started a game yet. Erstad has not done anything of epic proportions thus far to lead me to believe he is an everyday CF.

But regarding BA being in CF in the 9th Inning, that is arm-chair, after the fact managing.

With all due respect to BA and Erstad, Willie Mays, Andruw Jones, Mickey Mantle, and Ken Berry would have had a difficult time coming up with that hit.

The bigger question should be, why did Jenks throw such a ****ty pitch up there to get hammered?

But, hey, there does not have to be a scapegoat for every loss either, even if you lose it in the ninth inning.

Beer Can Chicken
04-11-2007, 12:13 PM
I dont think its a matter of finding a scapegoat. I think its more of a matter of trying to answer the question, If Brian was kept on the roster as a late inning defensive replacement, why wasnt he in the game? When you would think he would be.

Exactly. And to even complicate the issue even furhter, he only has 1 AB so far this year. Is it even productive for him, as a developing player, to be on the SOX roster at this point? ESPECIALLY if they aren't even going to use him as a late inning D replacement.
Let the mishandling of Brian Anderson continue........

SBSoxFan
04-11-2007, 12:13 PM
Regardless of who was in the outfield, JENKS still didn't do his job. He got himself into the jam, he got himself behind 2-1 against Ellis. Jenks lost this one in the ninth. The team lost this game.

You're right, but did anyone think Jenks would go the entire season without blowing a save? To suggest he shouldn't have been in there, as some in the postgame thread have suggested, because Macdougal had a 1-2-3 eighth or because it was his second straight day pitching is laughable.

Of course, so is all the venom spewing going on over there.

skottyj242
04-11-2007, 12:15 PM
Brian is starting today. Yes.

ode to veeck
04-11-2007, 12:17 PM
The loss was clearly Jenks' fault. I was at the game and he was the only hittable pitcher to appear for either team. And he was very hittable.

If you're going to blame Guillen for the loss, blame him for putting Jenks in.

Gaudan was the only hittable pitcher in the game as he tired, and he got yanked when it became apparent he was about to get rocked.

Jenks gave up seeing eye hits and one solid one at the end on a pitch he never should have thrown (2nd breaking ball in a row)

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 12:17 PM
You're right, but did anyone think Jenks would go the entire season without blowing a save? To suggest he shouldn't have been in there, as some in the postgame thread have suggested, because Macdougal had a 1-2-3 eighth or because it was his second straight day pitching is laughable.

Of course, so is all the venom spewing going on over there.

I did:D:

SBSoxFan
04-11-2007, 12:19 PM
I did:D:


I like your attitude! :D:

maurice
04-11-2007, 12:20 PM
LMAO at comments in the other thread indicating that it would take some superhuman effort to throw out Bradley. Even noodle-armed Podsednik was able to throw the ball hard enough to get Bradley. The problem is that his throw was 10 feet over AJ's head. Good defensive OFs throw harder and more accurately than Podsednik.

Rowandws33
04-11-2007, 12:25 PM
iam not trying to point the finger for the loss or anything like that. Ozzie pulled Pods out a bunch of times in 06 in the same type of game as last night. All iam saying is smart baseball would have been to put Anderson in the game. Ozzie said he made the roster for his D so why not put him in the game. I personally think PODS misplayed that ball last night. I'am not putting the loss on him at all. It's Jenks who is supposed to come in and nail it down.

Jerko
04-11-2007, 12:25 PM
You're right, but did anyone think Jenks would go the entire season without blowing a save? To suggest he shouldn't have been in there, as some in the postgame thread have suggested, because Macdougal had a 1-2-3 eighth or because it was his second straight day pitching is laughable.

Of course, so is all the venom spewing going on over there.


Why is it laughable? Jenks historically (granted, it's a brief history) struggles when he pitches 2 days in a row. I don't call it scape-goating either, I call it learning from your mistakes and trying to stop making them. This bullpen has been GREAT yet we've already lost 2 games with 8th inning leads..... Nobody ever said Jenks would be perfect this year.

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 12:28 PM
Second guessing is hindsight, although I am as big of a BA booster as anyone. I'm more concerned as to why he has not even started a game yet. Erstad has not done anything of epic proportions thus far to lead me to believe he is an everyday CF.

But regarding BA being in CF in the 9th Inning, that is arm-chair, after the fact managing.

With all due respect to BA and Erstad, Willie Mays, Andruw Jones, Mickey Mantle, and Ken Berry would have had a difficult time coming up with that hit.

The bigger question should be, why did Jenks throw such a ****ty pitch up there to get hammered?

But, hey, there does not have to be a scapegoat for every loss either, even if you lose it in the ninth inning.

It is after the fact arm chair managing. The reason being is something went wrong and that is when people are going to question why a better defensive player wasnt in there. You are never going to get arm chair, after the fact managing if the game goes perfectly according to plan.

Vestigio
04-11-2007, 12:33 PM
If we were to put the blame anyone, it should have been the Sox offense. We have one of the best bats in the league, but we're held to 3 hits and 8 Ks by a pitcher who was having his second career start. Totally unacceptable...

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 12:34 PM
If we were to put the blame anyone, it should have been the Sox offense. We have one of the best bats in the league, but we're held to 3 hits and 8 Ks by a pitcher who was having his second career start. Totally unacceptable...

Even more unacceptable is having Cintron on third with no outs and we cant get him in

doublem23
04-11-2007, 12:35 PM
If we were to put the blame anyone, it should have been the Sox offense. We have one of the best bats in the league, but we're held to 3 hits and 8 Ks by a pitcher who was having his second career start. Totally unacceptable...

I've come to expect it by now. I think you could get a pretty large list of crappy pitchers who totally shut us down the first time we see them.

I'm pleased we didn't get swept in Oakland, but I would really like to nail down a series win here so I don't have to think about 2 straight losses tomorrow.

Risk
04-11-2007, 12:38 PM
If we were to put the blame anyone, it should have been the Sox offense. We have one of the best bats in the league, but we're held to 3 hits and 8 Ks by a pitcher who was having his second career start. Totally unacceptable...

Bingo. Having a man on 3rd with no one out and not getting him in was also inexcusable.

Risk

Chicken Dinner
04-11-2007, 12:40 PM
If we were to put the blame anyone, it should have been the Sox offense. We have one of the best bats in the league, but we're held to 3 hits and 8 Ks by a pitcher who was having his second career start. Totally unacceptable...

Even if it was 10-9, Jenks still blew the save and Ozzie is the one that put him in there. Two in a row in Oakland would have been a big boost to this club. Now we have a 50-50 shot at losing this series. We needed it, but it slipped away. Especially Oakland at Oakland.

102605
04-11-2007, 12:40 PM
Did Ozzie ever have Anderson in Center and play Erstad in Left during Spring Training?

Vestigio
04-11-2007, 12:44 PM
Even if it was 10-9, Jenks still blew the save and Ozzie is the one that put him in there.

Thats just hypothetical. Even if it was 10-9 doesnt mean that Jenks would have been used or he would have seen the same batters at the plate.

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 12:47 PM
According to the article on the Sox site...

Guillen was asked after the game if he had thought about putting in Brian Anderson as a ninth-inning defensive replacement. But Guillen said if he had made that particular move, he would have had Anderson in center and didn't want to change Darin Erstad from center to left.

I don't quite see what is wrong with putting Erstad in left? But then again Ozzie is a manager and I'm not.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 12:50 PM
Did Ozzie ever have Anderson in Center and play Erstad in Left during Spring Training?


Yes and he even had Anderson in left and Erstad in center a few times.

doublem23
04-11-2007, 12:51 PM
I don't quite see what is wrong with putting Erstad in left? But then again Ozzie is a manager and I'm not.

That has to be Ozzie's way of saying he ****ed up without actually admitting it. What's the point of a 4th outfielder who only plays center field? :?:

White City
04-11-2007, 12:53 PM
Anderson is to play today in center, according to the AP.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 12:56 PM
Anderson is to play today in center, according to the AP.

What does that have to do with last night?

102605
04-11-2007, 01:03 PM
Anderson is to play today in center, according to the AP.

That was decided before yesterday happened. Facing a lefty its time for a day off for Pods and/or Erstad.

TDog
04-11-2007, 01:03 PM
Gaudan was the only hittable pitcher in the game as he tired, and he got yanked when it became apparent he was about to get rocked.

Jenks gave up seeing eye hits and one solid one at the end on a pitch he never should have thrown (2nd breaking ball in a row)


Those weren't seeing-eye hits in the ninth. If that's the way you saw them, you weren't being objective. The first two guys up hit rockets. Walker's pinch hit was hit hard enough that the Sox had a good chance to throw out the runner from second (who was running with the crack of the bat because there were two outs and he was the tying run). The sound of the hits echoing through the near-empty stadium (about 15,000 in a huge stadium with many football seats tarped off) would have told you they were hits even if you had your eyes closed.

