PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Sweeney vs. Brian Anderson


AJ Hellraiser
05-10-2007, 04:43 PM
Only a few games into Sweeney's ML stint, it's amazingly clear why so many scouts and people around the White Sox really believe Ryan Sweeney could be something special....

To me, the difference between him and BA is so obvious...

Whenever Anderson came to the plate he was doubting himself, constantly taking deep breaths almost as though he was nervous... he had no concept of the strike zone and no confidence that he would even make contact let alone hit the ball hard... whether that's just his mental make-up or an issue caused by Ozzie and the playing time I don't know...

On the other hand, Ryan appears to be supremely confident he will AT LEAST make contact in each plate apparence... he hits the ball to all fields and looks like he sees the ball really well... Hitting has a lot to do with the batter's mentality and to me Sweeney has the mind and swagger to be a very good hitter... with time, the power will come... I'm very excited for the young man having a successful career in a SOX uniform!!!

balke
05-10-2007, 04:46 PM
<Insert incredibly overused chunks tag, which surprisingly isn't used half as much as an Anderson or Sweeney thread has been made or turned into>

Rocky Soprano
05-10-2007, 04:47 PM
:threadsucks

JB98
05-10-2007, 04:47 PM
I can see where this is going.

Let's just say Ryan is doing a nice job with the opportunity that he's been given, and we hope BA will play well if and when he is recalled.

jenn2080
05-10-2007, 04:49 PM
I can see where this is going.

Let's just say Ryan is doing a nice job with the opportunity that he's been given, and we hope BA will play well if and when he is recalled.


Agreed.

Rocky Soprano
05-10-2007, 04:50 PM
I can see where this is going.

Let's just say Ryan is doing a nice job with the opportunity that he's been given, and we hope BA will play well if and when he is recalled.

Now that is a good post.

Ryan is playing great but I dont think its fair to compare him to BA. BA is a different type of player. I dont think anyone can really say that BA was scarred or nervous at the plate cause we don't know what goes on in his head.

Ryan is getting a good amount of playing time something that BA was not getting.

I'm happy Ryan is playing great and I hope BA comes back up and has a great season.

hawkjt
05-10-2007, 04:52 PM
BA seems to swing and miss a whole lot more than ryan...so far. sweeney has very good plate discipline( he took a couple of very close pitches today that were balls) ..so far. they are similar in the field- very good.

QCIASOXFAN
05-10-2007, 04:55 PM
I totally agree with you. Brian Anderson is not good at hitting, at all. Nice to see Sweeney looking good at the plate. I will take this anyday over BA sucking it up EVERY time he is up at bat.

JB98
05-10-2007, 04:57 PM
BA seems to swing and miss a whole lot more than ryan...so far. sweeney has very good plate discipline( he took a couple of very close pitches today that were balls) ..so far. they are similar in the field- very good.

Sweeney's at-bat in the fifth inning was key today. He took a couple of close pitches, worked the count full and finally got one he could handle. The result was a base hit to get Mackowiak in from third.

Not too many 22-year-olds have that kind of discipline at the plate. I'm very pleased with what I'm seeing from Ryan.

AJ Hellraiser
05-10-2007, 04:59 PM
I just wanted to clarify that I did not mean to make this another BA bashing thread or for this to be more negative towards him....

My intention as just to point out the difference of the two and to get other opinions (positive) on Sweeney....

FedEx227
05-10-2007, 05:00 PM
I totally agree with you. Brian Anderson is not good at hitting, at all. Nice to see Sweeney looking good at the plate. I will take this anyday over BA sucking it up EVERY time he is up at bat.

And we ruin a streak of decent posts with this. Yes, he was 0-356. Even his home runs sucked.

Sweeney has looked confident out there and is swinging a nice bat. Anderson had a much longer swing and seemed a bit scared from time to time. But they are different batters. Anderson has more raw-power, while Sweeney just has a good stroke.

Luckily, it appears the Sox organization is going to attempt to turn Anderson into a similar player who doesn't have to rely on a long, power swing.

nodiggity59
05-10-2007, 05:07 PM
It seems clear that Sweeney has more baseball acumen. I love the tools BA has, but he seems to have the most fragile psyche and poor game awareness / inteligence. I mean, why the hell can't he play well in a part time role in the first place? Is it so damn hard? Few players get a guaranteed job out of the minors, what makes him so special that we have to block out 3 years for him to develop at the ML level?



I still hope we have BA and Sweeney as our starting CF and LF next season, and I hope we can upgrade from Dye in right through FA or a trade.

hawkjt
05-10-2007, 05:12 PM
I am enjoying envisioning a future outfield of BA in center and ryan in right field the way they both cover ground and can throw... BA gets his stroke together and sweeney keeps that musial type sweet stroke going ; add a power hitting leftfielder - we are set in the Outfield for awhile.

throw in danks,fields,masset,gio,jenks,floyd ect.. and you have the makings of the next generation sox team.. in a few years, meanwhile, sox continue to make the playoffs while we plug in the new guys.

lostfan
05-10-2007, 05:15 PM
I just wanted to clarify that I did not mean to make this another BA bashing thread or for this to be more negative towards him....