As for the last hit, which was hit farther than anything hit last night, when it was hit, I was amazed at how shallow Erstad was playing, but Anderson or even Ken Berry would have been playing shallow there because the winning run was at third base.

Uribe didn't hit the ball well for his RBI, but it through because the first baseman was playing in. That was a seeing-eye hit, and it put runners on first and third. Then Gaudin came back to strike out Pods, who had hit the ball well twice in the game and got Erstad on a routine ground out. In the sixth he walked Thome before getting Crede to nearly hit into a doubleplay. Fortunately it wasn't hit well enough. Geren certainly thought he was done, and brought in the southpaw to face AJ.

champagne030
04-11-2007, 01:09 PM
According to the article on the Sox site...

Quote:
Guillen was asked after the game if he had thought about putting in Brian Anderson as a ninth-inning defensive replacement. But Guillen said if he had made that particular move, he would have had Anderson in center and didn't want to change Darin Erstad from center to left.

I don't quite see what is wrong with putting Erstad in left? But then again Ozzie is a manager and I'm not.

So is Ozzie going to bring in Pods or Erstad as a defensive substitute for Ozuna later today? We all know the answer is Erstad and that's what makes his comment last night complete bull****.

russ99
04-11-2007, 01:19 PM
All you Pods questioners, gimme a break. Sure he made a bad throw to home, but there's no way any of our other outfielders would have come close to that last hit, considering the infield and outfield were in.

Jenks obviously didn't have it yesterday and a defensive replacement wasn't really going to make a difference, it just might have delayed the inevitable.

Rowandws33
04-11-2007, 01:25 PM
you cant say that at all none of the other outfeilders would have made that play. A decent throw would have nailed that runner at home. The whole league knows you can run on pods he has a weak arm.

PushinWeight
04-11-2007, 01:29 PM
While you can't blame Ozzie for every loss, I don't take kindly to just taking a loss like this lightly because "it's only April". Think we could have used some of those April loses last year? Sorry, but there was a plenty of blame to go around for this one. I don't claim to be a Nostradamus, but I was saying before the inning that Brian should be in left to start the ninth, because it is just smart baseball. Podsednik is not half the fielder that Anderson is, and although I'm not saying that putting him in wins us the game, but I would take my chances that Brian would have AT LEAST made either the catch at the end or threw out Stewart before that. And another move I didn't like was walking the bases loaded. Yeah, yeah, there is a force out at every base, but this is a horrible move because it forces Jenks to throw strikes. If Jenks gets behind a hitter (which he did), then the hitter knows that he's going to groove one down the middle for him to crush (which is what happened). With the way Jenks was throwing the ball last night, we didn't need to load the bases up for them. I can remember the same thing happening over and over again to Billy Koch, and manager Jerry would never learn from it. Hopefully Guillen has learned something from that inning so that we are at least better prepared in the future.

Look, it doesn't matter what month it is. Every game counts. And every team makes mistakes that costs them games. But I think last nights mistakes should have been avoided. I just hope that the team, the players and the manager, learn from this one.

EndemicSox
04-11-2007, 01:30 PM
Ozzie screwed up, it happens.

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 01:31 PM
All you Pods questioners, gimme a break. Sure he made a bad throw to home, but there's no way any of our other outfielders would have come close to that last hit, considering the infield and outfield were in.

Jenks obviously didn't have it yesterday and a defensive replacement wasn't really going to make a difference, it just might have delayed the inevitable.

What are you talking about? Pods ALMOST had it himself, and if it wasn't for a poorly timed jump, he would have had it. Was it a really hard play to make? Yes. Do I blame Pods for not making it? No, the same way I don't fault Mackowiak for his less than stellar defense in CF last year. I think Erstad or Anderson would both have made the play in the same circumstances.

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 01:32 PM
All you Pods questioners, gimme a break. Sure he made a bad throw to home, but there's no way any of our other outfielders would have come close to that last hit, considering the infield and outfield were in.

Jenks obviously didn't have it yesterday and a defensive replacement wasn't really going to make a difference, it just might have delayed the inevitable.

Again, most the people arent making Pods the scapegoat. What we are questioning is why you dont have your best defensive outfiled in the field of a 1 run game and its the bottom of the ninth. I am not saying Anderson or Erstad would have made the play BUT why not give your team its best shot and have Anderson or Erstad in left.

IowaSox1971
04-11-2007, 01:40 PM
A decent throw probably would have gotten Bradley at the plate, assuming A.J. wouldn't have dropped the ball. Anderson and Erstad are very capable of making decent throws.

And on the game-winning hit, it's reasonable to assume that if a mediocre outfielder like Podsednik got close enough that the ball hit off his head, a good defensive outfielder like Anderson or Erstad might have caught it.

Jenks didn't have it, but a closer doesn't necessarily have it every night. Sometimes the defense has to bail him out. If Ozzie had made the sensible move and put in Anderson going into the bottom of the ninth inning, the defense might have been able to preserve a win for us, or at least force extra innings.

What people also overlook is that Podsednik's overthrow enabled the two other runners to move up a base. That led to the intentional walk, which left Jenks no margin for error and forced him to give the batter a more-hittable pitch.

Ozzie blew this one.

champagne030
04-11-2007, 01:48 PM
A decent throw probably would have gotten Bradley at the plate, assuming A.J. wouldn't have dropped the ball. Anderson and Erstad are very capable of making decent throws.



I bet Bradley wouldn't have even been sent if Erstad or Anderson were playing LF. I believe he was sent because every 3rd base coach in the league knows about Pods' arm.

SBSoxFan
04-11-2007, 01:52 PM
Why is it laughable? Jenks historically (granted, it's a brief history) struggles when he pitches 2 days in a row. I don't call it scape-goating either, I call it learning from your mistakes and trying to stop making them. This bullpen has been GREAT yet we've already lost 2 games with 8th inning leads..... Nobody ever said Jenks would be perfect this year.

He's your closer. Closers are used on back-to-back days.

I started checking his numbers from last year, and he pitched on consecutive days on 4/9-10, 4/18-19, and 4/28-29. In those six games, he was 0 - 0 with 5 saves, and gave up 1 run ... during the first game. His first blown save last year was May 5th against KC. It was his third straight day pitching. The previous 2 days, he recorded a win and then a save against Seattle. I stopped looking after that.

I think these 2nd day struggles are based more on perception, or perhaps game 2 of the world series, than on fact. People have off days sometimes. He was still 1 strike away from saving the game.

chitownhawkfan
04-11-2007, 01:58 PM
Jenks gave up seeing eye hits and one solid one at the end on a pitch he never should have thrown (2nd breaking ball in a row)

As someone who was at the game last night I can vouch for the fact they they were rockets. Bradley and Piazza smoked consecutive first pitches, none of the hits he gave up were cheap. It was Jenks' fault, he blew the game, he gave up the hits. It was also poor managing by Ozzie, I don't ever want to see Brian Anderson starting because he can't hit his own weight, but last night would have been the perfect time to use him. If he is in left, or Erstad is in left the game turns out differently. Its not Pods fault, he was put in a crappy decision by a poor managerial choice.

Tragg
04-11-2007, 01:58 PM
The problem is offense. Of course this team is loaded with a lot of mediocre or worse offensive players. The only player on the bench who is an above average hitter is Rob M. We have too many Ozzie-style hitters (swing at everything, refuse to walk, little power) - they have their moments, yea they can bunt; but overall the outs take their toll.
This team will win if its pitching is elite. If it's not, we lose.

As for Anderson, it appears that Ozzie doesn't like him. If he won't play him then trade him or put him in Charlotte. I think it's weird because I thought they kept him over Young and if they did so, all (Ozzie and Kenny) would be on board.

As for Ozzie's managing, it cost us games last year; it arguably cost us the 2nd cleveland game this year (using the worst hitter on the team as a pinch hitter in a key moment); and I still say after winning a title in 2005, he changed his managing style which was always a little off the wall to a lot off the wall.

And Erstad - he's had a nice start; yet given a nice start his OBP is only .333 with 1 homer, no doubles and no triples and WITH the benefit of hitting at the top of the lineup. That's the mediocrity that Erstad delivers. How much O do we lose by developing Anderson instead? Pods is simply the best leadoff hitter we have on the roster...he needs to stay in the lineup.

maurice
04-11-2007, 02:31 PM
Nobody is blaming Podsednik. We all expect him to play bad defense. The blame is on Ozzie for failing to make an obvious move (and on Jenks for tossing cookies up to the plate).

We're not all bitching in hindsight. I was wondering whether Ozzie would put Anderson in SOONER than the 9th. When I saw that Podsednik was still in the game in the bottom of the 9th, I was angry . . . even before he started screwing up plays. I thought this sort of crap would end when KW said "no Mack in CF," but apparently there is no limit to Ozzie's ability to misuse Anderson.