My intention as just to point out the difference of the two and to get other opinions (positive) on Sweeney....
You should know that the very mention of BA's name in a thread topic is going to attract BA-bashing. (See QCIA's post.)

Chicken Dinner
05-10-2007, 05:17 PM
I just wanted to clarify that I did not mean to make this another BA bashing thread or for this to be more negative towards him....

My intention as just to point out the difference of the two and to get other opinions (positive) on Sweeney....


Well it is. I think we've been BA'd to death. He's in the minors.

Palpidious
05-10-2007, 05:35 PM
Now that is a good post.

Ryan is playing great but I dont think its fair to compare him to BA. BA is a different type of player. I dont think anyone can really say that BA was scarred or nervous at the plate cause we don't know what goes on in his head.

Ryan is getting a good amount of playing time something that BA was not getting.

I'm happy Ryan is playing great and I hope BA comes back up and has a great season.

you're right. two different types of players

Sweeney good
BA bad

Jjav829
05-10-2007, 05:40 PM
I can see where this is going.

Let's just say Ryan is doing a nice job with the opportunity that he's been given, and we hope BA will play well if and when he is recalled.

I agree, but I think the original poster does make a valid point. I think one of the big differences is Sweeney seems to have a bit of an "it" factor to him. He seems to have that calm confidence in himself that he knows he can play this game, but it isn't at the level of arrogance.

I've liked what I have seen from Sweeney so far. I think the one key difference between him and Anderson is Sweeney just looks more ready. Sweeney hasn't been great by any means, but he's done a solid job. It's unfair to expect any rookie to come up and be Albert Pujols, but you want to see some signs of them being major league ready. Sweeney has shown those signs. His swing might be a bit longer than you'd like at times, and he might take some bad swings, but he looks ready to be at this level. Anderson just never had that look last year, at least at the plate.

Hopefully it works out with each of them. It would be great if Ozzie, or whoever our manager is, could write in Anderson in center and Sweeney in either corner spot for at least the next 6-8 years.

JB98
05-10-2007, 05:45 PM
I agree, but I think the original poster does make a valid point. I think one of the big differences is Sweeney seems to have a bit of an "it" factor to him. He seems to have that calm confidence in himself that he knows he can play this game, but it isn't at the level of arrogance.

I've liked what I have seen from Sweeney so far. I think the one key difference between him and Anderson is Sweeney just looks more ready. Sweeney hasn't been great by any means, but he's done a solid job. It's unfair to expect any rookie to come up and be Albert Pujols, but you want to see some signs of them being major league ready. Sweeney has shown those signs. His swing might be a bit longer than you'd like at times, and he might take some bad swings, but he looks ready to be at this level. Anderson just never had that look last year, at least at the plate.

Hopefully it works out with each of them. It would be great if Ozzie, or whoever our manager is, could write in Anderson in center and Sweeney in either corner spot for at least the next 6-8 years.

I guess I'm just sick of the Anderson discussions. For a couple weeks there, I was pretty much a pariah because I supported Ozzie on his handling of the Anderson situation.

Rational discussion as it pertains to BA has gone out the window on this board.

jabrch
05-10-2007, 05:53 PM
I can see where this is going.

Let's just say Ryan is doing a nice job with the opportunity that he's been given, and we hope BA will play well if and when he is recalled.

Well said.

Nobody hates BA. Everybody here wants BA to do in Chicago what he has done in the minors. I hope he comes back a better baseball player than he is now. I hope he's better than Erstad and Pods and everyone else in the mix. He can - he's got the tools. In the meantime, Sweeney is here, now, and coming up with big hits, so we will rally behind him, the same way we should support BA if he was here.

I'm really tired of supposed Sox fans who clearly have an agenda against whichever the Sox player it is. Javy, Jose, Jenks, BA, Erstad, Pods, etc are all key pieces to this team. I wish our fans would rally around their strengths more than we crap on our perceptions of their weaknesses.

HotelWhiteSox
05-10-2007, 05:55 PM
Ha, now we are judging him on whether he takes a breath or not. Glad you are inside both of their heads. Yeah, and Boone Logan was done after last year right? Especially after his comments in his paper, didn't show well for his confidence.

This so called something 'special' Sweeney has in compared to Anderson, I'm pretty sure everyone said the same thing shortly after Anderson came up, after he had a multiHR game to help save the Sox in 05. Either one will need some experience, so let's chill before we are replacing MVP outfielders.

WhiteSox5187
05-10-2007, 05:55 PM
I think that BA is going to be a great great player and he and Sweeney are going to be fixtures in the Sox outfield for a long time...Sweeney looks good and I think a big part of that is the situation they were put in to, Sweeney was only called up because Thome and Pods went down so there wasn't a whole lot of expectations for him. Anderson was brought in to replace one of the most popular players on a team that won a World Series. That's a lot of pressure on a rookie. Remember when Anderson first got called up in '05 he looked really good too. Time will tell, but I think both guys are going to pan out.

jabrch
05-10-2007, 05:56 PM
you're right. two different types of players

Sweeney good
BA bad

That's ridiculous. Brian is a career .306/.375/.486 hitter in the minors. He is not BAD. He needs some work right now - but he is a very good hitter. He just needs to bring the same things he did at the minor league level to the major league club.

soxinem1
05-10-2007, 05:57 PM
True, he looks decent, but isn't 20-30 AB's a little too soon to judge.

If that's the case, we should feel the same for the only .500 hitter on the team, Luis Terrero.

Especially if JD goes, they can both be in the OF next year. No reson for Bri vs. Ry right now.

JB98
05-10-2007, 05:58 PM
That's ridiculous. Brian is a career .306/.375/.486 hitter in the minors. He is not BAD. He needs some work right now - but he is a very good hitter. He just needs to bring the same things he did at the minor league level to the major league club.

I think there's a mental approach that needs to be changed, and I think that's what this minor-league stint is all about.

lumpyspun
05-10-2007, 06:04 PM
Ryan is playing great but I dont think its fair to compare him to BA. BA is a different type of player.

If you can't compare Anderson to another young, talented, White Sox farm system bred outfielder (Sweeney) then I'm not sure who exactly you can compare him to...

jabrch
05-10-2007, 06:07 PM
I think there's a mental approach that needs to be changed, and I think that's what this minor-league stint is all about.

Agreed. I'm sure KW and OG would love Brian to come back in a month and deliver like he did for a few months last summer. We'd be a better team that way. He needs the work in order to get there, and he wasn't earning the work here.

Huisj
05-10-2007, 06:26 PM
The big difference I can see seems to be in their approach at the plate, and that approach becomes quite apparent in the way they swing. Anderson always seems to take big cuts at everything, and when he gets fooled by a pitch, he looks terrible because he misses it and never looks like he had any chance to hit it. He swings and misses at a ton of pitches, and often looks really bad doing so because he gets all out of balance and his timing looks bad.

Sweeney has a much more controlled easy swing, like he's trying more just to make some contact and go with where the pitch is thrown. His swing seems to lend itself to making adjustments with the pitch, because he seems to be able to wait and then flick at it easily with his wrists, and he can hit to the opposite field well. Even when he gets fooled, he looks like he still at least has a chance to recover and get some wood on the ball, because he hasn't commited every muscle in his body to the pitch already, and he doesn't get himself twisted in knots.

Yes, there's a rather small sample size to go on with all this, but I think the differences in how these two approach hitting are pretty easy to pick up on. For now, I'll definitely take Sweeney. Making contact with gap power is a whole lot more valuable right now than someone who might have homerun power but can't make contact, especially in a lineup that has had so much trouble getting basehits this year.

IlliniSox4Life
05-10-2007, 06:34 PM
Right now, the best thing for this team is to have Sweeney up here and BA in AAA. For reasons that seem partially related to his own behavior as well as how Ozzie has utilized him, Brian's confidence was/is shot. He has been a better hitter than he was this year (believe it or not, the second half of last year he looked decent).

Hopefully they both become great players. Pods has been injury prone, and Dye might be moving on this season. We could use some great outfielders to replace them.

edit: And I was extremely impressed with Sweeney's AB in the 5th. He looked like a more disciplined hitter than ANY of our guys this season, not just BA.

Frater Perdurabo
05-10-2007, 08:23 PM
If the Sox want to build a long-term winning franchise, they must maintain a top-flight starting rotation. That means locking up Buehrle and Garland long-term.

Since the Sox don't have a Yankees/Red Sox budget, the Sox need to be able to work in young, home-grown position players. The Sox will have more payroll to devote to pitching if they can rely on a steady stream of position players. Sweeney and Anderson are important parts of that strategy. Let's all root for both to develop into solid All Star major league outfielders.

Tragg
05-10-2007, 08:54 PM
If the Sox want to build a long-term winning franchise, they must maintain a top-flight starting rotation. That means locking up Buehrle and Garland long-term.