Guillen was asked after the game if he had thought about putting in Brian Anderson as a ninth-inning defensive replacement. But Guillen said if he had made that particular move, he would have had Anderson in center and didn't want to change Darin Erstad from center to left.

That's ridiculous. As CLR noted, Ozzie played Anderson at corner positions with Erstad in CF during Spring Training.

schmitty9800
04-11-2007, 02:43 PM
Hm, I guess you can blame Ozzie a bit on this one, he should've made the move. However, you can't put a loss directly on the manager. We should've scored many more than the one run we gave to Jon.

Jaffar
04-11-2007, 02:44 PM
I was going to start a thread on this the other day because I am really surprised at the lack of play Anderson has seen so far. If Anderson isn't going to get a decent amount of use he needs to go to Charlotte and maybe bring up another bullpen guy. It's good to see Anderson getting the start today but I don't think it will help him much starting 1 out of 10 games unless he is getting a little time mixed in there somewhere else.

HotelWhiteSox
04-11-2007, 02:57 PM
Second guessing at its finest. Didn't see anyone say this before the fact. Ozzie most likely is not going to put Anderson in left, and with the whole moving Erstad over thing, maybe he doesn't want to take out his hottest bat in a close game. Another OF not ****ing up the throw is not easy to assume.

And how do you blame Ozzie for putting in Jenks? If he doesn't put his closer in at that time you all are ripping Ozzie to pieces. Velocity shouldn't change the decision, since it's been like that for the past few weeks now.

**** happened. The end.

oeo
04-11-2007, 03:02 PM
Second guessing at its finest. Didn't see anyone say this before the fact. Ozzie most likely is not going to put Anderson in left, and with the whole moving Erstad over thing, maybe he doesn't want to take out his hottest bat in a close game. Another OF not ****ing up the throw is not easy to assume.

And how do you blame Ozzie for putting in Jenks? If he doesn't put his closer in at that time you all are ripping Ozzie to pieces. Velocity shouldn't change the decision, since it's been like that for the past few weeks now.

**** happened. The end.

I agree with not taking your hottest hitter out, but the hottest hitter is Pods, not Erstad. I'd rank Uribe ahead of Erstad in terms of production right now, as well.

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 03:03 PM
Second guessing at its finest. Didn't see anyone say this before the fact. Ozzie most likely is not going to put Anderson in left, and with the whole moving Erstad over thing, maybe he doesn't want to take out his hottest bat in a close game. Another OF not ****ing up the throw is not easy to assume.

And how do you blame Ozzie for putting in Jenks? If he doesn't put his closer in at that time you all are ripping Ozzie to pieces. Velocity shouldn't change the decision, since it's been like that for the past few weeks now.

**** happened. The end.

Actually I tried calling Ozzie before the bottom of the ninth and it went right to voice mail.:rolleyes:

oeo
04-11-2007, 03:08 PM
Actually I tried calling Ozzie before the bottom of the ninth and it went right to voice mail.:rolleyes:

Would this thread be in existence if Bobby set them down 1-2-3? That's what I thought. I'd also put money on the postgame thread being about three or four pages about how great we are.

CLR01
04-11-2007, 03:09 PM
I agree with not taking your hottest hitter out

I don't, not when you are taking him out in the 9th inning of a game you are winning. Play to win not to tie.

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 03:09 PM
Second guessing at its finest. Didn't see anyone say this before the fact. Ozzie most likely is not going to put Anderson in left, and with the whole moving Erstad over thing, maybe he doesn't want to take out his hottest bat in a close game. Another OF not ****ing up the throw is not easy to assume.

And how do you blame Ozzie for putting in Jenks? If he doesn't put his closer in at that time you all are ripping Ozzie to pieces. Velocity shouldn't change the decision, since it's been like that for the past few weeks now.

**** happened. The end.

We had the lead going into the bottom of the 9th. If it was a tie game, I see the reasoning to keep your hottest hitter in. However, all you need at that point is 3 outs and no runs. What strategy in the world would suggest keeping in a average-poor defensive outfielder in favor of a great defensive outfielder in the bottom of the ninth with a lead? If you're expecting to need Pods to have another at bat then you are expecting them to tie it, and if you are, you have already lost the game.

edit: CLR beat me to it by less than a minute. Why am I so wordy?

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 03:14 PM
Would this thread be in existence if Bobby set them down 1-2-3? That's what I thought. I'd also put money on the postgame thread being about three or four pages about how great we are.

:rolleyes: Just because the loss drew more attention to it than a win would have, it doesn't mean it wasn't the wrong move. He could have also subbed in Ozuna for Dye, put Masset at short, Thornton at third, and moved Mac from pitcher to first. If Jenks strikes out the side, those would still be bad moves.

The Immigrant
04-11-2007, 03:18 PM
I don't, not when you are taking him out in the 9th inning of a game you are winning. Play to win not to tie.

Right, especially when he just batted and is unlikely to come up again until the 11th inning.

oeo
04-11-2007, 03:18 PM
:rolleyes: Just because the loss drew more attention to it than a win would have, it doesn't mean it wasn't the wrong move. He could have also subbed in Ozuna for Dye, put Masset at short, Thornton at third, and moved Mac from pitcher to first.

When did I say that it wasn't a wrong move? I'm not saying it was the right move or the wrong move...I think second-guessing after something fails is stupid; anyone can do that. It takes real guts to second guess something that worked...you never see that, though, do you?

If Jenks strikes out the side, those would still be bad moves.I can almost guarantee you that about zero people would have brought it up. Actually, most people probably wouldn't even have noticed it.

oeo
04-11-2007, 03:20 PM
I don't, not when you are taking him out in the 9th inning of a game you are winning. Play to win not to tie.

I should have worded it differently, but the point of my post was OT: Erstad is not our hottest hitter, he's actually been quite awful this series.

maurice
04-11-2007, 03:20 PM
It's theoretically possible that Anderson or Erstad would have matched Podsednik's craptacular defense in LF yesterday, but it's exteremely unlikely. The entire league knows that Podsednik sucks in LF, so they run on him constantly. With a decent player in LF, I doubt the A's even send Bradley.

Jaffar
04-11-2007, 03:26 PM
When did I say that it wasn't a wrong move? I'm not saying it was the right move or the wrong move...I think second-guessing after something fails is stupid; anyone can do that. It takes real guts to second guess something that worked...you never see that, though, do you?

It's not really second guessing though because Ozzie told us, the fans and the second guessers that Anderson made the team and would be used as a late inning defensive replacement and you couldn't ask for a better chance to do such a thing.

oeo
04-11-2007, 03:31 PM
It's not really second guessing though because Ozzie told us, the fans and the second guessers that Anderson made the team and would be used as a late inning defensive replacement and you couldn't ask for a better chance to do such a thing.

Making managerial decisions after the fact = second guessing.

Bruizer
04-11-2007, 03:32 PM
Did anyone notice that the ball actually bounced off the wall before hitting Pods in the head?

It would have been a difficult catch for just about anyone.

Bru

soxfan13
04-11-2007, 03:38 PM
Would this thread be in existence if Bobby set them down 1-2-3? That's what I thought. I'd also put money on the postgame thread being about three or four pages about how great we are.

No this thread wouldnt exist if the Sox had won. I said that earlier but what are you going to second guess if the Sox win 1-0 and Jenks mows them down 1-2-3. Hey that game was great last night , did you see Bobby strike out the side. Ozzie almost ****ed up and if they would have hit a few flyballs to Pods we might have lost. Sorry but thats not as fun and it doesnt make sense. Alot of people here would say you are being a black cloud by talking the way I just did in teal.

To be honest I fell asleep in the 7th inning and didnt see the Pods play til this morning. After seeing it, the first thing that popped into my head was "why wasnt Anderson in there?" So what wrong with being an armchair manager. Thats half the fun of this site.

Again I have repeated a few times I dont think anyone is looking to blame anybody for the loss. I think the underlying question is "If Brian Anderson was kept on the squad to be a defensive replacement in the outfield, why wasnt he in there when the situation was perfect for him to be in there?"

oeo
04-11-2007, 04:00 PM
No this thread wouldnt exist if the Sox had won. I said that earlier but what are you going to second guess if the Sox win 1-0 and Jenks mows them down 1-2-3. Hey that game was great last night , did you see Bobby strike out the side. Ozzie almost ****ed up and if they would have hit a few flyballs to Pods we might have lost. Sorry but thats not as fun and it doesnt make sense. Alot of people here would say you are being a black cloud by talking the way I just did in teal.
Thanks for proving a point. You only second guess to have some 'fun', which means these are things you're noticing when things are going wrong. When things go right, they go right over your head. If you want to play manager, maybe you should play manager all the time, not only when you want to have 'fun'.