Since the Sox don't have a Yankees/Red Sox budget, the Sox need to be able to work in young, home-grown position players. The Sox will have more payroll to devote to pitching if they can rely on a steady stream of position players. Sweeney and Anderson are important parts of that strategy. Let's all root for both to develop into solid All Star major league outfielders.
Or home grown pitchers. It seems to me that we have more home grown pitchers near ML ready than home grown position players. There's room for both - we'll be either re-signing or swapping out plenty of pitchers and position players over the next 2 years.

Frater Perdurabo
05-11-2007, 06:36 AM
Or home grown pitchers. It seems to me that we have more home grown pitchers near ML ready than home grown position players. There's room for both - we'll be either re-signing or swapping out plenty of pitchers and position players over the next 2 years.

Yes, but I still want some veterans leading the rotation. I'd like to keep Buehrle, Garland and Vazquez and have the very best among Danks, Gio, Floyd, Broadway, Haeger, McCullough, Vasquez et. al. battle it out for the fourth and fifth spots whenever Contreras is traded/retires. (Danks clearly has the inside track right now.) The best of the rest can then fortify the bullpen. A team can never have too many pitchers!

The bottom line for 2008-2009 is that if Sweeney and Anderson (and Fields) can become productive position players (solid fielders and at least MLB average hitters), the Sox will better be able to re-sign Buehrle and Garland.

WSox597
05-11-2007, 07:32 AM
It would be great if Ozzie, or whoever our manager is, could write in Anderson in center and Sweeney in either corner spot for at least the next 6-8 years.

You may have put your finger on the real problem. Perhaps it's a perception, but it seems sometimes like Guillen just doesn't like Anderson. This doesn't excuse poor performance at the plate, but it seems like the kid can't get a break.

Let's all root for both to develop into solid All Star major league outfielders.

I agree. That would be best for the team overall.

jabrch
05-11-2007, 07:55 AM
You may have put your finger on the real problem. Perhaps it's a perception, but it seems sometimes like Guillen just doesn't like Anderson. This doesn't excuse poor performance at the plate, but it seems like the kid can't get a break.

You earn "breaks" you don't just get them. BA was horrible in his time up here this season.

He needs to go back, work it out, and try again when he can contribute. This is not the place to be learning/working for a kid like BA.

Maybe a few months of riding the bus will remind him that there is a lot of upside to him if he lives up to his potential.

Berkules
05-11-2007, 01:18 PM
In the latest Soxcast, (I think it's) George Heidkamp said BA was hitting .350 with 1 HR and 4 RBI in his first five games back at Charlotte... it made me chuckle.

Can someone point me in the right direction concerning where I can track his stats with Charlotte?

102605
05-11-2007, 01:24 PM
You may have put your finger on the real problem. Perhaps it's a perception, but it seems sometimes like Guillen just doesn't like Anderson. This doesn't excuse poor performance at the plate, but it seems like the kid can't get a break.

I'll keep Ozzie over Anderson anyday of the week.

Jaffar
05-11-2007, 01:32 PM
In the latest Soxcast, (I think it's) George Heidkamp said BA was hitting .350 with 1 HR and 4 RBI in his first five games back at Charlotte... it made me chuckle.

Can someone point me in the right direction concerning where I can track his stats with Charlotte?

Knights Stats
(http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?t=t_ibp&cid=494&stn=true&sid=t494)

Berkules
05-11-2007, 01:35 PM
Knights Stats
(http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?t=t_ibp&cid=494&stn=true&sid=t494)

Thank you. Aside from the 9 SOs in 32 ABs, nice numbers.

nodiggity59
05-11-2007, 01:46 PM
Thank you. Aside from the 9 SOs in 32 ABs, nice numbers.

He Ks almost a 1/3 of the time at the AAA level?

Boy, that really gets me excited!

maurice
05-11-2007, 02:19 PM
Boy, that really gets me excited!
Make sure you ignore the rest of his stats:
.313 AVE, .405 OBP, .500 SLG, .905 OPS, 5 BB, 8 R, 5 RBI in 9 games.
:rolleyes:

balke
05-11-2007, 02:31 PM
Brian has shown the ability to strike out way more than Sweeney in his career.

PatK
05-11-2007, 02:32 PM
You may have put your finger on the real problem. Perhaps it's a perception, but it seems sometimes like Guillen just doesn't like Anderson. This doesn't excuse poor performance at the plate, but it seems like the kid can't get a break.

His last season was his "break", and he didn't do well enough offensively.

BA has a long swing, and players with long swings do not do well if they don't get regular plate appearances.

If he wasn't going to be playing regularly, there's no sense in having him up.

Hopefully, he'll turn it around and get back up here.

One thing that's always struck me strange about BA is that he seems like he's always had a decent OBP, but strikes out a lot.

soxfan13
05-11-2007, 02:35 PM
Make sure you ignore the rest of his stats:
.313 AVE, .405 OBP, .500 SLG, .905 OPS, 5 BB, 8 R, 5 RBI in 9 games.
:rolleyes:


HORRIBLE:redneck

rdivaldi
05-11-2007, 02:39 PM
One thing that's always struck me strange about BA is that he seems like he's always had a decent OBP, but strikes out a lot.

OBP and K/9 do not always jibe. Just look at Thome, he's a prime example.

balke
05-11-2007, 02:42 PM
I don't like the idea of a vs. for these players. They have similar #'s and are both great prospects, I wish they both could break out and be major leaguers for the White Sox in the next couple years, and that we could look back and laugh at Anderson's 06' #'s.

I don't believe Anderson had "his shot". I think he blew a shot. He'll get another one. Sweeney doesn't have as good of a shot right now, but he can still show what he's got for the future (He's filling in for an injury, not filling in as the LFer of 2007).

A little work for BA and he could come back up better than ever. If worse comes to worse, he could even be traded to a team that'll be willing to give him that shot. I'm hoping he's going to be the Whites Sox young CFer of the future, because I think he's every bit as good as Sweeney. Time will tell though.

IndianWhiteSox
05-11-2007, 02:53 PM
I'll keep Ozzie over Anderson anyday of the week.

While I agree with that statement, I just want to state that Ozzie post-1992 was the BA of SS's with a nice glove, great range and an excellent arm, but won't bring it offensively.

Back to the thread, I think that as of now Sweeney will be a good player for a while.

JB98
05-11-2007, 02:56 PM
He Ks almost a 1/3 of the time at the AAA level?

Boy, that really gets me excited!

You put up with the strikeouts if you get run production.

JB98
05-11-2007, 03:00 PM
Yes, but I still want some veterans leading the rotation. I'd like to keep Buehrle, Garland and Vazquez and have the very best among Danks, Gio, Floyd, Broadway, Haeger, McCullough, Vasquez et. al. battle it out for the fourth and fifth spots whenever Contreras is traded/retires. (Danks clearly has the inside track right now.) The best of the rest can then fortify the bullpen. A team can never have too many pitchers!

The bottom line for 2008-2009 is that if Sweeney and Anderson (and Fields) can become productive position players (solid fielders and at least MLB average hitters), the Sox will better be able to re-sign Buehrle and Garland.

It's pretty clear that the Sox will be in transition for 2008 and likely 2009. They're going to have to get younger. The thing is, it's tricky to get younger while staying in contention. I think we can do it if we keep three veterans to top our rotation. I would really prefer that one of them be Buerhle because he is the leader of the pitching staff and a mentor for the younger guys. I think you can still contend if you work one young pitcher into your rotation as the fifth starter each year, as we are trying to do with Danks this season.

SoxxoS
05-11-2007, 03:34 PM
The thing that concerns me with Sweeney is he hasn't had a OPS above 835 at any level...so that means he will have an OPS in the majors at around 750...which I guess is OK - But I would like to see him keep developing in the minors.

FarWestChicago
05-11-2007, 05:21 PM
The thing that concerns me with Sweeney is he hasn't had a OPS above 835 at any level...so that means he will have an OPS in the majors at around 750...which I guess is OK - But I would like to see him keep developing in the minors.How about if we see him suck in the Majors before we send him back to the Minors? :dunno:

TheVulture
05-11-2007, 05:40 PM
While I agree with that statement, I just want to state that Ozzie post-1992 was the BA of SS's with a nice glove, great range and an excellent arm, but won't bring it offensively.

Back to the thread, I think that as of now Sweeney will be a good player for a while.
Except Ozzie K'd about once every 25-30 ABs, not every 2.5-3.0.

comerica
05-11-2007, 05:46 PM
I'm sure as sox fans you already know this, but as someone who isn't a chicago fan but follows the prospect situations all around the league pretty closely, you guys have got one hell of a talent on your hands with sweeney. I wish we had him(as does probably every GM in the league)

SoxxoS
05-11-2007, 06:05 PM
How about if we see him suck in the Majors before we send him back to the Minors? :dunno:

That is fine, but it's delaying the inevitable...

He isn't hitting for a high average...but if Ozzie is going to keep giving him at-bats consistantly, I am for not sending him down. But all those at-bats in the minors don't lie. Rushing him isn't something that is very beneficial.

Frater Perdurabo
05-12-2007, 12:01 AM
Some have mentioned that Sweeney could develop into a John Olerud-type of hitter. Not a HOF-er by any means, but definitely a solid major league, professional hitter.

I can't tell you how great it would be if the Sox had a that kind of hitter in the lineup - a guy who doesn't necessarily hit a ton of homers (although that may develop in time, especially playing at the Cell), but hits for solid average, takes walks, hits a good amount of doubles, and doesn't strike out much.

In fact, the Sox really haven't had that kind of left-handed hitter since I can remember. (As a RHB Big Frank certainly did that and more during his peak.)Sweeney also seems to run the bases well and can play the outfield at an acceptable level.