To be honest I fell asleep in the 7th inning and didnt see the Pods play til this morning. After seeing it, the first thing that popped into my head was "why wasnt Anderson in there?" So what wrong with being an armchair manager. Thats half the fun of this site.Yep, after seeing the play it popped in your head...exactly. If Pods makes the catch, you don't even notice it, right? I don't have a problem if you want be an 'armchair manager', but being a manager is not second guessing decisions to have 'fun'. Just because criticizing moves that worked is not as much 'fun', does not mean that that's not a part of being an 'armchair manager'.

Again I have repeated a few times I dont think anyone is looking to blame anybody for the loss. I think the underlying question is "If Brian Anderson was kept on the squad to be a defensive replacement in the outfield, why wasnt he in there when the situation was perfect for him to be in there?"Nope, I'm pretty sure this thread is all about blaming Ozzie for the loss. When in all reality it wasn't just Ozzie, it was Bobby and the offense as a whole.

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 04:09 PM
When did I say that it wasn't a wrong move? I'm not saying it was the right move or the wrong move...I think second-guessing after something fails is stupid; anyone can do that. It takes real guts to second guess something that worked...you never see that, though, do you?

I can almost guarantee you that about zero people would have brought it up. Actually, most people probably wouldn't even have noticed it.

Second guessing is not stupid in the case when it is a valid question. This clearly was. If Pods botches a ball in the 7th or 8th, and somebody second guesses saying Anderson should have been in there, that just isn't right. There was reason to leave Pods in, he was still going to bat. But independent of the outcome of the game, the right move was to put Anderson in the game in the 9th (either in CF and slide Erstad over or LF and replace Pods). Even if a ball was never hit to LF in the inning, it still would have been the correct move to make. In the ninth inning, if you have the lead, you should ALWAYS have your best defense out there.

Sure, not as many people would have noticed it if Bobby did his job and we won the game. Even less people would have posted about it, but you ALWAYS have your best defense in when protecting a lead in the 9th inning. There is nothing wrong with questioning why Ozzie didn't do it this time.

doublem23
04-11-2007, 04:20 PM
Thanks for proving a point. You only second guess to have some 'fun', which means these are things you're noticing when things are going wrong. When things go right, they go right over your head. If you want to play manager, maybe you should play manager all the time, not only when you want to have 'fun'.

This is ridiculous. Look, Ozzie made a mistake. He should have put Anderson in there and it bit him in the ass. Obviously if Jenks gets Walker to K or ground out, no one even notices there is a left fielder, but it was exposed and now we all have to live with the reprocussions.

Conversely, if the Sox had won yesterday, what do you think would happen to the guy who posts, "You know, Ozzie should have put Anderson in left field. What would happen is Jenks gives up 2 singles, then allows Todd Walker to take a curveball to left field, and Podsednik throws the ball over Pierzynski's head. Then, to top it all off, the very next ball put in play gets hit to deep left field and Scott takes it off the noggin while running into the wall?" He'd be laughed off the site.

Obviously mistakes are natural and human, and considering Ozzie has only had a handful of real head scratchers like last night, it makes me believe he's pretty much a very good manager, but to say that we're running some sort of a witch hunt because we're wondering why Ozzie left Noodle Arm in there instead of a guy who made the team because of his defense is worthy of armchair managing.

champagne030
04-11-2007, 04:30 PM
I agree with not taking your hottest hitter out

Second guessing at its finest. Didn't see anyone say this before the fact.

Maybe Ozzie should pitch Mac or Thornton, with a lead, in the 9th and save Jenks for extra innings, just in case the opponent forces extra innings.

I'm going on record now, so I cannot be accused of "second guessing" that Pods/Ozuna/Mack should not be in the OF over Erstad or Anderson in the 8th inning or later of a game we're winning.

IlliniSox4Life
04-11-2007, 04:41 PM
Maybe Ozzie should pitch Mac or Thornton, with a lead, in the 9th and save Jenks for extra innings, just in case the opponent forces extra innings.

I'm going on record now, so I cannot be accused of "second guessing" that Pods/Ozuna/Mack should not be in the OF over Erstad or Anderson in the 8th inning or later of a game we're winning.

Let me go on the record with this to. However, I'd modify it a bit and say if Pods is really hot at the plate and have an AB coming up in the 9th (and we are on the road), then I don't have a problem with him playing LF in the 8th. However Ozuna should never be out there that late. I haven't seen Mack play enough LF to know how good he is there, but he should never be in CF that late, no matter how hot his bat is. Although with Erstad/Anderson I doubt he'll ever play CF this year.

oeo
04-11-2007, 05:00 PM
This is ridiculous. Look, Ozzie made a mistake. He should have put Anderson in there and it bit him in the ass. Obviously if Jenks gets Walker to K or ground out, no one even notices there is a left fielder, but it was exposed and now we all have to live with the reprocussions.

Conversely, if the Sox had won yesterday, what do you think would happen to the guy who posts, "You know, Ozzie should have put Anderson in left field. What would happen is Jenks gives up 2 singles, then allows Todd Walker to take a curveball to left field, and Podsednik throws the ball over Pierzynski's head. Then, to top it all off, the very next ball put in play gets hit to deep left field and Scott takes it off the noggin while running into the wall?" He'd be laughed off the site.

Obviously mistakes are natural and human, and considering Ozzie has only had a handful of real head scratchers like last night, it makes me believe he's pretty much a very good manager, but to say that we're running some sort of a witch hunt because we're wondering why Ozzie left Noodle Arm in there instead of a guy who made the team because of his defense is worthy of armchair managing.

If people want to play 'armchair manager' they should be playing it all the time. What I think is ridiculous is picking and choosing when you feel like playing, and then acting like you're smarter than the manager himself. I've already said it, but I'll say it again...it's easy to criticize mistakes. I don't hear compliments when he makes good decisions (which much to many here's surprise is the majority of the time). I think it's stupid to be blaming this loss on Ozzie...yes he may have made a mistake, but Bobby didn't help with his mistakes, neither did the offense with their mistakes...or the homeplate umpire's mistake on Pods' bunt attempt.

oeo
04-11-2007, 05:02 PM
Second guessing is not stupid in the case when it is a valid question. This clearly was. If Pods botches a ball in the 7th or 8th, and somebody second guesses saying Anderson should have been in there, that just isn't right. There was reason to leave Pods in, he was still going to bat. But independent of the outcome of the game, the right move was to put Anderson in the game in the 9th (either in CF and slide Erstad over or LF and replace Pods). Even if a ball was never hit to LF in the inning, it still would have been the correct move to make. In the ninth inning, if you have the lead, you should ALWAYS have your best defense out there.

For whatever reason Ozzie didn't agree with that, so that is, in fact, second guessing his decision. This is besides the point, though. I never said it was the right move on his part (nor the wrong, because I don't know what he was thinking at the time). My only problem is those that think Ozzie lost the game, and then going ahead and telling him what he should've done like the job should be yours...I totally disagree with that.

A. Cavatica
04-11-2007, 10:19 PM
considering Ozzie has only had a handful of real head scratchers like last night, it makes me believe he's pretty much a very good manager, but to say that we're running some sort of a witch hunt because we're wondering why Ozzie left Noodle Arm in there instead of a guy who made the team because of his defense is worthy of armchair managing.

I turned in last night in the middle of the eighth, so I didn't see the end of the game. I don't have the right to criticize last night's "head scratcher", and (thanks to today's win) I don't have the energy.

On the other hand, I don't agree with you that Ozzie's only had a handful of real head scratchers. Last season he had a ton of moves that were roundly second-guessed, and a lot of them had to do with (1) not having his best defensive outfielders out there to protect leads, and (2) mishandling his bullpen. It's both natural and justified for WSI to second-guess him now.

JB98
04-11-2007, 10:37 PM
While watching the game last night, it never occurred to me that Anderson should be in the game. Never.

The only head-scratcher I saw was Jenks' pitch selection to Walker. A belt-high curve ball on a 1-2 count? Not smart.

Vernam
04-11-2007, 10:39 PM
I must be one of the biggest Ozzie-Kenny apologists around, but I really wish he'd had Anderson out there yesterday. I also don't understand why he doesn't send in Ozuna to run for Konerko, Thome, or other slow guys when they get on-base late in close games. People always talk about Ozzie as a "National League" type of manager (which I find hugely offensive!), but he's surprisingly conservative at times.

Vernam

BUMMER
04-11-2007, 10:55 PM
The loss was clearly Jenks' fault. I was at the game and he was the only hittable pitcher to appear for either team. And he was very hittable.

If you're going to blame Guillen for the loss, blame him for putting Jenks in.