Now if we can just get Anderson going, the Sox could have 2/3rds of a solid, young outfield. Now go get Ichiro.

:D:

IndianWhiteSox
05-12-2007, 12:46 AM
Except Ozzie K'd about once every 25-30 ABs, not every 2.5-3.0.

I guess, but the point I was trying to make was that, Ozzie really wasn't that good of a hitter post-1992.

Nellie_Fox
05-12-2007, 12:51 AM
I guess, but the point I was trying to make was that, Ozzie really wasn't that good of a hitter post-1992.But Ozzie knew his limitations, and was a good bunter, slap hitter, etc. I used to love the "butcher boy" play he excelled at; faking the bunt and then slapping the ball over the head of the charging third baseman. His biggest problem as a hitter was that if you were as weak as he was, you needed to be more selective. He'd swing at anything.

FireMariotti
05-12-2007, 01:25 AM
I wont debate whether BA or Sweeney is the better ballplayer, but after what Sweeney has done in the few MLB games he has played, who do you think will get called back up first? IMO, Sweeney has the edge.

Tragg
05-12-2007, 07:32 AM
I hope Sweeney stays. As far as being patient, drawing walks and hitting doubles, I wonder if the reason we don't have a lot of hitters like that is because the Sox don't like hitters like that. Our manager publically decries walking, and calls a .300 OBP hitter a "400 quality" hitter.

I still don't know what Sweeney's done to be sent down. Pods was having a good year prior to the injury. The hitter who hasn't done much is Erstad - yet he gets plaudits for his .300 OBP as a leadoff hitter. (even in Pods' "off-year" in 2005, he well outperformed Erstad offensively).

FarWestChicago
05-12-2007, 07:57 AM
The hitter who hasn't done much is Erstad - yet he gets plaudits for his .300 OBP as a leadoff hitter.Do you have any idea how stupid you look for making this statement? Yes, the Sox can't hit. Why are you blaming the guy with the highest average? Oh, you predicted he would suck and will do anything, including hoping he makes outs and pulling against the Sox, to make yourself look "right". I'm one second from giving you a long time to think about your priorities. You are not a genius. Nobody here thinks you are a genius. How about hoping the Sox do well instead of hoping your petty "theories" come out right? I really hate you REH's because you put your own egos above all else.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-12-2007, 08:29 AM
I still don't know what Sweeney's done to be sent down. Pods was having a good year prior to the injury. The hitter who hasn't done much is Erstad - yet he gets plaudits for his .300 OBP as a leadoff hitter. (even in Pods' "off-year" in 2005, he well outperformed Erstad offensively).

Sweeney is here because Thome landed on the DL. His promotion had less to do with Anderson sucking than just plain bad luck for Thome. Having said that, Sweeney has played well enough that the Sox are considering keeping him around. That's what happens when you make the most of your opportunities, something Brian Anderson never did.

As for your comments about Erstad, they are beyond stupid. He is unquestionably the best lead-off man this team has right now, and comparing his stats to a #9 hitter and a AAA washout is truly pathetic. I feel bad for you.

FedEx227
05-12-2007, 08:40 AM
As for your comments about Erstad, they are beyond stupid. He is unquestionably the best lead-off man this team has right now, and comparing his stats to a #9 hitter and a AAA washout is truly pathetic. I feel bad for you.

Which is an even more pathetic statement for the state of the Sox. I think Erstad is doing great, but when we credit .301 OBP and 14 runs scored as our best lead-off man, that's a problem.

Especially when our division rivals are coming at us with:

Grady Sizemore: .394 OBP, 26 runs scored
Curtis Granderson: .336 OBP, 23 runs scored
Luis Castillo: .359 OBP, 14 runs scored
David DeJesus: .360 OBP, 27 runs scored

Even when Podsednik comes back, I still don't think this team has a leadoff hitter that can help us score more runs. With the type of team we have (power-based) we need a guy who can get on base consistently. Enough of this "Ozzie-ball", hit and run crap, we aren't that type of team. It's a great concept, but we don't have the talent currently to do it.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-12-2007, 08:43 AM
Which is an even more pathetic statement for the state of the Sox. I think Erstad is doing great, but when we credit .301 OBP and 14 runs scored as our best lead-off man, that's a problem.

Yeah, you're right. Kenny Williams ought to go to Sam's Club and buy a gross of Lead-off Men. They always have great deals on cigarettes, bottled water, and major league talent.

:nuts:

Tragg
05-12-2007, 09:03 AM
Especially when our division rivals are coming at us with:

Grady Sizemore: .394 OBP, 26 runs scored
Curtis Granderson: .336 OBP, 23 runs scored
Luis Castillo: .359 OBP, 14 runs scored
David DeJesus: .360 OBP, 27 runs scored

Even when Podsednik comes back, I still don't think this team has a leadoff hitter that can help us score more runs. With the type of team we have (power-based) we need a guy who can get on base consistently. Enough of this "Ozzie-ball", hit and run crap, we aren't that type of team. It's a great concept, but we don't have the talent currently to do it.
Podsednik got on base at a .350 clip in 2005. He was off to a good start this year. Even in his off year, he got on base at .330.
Good leadoff hitters are scarce.

soxfan13
05-12-2007, 09:08 AM
Which is an even more pathetic statement for the state of the Sox. I think Erstad is doing great, but when we credit .301 OBP and 14 runs scored as our best lead-off man, that's a problem.

Especially when our division rivals are coming at us with:

Grady Sizemore: .394 OBP, 26 runs scored
Curtis Granderson: .336 OBP, 23 runs scored
Luis Castillo: .359 OBP, 14 runs scored
David DeJesus: .360 OBP, 27 runs scored

Even when Podsednik comes back, I still don't think this team has a leadoff hitter that can help us score more runs. With the type of team we have (power-based) we need a guy who can get on base consistently. Enough of this "Ozzie-ball", hit and run crap, we aren't that type of team. It's a great concept, but we don't have the talent currently to do it.

I think you can throw the runs scored out the window right now. The low runs scored has more to do with the guys hitting behind him right now at the tremendous .220 clip:redneck

wassagstdu
05-12-2007, 10:10 AM
Enough of this "Ozzie-ball", hit and run crap, ... It's a great concept...

Yeah, right. Fact is, when the Sox were scoring all of their runs by HR they were losing. Now that they are scoring other ways, they are winning. Which kind of game is the failure, or which kind do we not have the players for (right now)?

AJ Hellraiser
05-12-2007, 12:05 PM
FOR ALL ERSTAD BASHERS:

I'm pretty sure I heard a stat on Baseball Tonight earlier this week, something along the lines of the fact that since the date Darin Erstad took over the leadoff spot he has the highest batting average among leadoff hitters in the American League...

balke
05-12-2007, 12:12 PM
FOR ALL ERSTAD BASHERS:

I'm pretty sure I heard a stat on Baseball Tonight earlier this week, something along the lines of the fact that since the date Darin Erstad took over the leadoff spot he has the highest batting average among leadoff hitters in the American League...


Yeah he's on a hot streak. I don't think he's going ot hit .330 for the Sox just because he's leading off. Although I'm not a basher of the guy. I'm really happy with him so far, I just hope he's our #2 when Pods comes back, because I think that's where his skills will come most in handy. I'd like this team to start scoring in the 1st inning like they were in 05'. If Pods can't come back healthy Erstad is a suitable leadoff hitter.

Frater Perdurabo
05-12-2007, 07:56 PM
I can't tell you how great it would be if the Sox had a that kind of hitter in the lineup - a guy who doesn't necessarily hit a ton of homers (although that may develop in time, especially playing at the Cell), but hits for solid average, takes walks, hits a good amount of doubles, and doesn't strike out much.

In fact, the Sox really haven't had that kind of left-handed hitter since I can remember.

I'm calling a faux pas on myself. Harold Baines was a great left-handed hitter for average and had decent power. He also was a good fielder and baserunner before that knee injury in 1987 limited him to DH duty.

Mohoney
05-13-2007, 03:00 AM
I'm calling a faux pas on myself. Harold Baines was a great left-handed hitter for average and had decent power. He also was a good fielder and baserunner before that knee injury in 1987 limited him to DH duty.

Ventura's K numbers weren't that bad, and his glove more than made up for it, so I'd be inclined to include him, too.

I'll definitely cut you some slack, though, because those 2 guys are the only legit lefty bats that really fit this category in our recent history.

I can also think of 2 other guys who did strike out a lot but nevertheless at least provided an intangible that made the strikeouts easier to absorb, and they are Jose Valentin (power, especially in the clutch) and Ray Durham (who provided some pop and some stolen base speed), but both those guys were switch-hitters.

These guys, plus Podsednik's 2005 and Thome's 2006, are really the extent of viable lefty bats in recent Sox history.

Frater Perdurabo
05-13-2007, 06:52 AM
Ventura's K numbers weren't that bad, and his glove more than made up for it, so I'd be inclined to include him, too.

I'll definitely cut you some slack, though, because those 2 guys are the only legit lefty bats that really fit this category in our recent history.

I can also think of 2 other guys who did strike out a lot but nevertheless at least provided an intangible that made the strikeouts easier to absorb, and they are Jose Valentin (power, especially in the clutch) and Ray Durham (who provided some pop and some stolen base speed), but both those guys were switch-hitters.

These guys, plus Podsednik's 2005 and Thome's 2006, are really the extent of viable lefty bats in recent Sox history.