Ozzie messed up the whole thing for Garland and the Sox -
Oakland brought in a lefty for the top of the 9th that Pods couldn't touch. He had both Anderson & Ozuna on the bench to pinch-hit and then for defense, either one could have made a better throw home on the A's tying run and /or caught the ball for the final out on the winning run.
Does anyone else believe that the closer doesn't ALWAYS have to START the 9th? McDougal looked good in the 8th - why the move to Jenks -just 'cause he's the "closer"? - Then, after the first 2 or 3 A's batters rocked Jenks, the A's had 3 or 4 lefties coming up - why not Thornton after Jenks showed he wasn't "on"?

JB98
04-11-2007, 10:58 PM
Ozzie messed up the whole thing for Garland and the Sox -
Oakland brought in a lefty for the top of the 9th that Pods couldn't touch. He had both Anderson & Ozuna on the bench to pinch-hit and then for defense, either one could have made a better throw home on the A's tying run and /or caught the ball for the final out on the winning run.
Does anyone else believe that the closer doesn't ALWAYS have to START the 9th? McDougal looked good in the 8th - why the move to Jenks -just 'cause he's the "closer"? - Then, after the first 2 or 3 A's batters rocked Jenks, the A's had 3 or 4 lefties coming up - why not Thornton after Jenks showed he wasn't "on"?

It wasn't Game 7 of the World Series.

And for the record, Jenks didn't start the ninth in Monday's game. So, no, the closer doesn't ALWAYS have to START the ninth.

Jenks, not Guillen, messed up last night's game.

Jurr
04-12-2007, 12:03 AM
Ozzie messed that up. Give me a break.

Here's the deal people. Jenks messed it up by grooving fastballs over the plate. In the 8 innings previously, Pods had made all of the catches he needed to. PERIOD!

If Jenks gives up lazy fly balls because he was locating his pitches, we're not talking about this. Instead, he was very hittable. That is why the Sox lost.

Why does everyone have to freak out about tiny little micromanaging issues? If Anderson had come in and misplayed a ball, everyone would be saying, "Things were fine for 8 innings. Why did Ozzie put in a player that hasn't touched the field in days???"

Anyone who argues against that point has no ground to stand on. It's really damn easy to see fallacy in an action after the deed has been done. Give me a break. That all came down to Jenks and his inability to get outs.

JB98
04-12-2007, 12:06 AM
Ozzie messed that up. Give me a break.

Here's the deal people. Jenks messed it up by grooving fastballs over the plate. In the 8 innings previously, Pods had made all of the catches he needed to. PERIOD!

If Jenks gives up lazy fly balls because he was locating his pitches, we're not talking about this. Instead, he was very hittable. That is why the Sox lost.

Why does everyone have to freak out about tiny little micromanaging issues? If Anderson had come in and misplayed a ball, everyone would be saying, "Things were fine for 8 innings. Why did Ozzie put in a player that hasn't touched the field in days???"

Anyone who argues against that point has no ground to stand on. It's really damn easy to see fallacy in an action after the deed has been done. Give me a break. That all came down to Jenks and his inability to get outs.

In addition, Ozzie gets a lot of crap around here for all his lefty-righty stuff. Now, because Jenks coughed one up last night, he's getting second-guessed for not bringing in Thornton to face a left-handed hitter.

Well, which is it? Do people want Ozzie to do the lefty-righty stuff or not? The bottom line is players have to execute. Jenks has earned the trust to pitch in those situations. He gets the job done with great regularity. Unfortunately, last night was an exception to the rule.

Jurr
04-12-2007, 12:15 AM
In addition, Ozzie gets a lot of crap around here for all his lefty-righty stuff. Now, because Jenks coughed one up last night, he's getting second-guessed for not bringing in Thornton to face a left-handed hitter.

Well, which is it? Do people want Ozzie to do the lefty-righty stuff or not? The bottom line is players have to execute. Jenks has earned the trust to pitch in those situations. He gets the job done with great regularity. Unfortunately, last night was an exception to the rule.
People get pissed because the Sox lost. I understand it. **** happens.

However, you have a closer in place to hold down one run leads. Jenks has pulled this feat off numerous times. Last night he didn't. Because he didn't, people want to look at every single portion of the situation for a reason to place blame. Look no further than the closer.

Yeah, Scott's throw was off. Look at the replay, and you'll see that the runner was so close, that only a perfect throw would've nailed him. Air mail or not, the throw had to be absolutely perfect. Anderson, Hunter, Edmonds, and the rest are not guaranteed to make that throw. Not even Rowand!:redneck

Then the final play takes place. Okay, bad play. The ball was a rocket , and the result was bad. What prevents that? Jenks doing his business like he did today. If everyone's logic is correct, Pods should've been taken out for the 8th, when the Sox were nursing a one run lead. He wasn't, and the Sox were fine. They were also fine the preceding 7 innings, and Pods made a number of catches.

One little problem occurs, and everyone wants to point the finger at Ozzie, with the assumption that Anderson would've made both plays without a hitch. I guess it makes people feel better about a loss, like they're smarter than a guy that is with his team every day.

IlliniSox4Life
04-12-2007, 07:21 AM
For whatever reason Ozzie didn't agree with that, so that is, in fact, second guessing his decision. This is besides the point, though. I never said it was the right move on his part (nor the wrong, because I don't know what he was thinking at the time). My only problem is those that think Ozzie lost the game, and then going ahead and telling him what he should've done like the job should be yours...I totally disagree with that.

Listen, if Ozzie had a good reason to not put Anderson in, or at least any reason that seems valid at all, this could be considered second guessing. However, he stated his reason was not wanting to move Erstad over to left. Why? And if that's a good reason, then why not put Anderson in left? He played there a lot during ST, and is a better defensive LF than Pods.

You can blindly accept everything Ozzie does, or you can question why he does it. Ozzie was asked the question as to why he didn't do it, and his answer was not a good enough reason for a lot of us. It didn't even seem to be much of a reason at all.

In addition, Ozzie gets a lot of crap around here for all his lefty-righty stuff. Now, because Jenks coughed one up last night, he's getting second-guessed for not bringing in Thornton to face a left-handed hitter.

Well, which is it? Do people want Ozzie to do the lefty-righty stuff or not? The bottom line is players have to execute. Jenks has earned the trust to pitch in those situations. He gets the job done with great regularity. Unfortunately, last night was an exception to the rule.

Thoss are completely different scenarios. I agree that it's BS to complain about Ozzie not bringing in Thornton. Ozzie had a reason not to - Jenks was the closer. He also has a reason to play the lefty righty matchups when he does - he thinks it gives us a better chance to get the guy out.

Here though, Ozzie's only excuse was he didn't want to move Erstad to LF. Why? Is Erstad a poor LF after playing CF for 8 innings? I find that hard to believe. If so, why not put Anderson in LF instead? Is Anderson a poor LF after sitting out most of the game? I find that hard to believe.



Ozzie may very well have had a reason that I am not thinking about, but neither I nor anyone on this site has come up with one. Sure WE are commenting on it after the fact, but Ozzie is the manager of this team. He is paid to know that in the 9th inning with a lead you put your best defense in the outfield. Period.



edit: All that said, Ozzie didn't lose the game for us. Jenks did. It happens. He gets most the blame. However, if Ozzie had made the correct move in the 9th, there is a small chance that even with Jenks messing up we still would have won. And you can't ignore that and say that it's OK for him to not have made the move because it was mostly Jenks' fault.

SOXandILLINI
04-12-2007, 08:56 AM
the answer to the question is very simple, almost as simple as our manager. if we win, we win in spite of him.... ozzie apologists, have at me. there was zero excuse for having pods in the game in the 9th, i mean ZERO, to say otherwise is sticking your head in the sand.... it is the managers job to give your team the best chance to win, having scotty in left in a 1 run game is pulling a costanza, doing the opposite...that is all.Listen, if Ozzie had a good reason to not put Anderson in, or at least any reason that seems valid at all, this could be considered second guessing. However, he stated his reason was not wanting to move Erstad over to left. Why? And if that's a good reason, then why not put Anderson in left? He played there a lot during ST, and is a better defensive LF than Pods.

You can blindly accept everything Ozzie does, or you can question why he does it. Ozzie was asked the question as to why he didn't do it, and his answer was not a good enough reason for a lot of us. It didn't even seem to be much of a reason at all.



Thoss are completely different scenarios. I agree that it's BS to complain about Ozzie not bringing in Thornton. Ozzie had a reason not to - Jenks was the closer. He also has a reason to play the lefty righty matchups when he does - he thinks it gives us a better chance to get the guy out.

Here though, Ozzie's only excuse was he didn't want to move Erstad to LF. Why? Is Erstad a poor LF after playing CF for 8 innings? I find that hard to believe. If so, why not put Anderson in LF instead? Is Anderson a poor LF after sitting out most of the game? I find that hard to believe.



Ozzie may very well have had a reason that I am not thinking about, but neither I nor anyone on this site has come up with one. Sure WE are commenting on it after the fact, but Ozzie is the manager of this team. He is paid to know that in the 9th inning with a lead you put your best defense in the outfield. Period.



edit: All that said, Ozzie didn't lose the game for us. Jenks did. It happens. He gets most the blame. However, if Ozzie had made the correct move in the 9th, there is a small chance that even with Jenks messing up we still would have won. And you can't ignore that and say that it's OK for him to not have made the move because it was mostly Jenks' fault.

soxfan13
04-12-2007, 10:11 AM
For whatever reason Ozzie didn't agree with that, so that is, in fact, second guessing his decision. This is besides the point, though. I never said it was the right move on his part (nor the wrong, because I don't know what he was thinking at the time). My only problem is those that think Ozzie lost the game, and then going ahead and telling him what he should've done like the job should be yours...I totally disagree with that.

You need to go back a read my posts, I never blamed Ozzie, Pods or Jenks or the offense. If you see my very first post I even say its too early to be bitching about a game like that. Again like I have been posting in this thread all along, my question was and still is "If the Sox kept Brian Anderson on the team to be a late inning defensive replacement why wasnt he in the game when the situation called for it?"

For you to say arm chair managering is wrong. I would rather be wrong and second guess a manager then be a lemming like you seem to be with the way you are talking. Like a previous poster has said, you dont realize things until something bad happens. I am sorry I am not as "smart" as you and have my whole game plan written out in front of me before the game starts.

Jerko
04-12-2007, 11:06 AM
This happens every year. When the Sox lose, people (myself included) like to come here and bitch, then we stick around to see if anybody agrees or disagrees with us. Then some of us start arguing, etc. That makes for long threads. When the Sox win, we sign on, maybe make one post about how great we are, and then read other stuff or log off. If Ozzie does something I don't agree with I usually say something before he makes the move, like "don't bunt with Iguchi right after AJ greeted Hernandez with a double". I also admit when I'm wrong, like saying "putting Aardsma in here with the bags jammed is iffy".... You have like 2 or 3 "camps" when it comes to arm-chair managing: The "2nd guessers", the "I told you so's" and the "We're better than 2005's!!!!!" which somebody actually said in that game thread when it was 1-0 Sox in the 8th inning of the 7th game of the year, which IMO is ridiculous too. This thread is STILL going and the Sox won yesterday. It's just easier to bitch after a loss, that's all. Who's gonna come on here and say "hey we won, but if Crede didn't strike out in the 8th we wouldn't have had to come up with a rally in the 9th to win"... It's human nature.

JB98
04-12-2007, 01:03 PM
As Jurr pointed out, it would have taken a great throw to nail Bradley at the plate. There is no guarantee that Erstad or anyone else makes that throw.My opinion: This thread is a drawn out production by the "Free Brian Anderson" crowd, which steadfastly believes Ozzie is managing the team with the sole purpose in mind of screwing BA over at every turn.

maurice
04-12-2007, 01:05 PM
Here though, Ozzie's only excuse was he didn't want to move Erstad to LF. Why? Is Erstad a poor LF after playing CF for 8 innings? I find that hard to believe. If so, why not put Anderson in LF instead? Is Anderson a poor LF after sitting out most of the game? I find that hard to believe.

One more:
Is Podsednik a poor LF after playing most of the game? Absolutely.

Everybody in the league knows that Podsednik sucks in LF, especially his throwing arm. Why doesn't Ozzie know this?

As usual, Ozzie's explanation for leaving Anderson on the bench doesn't make any sense.

doublem23
04-12-2007, 01:07 PM
As Jurr pointed out, it would have taken a great throw to nail Bradley at the plate. There is no guarantee that Erstad or anyone else makes that throw.My opinion: This thread is a drawn out production by the "Free Brian Anderson" crowd, which steadfastly believes Ozzie is managing the team with the sole purpose in mind of screwing BA over at every turn.

Maybe, but a) What's the point of carrying a 4th outfielder if you're not going to use him in a situation that's basically Baseball 101? b) Do you think Bradley runs if Anderson/Erstad are in left instead of Podsednik? I think everyone knows Podsednik has no arm, and he still made the play relatively close.

maurice
04-12-2007, 01:10 PM
As Jurr pointed out, it would have taken a great throw to nail Bradley at the plate.

You're both wrong. Even noodle-armed Podsednik was able to throw the ball hard enough to get the ball there on time. He just threw it 10 feet over AJ's head. Anderson and Erstad both have stronger and more accurate arms than Podsednik, and probably would have thrown Bradley out by 3 steps. Heck, Pods fielded the ball only about 40-50' past the dirt. It was a very short, easy throw with a hobbling runner.

If Anderson is in LF, I seriously doubt that the A's even send Bradley.

CLR01
04-12-2007, 01:26 PM
You're both wrong. Even noodle-armed Podsednik was able to throw the ball hard enough to get the ball there on time. He just threw it 10 feet over AJ's head. Anderson and Erstad both have stronger and more accurate arms than Podsednik, and probably would have thrown Bradley out by 3 steps. Heck, Pods fielded the ball only about 40-50' past the dirt. It was a very short, easy throw with a hobbling runner.

If Anderson is in LF, I seriously doubt that the A's even send Bradley.

Ozzie disagrees with you, he's never wrong, he's smarter than you, ****.

CLR01
04-12-2007, 01:29 PM
You're both wrong. Even noodle-armed Podsednik was able to throw the ball hard enough to get the ball there on time. He just threw it 10 feet over AJ's head.


Bradley wasn't even in the frame when the ball sail over his head. Given the fact that he injured himself running, a decent throw would have probably been enough to get him out.

soxjim
04-12-2007, 01:34 PM
Yes I do arm chair manage/coach at all sports I watch. I'm a fan that is to be expected. Didn't watch Tuesdays game but what I hear I would of been yelling at the TV. If it would of worked out I would of had a broom out on Wednesday. That's the life of this sports fan.

jabrch
04-12-2007, 01:36 PM
Maybe, but a) What's the point of carrying a 4th outfielder if you're not going to use him in a situation that's basically Baseball 101?

I'm not sure on this one - so I'm asking...

Do the Reds replace Dunn in the 9th in a 1 run game if he's up the next inning?

Do the Red Sox replace Manny?

Do the Astros do it with Carlos?

Oakland didn't do it with Shannon Stewart the other day.

I know it happens sometimes, but do you think this is a hard and fast "baseball 101" rule that is always followed that Ozzie ignored, or do you think it is a judgement call that managers make based on the situation where Ozzie took a chance, and got burned on it, but could easily have gone the other way?

In hindsight, we know it could have been no worse had Guillen put in BA in CF and moved Erstad to LF. But if that's the case, then people should be this riled up nearly every day a game is close in the late innings.

You can take it one step further also. What about Konerko? Why aren't we worried about replacing him in the 9th? What about Cintron on days he plays instead of Uribe or Iguchi?

To me, Tuesday was flat out bad luck. 3 singles were hit through the IF on Jenks. How many times will we see that happen to him? If the best way to beat us is having 3 hitters roll balls between Crede, Uribe and Tadahito, we are going to win a lot of games.

CLR01
04-12-2007, 01:41 PM
You can take it one step further also. What about Konerko? Why aren't we worried about replacing him in the 9th? What about Cintron on days he plays instead of Uribe or Iguchi?

Who on the team is clearly a better defensive first baseman than Konerko?

soxfan13
04-12-2007, 01:54 PM
I'm not sure on this one - so I'm asking...

Do the Reds replace Dunn in the 9th in a 1 run game if he's up the next inning?

Do the Red Sox replace Manny?

Do the Astros do it with Carlos?

Oakland didn't do it with Shannon Stewart the other day.

I know it happens sometimes, but do you think this is a hard and fast "baseball 101" rule that is always followed that Ozzie ignored, or do you think it is a judgement call that managers make based on the situation where Ozzie took a chance, and got burned on it, but could easily have gone the other way?

In hindsight, we know it could have been no worse had Guillen put in BA in CF and moved Erstad to LF. But if that's the case, then people should be this riled up nearly every day a game is close in the late innings.

You can take it one step further also. What about Konerko? Why aren't we worried about replacing him in the 9th? What about Cintron on days he plays instead of Uribe or Iguchi?

To me, Tuesday was flat out bad luck. 3 singles were hit through the IF on Jenks. How many times will we see that happen to him? If the best way to beat us is having 3 hitters roll balls between Crede, Uribe and Tadahito, we are going to win a lot of games.

Out of the 4 mentioned I would definately replace stewart and Dunn. Lee has turned into a decent left fielder. I would take my chance of protecting the 1 run lead and hopefully the game being over. As for Konerko you are not going to replace him defensively. There is no better defensive replacement on the team but he has been replaced for a pinch runner in the ninth when the game has been tied or chasing a run and Ozzie is going for the win or tie.