I debated on Ventura, as he was a good lefty bat, but I was surprised to see that his career average was only .267. I remember that when the Sox drafted him, many expected him to be a .300+ hitter, given that he had two seasons at Oklahoma State where he batted over .400, and he also had a very long hitting streak. He only hit .301 once in his first year with the Mets. He did hit an tremendous number of grand slams, including that famous game-winner to cap a tremendous month. He also didn't have Joe Crede's maddening tendency to pop out. I definitely was disapponted when the Sox let Ventura go.

RCWHITESOX
05-15-2007, 02:38 PM
It seems clear that Sweeney has more baseball acumen. I love the tools BA has, but he seems to have the most fragile psyche and poor game awareness / inteligence. I mean, why the hell can't he play well in a part time role in the first place? Is it so damn hard? Few players get a guaranteed job out of the minors, what makes him so special that we have to block out 3 years for him to develop at the ML level?



I still hope we have BA and Sweeney as our starting CF and LF next season, and I hope we can upgrade from Dye in right through FA or a trade.

You have to be kidding. If the Sox have Sweeney starting in LF and Anderson starting in CF and God knows who in RF because Jerry won't pay Dye his fair value not to mention the probable loss of Buerhle and Crede will be chasing KC in the division and I don't mean for first. I know the Sox are building for the future but if they want to win it this year make a trade for a established LF while there is still a window of opportunity.

TheVulture
05-15-2007, 02:46 PM
I guess, but the point I was trying to make was that, Ozzie really wasn't that good of a hitter post-1992.

True, but at least Ozzie could move a runner like nobody's business. Sweeney looks like he can do the same, whereas Brian...he's going to have to either change his approach entirely or actually hit to help this team.

TheVulture
05-15-2007, 02:53 PM
You have to be kidding. If the Sox have Sweeney starting in LF and Anderson starting in CF and God knows who in RF because Jerry won't pay Dye his fair value...
I don't think so. Dye is not going to be Dye 2005-2006 for much longer. We'd be better off going in another direction, using that money to keep Buerhle around, than signing JD to 5+ years. Also, I'd rather have Sweeney in RF and God-knows-who in left in that scenerio, unless we're talking Ichiro. Sweeney 2008 to 2013 will be a better player than Dye over that period, IMO.

ondafarm
05-15-2007, 06:32 PM
I don't think so. Dye is not going to be Dye 2005-2006 for much longer. We'd be better off going in another direction, using that money to keep Buerhle around, than signing JD to 5+ years. Also, I'd rather have Sweeney in RF and God-knows-who in left in that scenerio, unless we're talking Ichiro. Sweeney 2008 to 2013 will be a better player than Dye over that period, IMO.

At some point in the future the White Sox almost certainly will have Sweeney in RF and BA in CF.

Frater Perdurabo
05-16-2007, 07:02 AM
While Anderson is solely responsible for his poor average in 2006, it didn't help that he usually hit with the bases empty and one out, because Uribe had the lowest OBP of any AL starting position player. (Or AJ or Crede was on base with one or two out, and neither of those guys are baserunners who force the pitcher to pay attention to them.) What kind of approach, other than swinging away or sitting back and trying to work a walk, is called for in such a situation?

Furthermore, when in Anderson's college or minor league career was he expected to take a walk? IIRC at Arizona he was a middle-of-the-order run producer. Up until coming to the Sox, he's probably always been the best hitter on his team. Coaches don't usually ask their best hitters to sit back and not swing.

So, when the Sox drafted him, the hitting instructors should have taught him how to bunt, how to slap hits, how to work counts, how to foul off pitches and how to get on base via a walk. If the Sox organization didn't teach him how to do it, then shame on them!

ondafarm
05-16-2007, 12:31 PM
While Anderson is solely responsible for his poor average in 2006, it didn't help that he usually hit with the bases empty and one out, because Uribe had the lowest OBP of any AL starting position player. (Or AJ or Crede was on base with one or two out, and neither of those guys are baserunners who force the pitcher to pay attention to them.) What kind of approach, other than swinging away or sitting back and trying to work a walk, is called for in such a situation?

Furthermore, when in Anderson's college or minor league career was he expected to take a walk? IIRC at Arizona he was a middle-of-the-order run producer. Up until coming to the Sox, he's probably always been the best hitter on his team. Coaches don't usually ask their best hitters to sit back and not swing.

So, when the Sox drafted him, the hitting instructors should have taught him how to bunt, how to slap hits, how to work counts, how to foul off pitches and how to get on base via a walk. If the Sox organization didn't teach him how to do it, then shame on them!

Apart from Razor Shines and the now departed Wally Backman, I didn't see anyone in the Sox org willing to teach such skills.

jabrch
05-16-2007, 01:17 PM