SBSoxFan
04-12-2007, 04:42 PM
Who on the team is clearly a better defensive first baseman than Konerko?

Erstad. He's a grinder.

On another note, Swisher looked weak going after JD's homer yesterday. He appeared to be jogging, and made it to the warning track as the ball just got over the wall.

[QUOTE: A's Fan] Street sucks. If he can't pitch well 2 days in a row, he needs to be replaced, released or sent down. He has a history of not pitching well 2 days in a row; I don't know why they keep putting him in.

Swisher sucks. He is NOT a center fielder. He should have been replaced with a 2-run lead late in the game. [/QUOTE: A's Fan]

JB98
04-12-2007, 05:47 PM
You're both wrong. Even noodle-armed Podsednik was able to throw the ball hard enough to get the ball there on time. He just threw it 10 feet over AJ's head. Anderson and Erstad both have stronger and more accurate arms than Podsednik, and probably would have thrown Bradley out by 3 steps. Heck, Pods fielded the ball only about 40-50' past the dirt. It was a very short, easy throw with a hobbling runner.

If Anderson is in LF, I seriously doubt that the A's even send Bradley.

I'll bet you everything I own they send Bradley in that situation regardless of who is in left field. They had a rookie in the on-deck circle (Buck). With two outs, you gamble.

I'm sticking by my guns. This is a thread for Brian Anderson apologists. How many games have we won the last two years with Pods in left field?

SOXandILLINI
04-12-2007, 06:04 PM
I'll bet you everything I own they send Bradley in that situation regardless of who is in left field. They had a rookie in the on-deck circle (Buck). With two outs, you gamble.

I'm sticking by my guns. This is a thread for Brian Anderson apologists. How many games have we won the last two years with Pods in left field?

i bet they send him too, so what? not the point anyway, your statement is for ozzie apologists. i have no particular axe to grind about BA one way or the other. i couldn't care less whether BA plays or not, whoever is producing should play. this is a specific situation that our manager put us in a weak defensive position in the 9th inning in a 1 run game, it's that simple. there is no excuse why a defensive move should not have been made. anyone that says different is an ozzie apologist. it was a simple, basic baseball move, that ozzie chose not to make, and i, for one, would like to know why.

maurice
04-12-2007, 06:27 PM
Ozzie regularly subbed Gload for Konerko in similar situtations, and Ozzie has subbed for Podsednik in similar situations in the past. He just dropped the ball on this one.

FarWestChicago
04-12-2007, 10:59 PM
I'll admit there are many genius IQ's, simply brilliant minds, posting in this thread. But, you need to work on your EQ. You're still bitching about a loss on Tuesday after the postgame thread from the Wednesday win has died. :roflmao:

JB98
04-12-2007, 11:16 PM
i bet they send him too, so what? not the point anyway, your statement is for ozzie apologists. i have no particular axe to grind about BA one way or the other. i couldn't care less whether BA plays or not, whoever is producing should play. this is a specific situation that our manager put us in a weak defensive position in the 9th inning in a 1 run game, it's that simple. there is no excuse why a defensive move should not have been made. anyone that says different is an ozzie apologist. it was a simple, basic baseball move, that ozzie chose not to make, and i, for one, would like to know why.

I was pissed at Ozzie for allowing Mackowiak to hit against a left-handed pitcher with a runner at third base and no outs. JD is on the bench. Why not use him?

I'm not an "Ozzie apologist." I disagree with Ozzie's moves from time to time. But I don't have a problem with Pods in the OF in a close game at all, nor do I have a problem with the way he's handling BA. I'm still completely baffled that people think the outfield defense cost us that game.

champagne030
04-12-2007, 11:55 PM
I'll admit there are many genius IQ's, simply brilliant minds, posting in this thread. But, you need to work on your EQ. You're still bitching about a loss on Tuesday after the postgame thread from the Wednesday win has died. :roflmao:

It does pertain to the rest of the season. If Ozzie if going to keep a finger up his nose and refuse to replace Pods late in games for defensive replacements then it will cost us just like he did last year by running Mack out in CF.

Craig Grebeck
04-13-2007, 12:15 AM
I'm not sure on this one - so I'm asking...

Do the Reds replace Dunn in the 9th in a 1 run game if he's up the next inning?

Do the Red Sox replace Manny?

Do the Astros do it with Carlos?

Oakland didn't do it with Shannon Stewart the other day.

The difference being that all of these guys are either good/great hitters, Pods is somewhere between bad and...bad.

SOXandILLINI
04-13-2007, 05:27 PM
I was pissed at Ozzie for allowing Mackowiak to hit against a left-handed pitcher with a runner at third base and no outs. JD is on the bench. Why not use him?

I'm not an "Ozzie apologist." I disagree with Ozzie's moves from time to time. But I don't have a problem with Pods in the OF in a close game at all, nor do I have a problem with the way he's handling BA. I'm still completely baffled that people think the outfield defense cost us that game.

UNCLE !!

SOXandILLINI
04-13-2007, 05:28 PM
It does pertain to the rest of the season. If Ozzie if going to keep a finger up his nose and refuse to replace Pods late in games for defensive replacements then it will cost us just like he did last year by running Mack out in CF.

uh... yeah.

MRM
04-13-2007, 09:19 PM
BA should have been in the outfield instead of pods. I put this one on ozzie as much as i do on Jenks. Pods has been taken out many times before in the 9th in a close game. If your not gonna use Anderson then just send him down. The whole point of him making the team was becuase of his stellar D. Not smart baseball ozzie not smart baseball.

The same guy everyone wanted demoted? Cmon. This is nonsense second guessing. For starters if Anderson WAS brought into the game he'd have been in center with Erstad in left. THAT would have been even worse on that particular play. The Sox had Pods playing shallow...only his speed allowed it to be even close. With Erstad it wouldn't have been anywhere near close. If you want to lay blame, blame the coaches who had Pods playing so shallow to begin with.

Not Pods fault that Bobby didn't have it, either.

SOXandILLINI
04-13-2007, 09:26 PM
DOES ANYBODY KNOW THIS GAME ??????????? it amazes me some of the posts i see here. i expect such stupidity out of cub fans, but i guess it's universal. about 2% of fans understand the games they watch, the others spew nonsense. at least most in this thread understand what should have been done, would the outcome have been different? not necessarily, but we'll never know because ozzie had his head up his rear end.

MRM
04-13-2007, 09:32 PM
DOES ANYBODY KNOW THIS GAME ??????????? it amazes me some of the posts i see here. i expect such stupidity out of cub fans, but i guess it's universal. about 2% of fans understand the games they watch, the others spew nonsense. at least most in this thread understand what should have been done, would the outcome have been different? not necessarily, but we'll never know because ozzie had his head up his rear end.

That's the funniest thing I've read in a while. Not only do you insult most people in here for "not knowing the game" you follow it up by suggesting Ozzie doesn't, either. That's hilarious.

May I ask what YOUR credentials are that you can claim NOBODY, including the Sox manager, knows as much about "the game" as you do?

Jurr
04-13-2007, 09:37 PM
Why doesn't this one go away? Come on.

Brian26
04-13-2007, 09:37 PM
DOES ANYBODY KNOW THIS GAME ???????????

Take it easy. Mostly everyone agrees with you that BA should be a late-game defensive replacement when he's not starting. Ozzie just blew it in that situation. Let's move on.

SOXandILLINI
04-13-2007, 09:38 PM
That's the funniest thing I've read in a while. Not only do you insult most people in here for "not knowing the game" you follow it up by suggesting Ozzie doesn't, either. That's hilarious.

May I ask what YOUR credentials are that you can claim NOBODY, including the Sox manager, knows as much about "the game" as you do?

i have given my "credentials" on this board before, and will not do it again, as they, in and of themselves do not make one insightful when it comes to the game itself, see darrin jackson. if you don't think the defensive move should have been made, you don't know the game, and i really don't care what you think about that. ozzie made a very basic mistake, and i'm sure he knows it, let's just hope he doesn't stay his arrogant self, like he did last year with rob in center that cost us about 5 games.

A. Cavatica
04-13-2007, 11:56 PM
I'm still pissed off about Jerry Manuel giving Cotts the start at Yankee Stadium. :angry:

OK, that should've been teal.

Jurr
04-14-2007, 06:42 AM
I'm still pissed off about Jerry Manuel giving Cotts the start at Yankee Stadium. :angry:

OK, that should've been teal.
No it shouldn't! He ruined it! He ruined it all!
I'm still pissed about Billy Koch giving up that walk off in Tampa, after the Sox dramatically swept Minnesota and acquired Alomar/Everett (Pt.I). :angry:

FarWestChicago
04-14-2007, 07:56 AM
It does pertain to the rest of the season. If Ozzie if going to keep a finger up his nose and refuse to replace Pods late in games for defensive replacements then it will cost us just like he did last year by running Mack out in CF.Oh hell, I expect you to keep reviving this thread until 2008. There is just no way you can get enough negativity in your life. BTW, they Sox have won twice and lost none since this bitchfest; not that you would care. :D:

jabrch
04-14-2007, 09:33 AM
Oh hell, I expect you to keep reviving this thread until 2008. There is just no way you can get enough negativity in your life. BTW, they Sox have won twice and lost none since this bitchfest; not that you would care. :D:

And in both of those games, when the opposition had a game tying runner in scoring position in the bottom of the 9th, Guillen did EXACTLY the same thing he did on Tuesday - and we won anyhow.

MLB Teams don't just yank their starting LF to put in someone else in the 9th inning every single time. Most certainly not when that player is hitting .296/.387.

champagne030
04-14-2007, 10:31 AM
And in both of those games, when the opposition had a game tying runner in scoring position in the bottom of the 9th, Guillen did EXACTLY the same thing he did on Tuesday - and we won anyhow.



What games are you referring to? The tying run was never even on base, let alone in scoring position, in the 9th inning of our last two victories. Heck, nobody even reached base in the 9th inning of our 3 run victory on Wednesday.

And yesterday, Ozzie ****ed up again. He should have brought BA into the game. Wednesday, Ozzie already had removed BA from the game before the 9th inning, so he wasn't available as a defensive subsitute.

FarWestChicago
04-14-2007, 10:51 AM
And yesterday, Ozzie ****ed up again. He should have brought BA into the game.Holy crap. So there is actually a member of a Chicago team you like? The hell with everybody else on the Bears, Bulls, Hawks and Sox. You've got BA. :D:

CLR01
04-14-2007, 11:32 PM
I don't know where to put it.


From the "not what I say" department:

"We went through meeting after meeting after meeting about what we had to do, and [general manager] Kenny Williams and myself said if we have to give someone a day off, Anderson is the best guy we have for that," Guillen said.

So why has he only been used once to give a guy a day off while Mack and Ozuna have been used 3 times in the outfield?


http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070414soxbits,1,5968685.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines

getonbckthr
04-14-2007, 11:35 PM
I don't know where to put it.


From the "not what I say" department:

So why has he only been used once to give a guy a day off while Mack and Ozuna have been used 3 times in the outfield?


http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070414soxbits,1,5968685.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines
Hey you watch that tone they brought us a championship you aren't allowed to question them.

Frater Perdurabo
04-15-2007, 08:43 AM
I don't know where to put it. From the "not what I say" department:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070414soxbits,1,5968685.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines

Assuming he's quoted right (and with the Trib, that's another matter), Ozzie almost seems to suggest that BA was to blame for his illness:

Anderson reluctantly went to play for LaGuaira in the Venezuelan Winter League and got sick, lost 20 pounds in less than a month and returned to the United States.

"You can't make people do what they don't want to do," Guillen said. "You want to go, this is the guy you want to talk to."

Brian, if you don't want to go to Venezuela, just say so. You don't have to give yourself dysentery by drinking gallons of untreated sewage!

Jjav829
04-15-2007, 09:56 AM
I don't know where to put it.


From the "not what I say" department:



So why has he only been used once to give a guy a day off while Mack and Ozuna have been used 3 times in the outfield?


http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-070414soxbits,1,5968685.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines

Ozuna isn't used to give anyone rest. He is a semi-platoon partner for Pods against lefties when Pods is struggling, and the only other guy on the team that Ozzie seems to like in the leadoff spot.

I don't know why Mackowiak was used over Anderson.

SOXandILLINI
04-15-2007, 01:34 PM
Ozuna isn't used to give anyone rest. He is a semi-platoon partner for Pods against lefties when Pods is struggling, and the only other guy on the team that Ozzie seems to like in the leadoff spot.

I don't know why Mackowiak was used over Anderson.

cus our manager has a rod on for BA for whatever reason, i just wish it wouldn't interfere with winning baseball games, but that's ozzie, see last year with rob.

Man Soo Lee
04-15-2007, 02:19 PM
I don't know why Mackowiak was used over Anderson.

Mackowiak's only start this year was in RF. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that he was used over Anderson because he's a better hitter.

Rowandws33
04-24-2007, 03:50 PM
Anyone else notice that BA comes in late in close games all the time now???? I guess are second guessing was right huh....

ilsox7
04-24-2007, 05:26 PM
Anyone else notice that BA comes in late in close games all the time now???? I guess are second guessing was right huh....

It might behoove BA to hustle from now on when he is put in the game as a defensive replacement . . .

JB98
04-24-2007, 06:11 PM
cus our manager has a rod on for BA for whatever reason, i just wish it wouldn't interfere with winning baseball games, but that's ozzie, see last year with rob.

After all, we've been on a massive losing streak ever since Pods went down. Mack is just killing us right now.

SOXandILLINI
04-24-2007, 06:14 PM
Anyone else notice that BA comes in late in close games all the time now???? I guess are second guessing was right huh....
there was never a question if our second guessing was right or not, it was.... and as far as rob goes, he's not a center fielder, he does an adequate job in left.

JB98
04-24-2007, 06:16 PM
Anyone else notice that BA comes in late in close games all the time now???? I guess are second guessing was right huh....

The people who started this thread wanted BA to play CF and Erstad to move to LF in replace of Pods. So no, they are not right.

Pods is now on the DL, and obviously, the situation has changed.

FarWestChicago
04-24-2007, 07:34 PM
Anyone else notice that BA comes in late in close games all the time now???? I guess are second guessing was right huh....For god's sake, man. Use English when claiming you are a genius. :redneck

voodoochile
04-24-2007, 07:36 PM
For god's sake, man. Use English when claiming you are a genius. :redneck

Yeah, talking like a pirate was so 2006...

Jurr
04-24-2007, 07:36 PM
For god's sake, man. Use English when claiming you are a genius. :redneck
:rolling: I'm glad I wasn't the guy to say it.

Rowandws33
04-24-2007, 07:43 PM
when did i say that??? most of the people on here complained of people second guessing ozzie. Smart baseball to put your best defensive players in with a one run lead...but dont worry about the baseball just harp on the one word..good move

Jurr
04-24-2007, 07:46 PM
when did i say??? most of the people on here complained of people second guessing ozzie. Smart baseball to put your best defensive players in with a one run lead...but dont worry about the baseball just harp on the one word..good move
We won't harp on the one word stuff any more. That doesn't get you anywhere. Smart baseball coaches DON'T put players in the game unless they give you a good chance to win. I DON'T think that Ozzie believes in Anderson's abilities. Don't you think so?

Daver
04-24-2007, 07:47 PM
when did i say that??? most of the people on here complained of people second guessing ozzie. Smart baseball to put your best defensive players in with a one run lead...but dont worry about the baseball just harp on the one word..good move

Picking a fight with the guy that owns the message board is an even better move.

Jurr
04-24-2007, 07:49 PM
Picking a fight with the guy that owns the message board is an even better move.
Hey, look! The game's coming on! :bandance: Good luck finding it on CSN2++++

FarWestChicago
04-24-2007, 08:15 PM
We won't harp on the one word stuff any more.Do all of the REH's have no sense of humor? :D:

Jurr
04-24-2007, 08:20 PM
Do all of the REH's have no sense of humor? :D:
Note the abundance of apostrophes in the post.

Jurr
04-24-2007, 08:33 PM
Cowley is talking on the air about Anderson.
"Ozzie has stated that this isn't a developmental league. He gave Brian plenty of chances last year, and he wasn't impressed. Maybe Anderson needs a change of scenery."

Jurr
04-24-2007, 08:40 PM
Cowley is still talking about Anderson. He is referring to Anderson playing in left.
"Anderson has not played a full game in left, and the Sox have been getting him some practice over there. Now he's ready. A lot of people had been complaining about why Anderson wasn't in left against Oakland. Well, he wasn't ready. Now he has some practice at left, and he'll be there."

Hmmmm...I wonder what he's been reading?????

CLR01
04-24-2007, 08:41 PM
Cowley is still talking about Anderson. He is referring to Anderson playing in left.
"Anderson has not played a full game in left, and the Sox have been getting him some practice over there. Now he's ready. A lot of people had been complaining about why Anderson wasn't in left against Oakland. Well, he wasn't ready. Now he has some practice at left, and he'll be there."

Hmmmm...I wonder what he's been reading?????

Cowley? Probably nothing as usual.

maurice
04-24-2007, 09:39 PM
Wait, Cowley can READ?!?
:o:

BoysMom3
04-24-2007, 11:58 PM
Hey, look! The game's coming on! :bandance: Good luck finding it on CSN2++++

We eventually found it here on ch 58, woot!

Nellie_Fox
04-25-2007, 01:41 AM
We won't harp on the one word stuff any more. Who's "we?" :D: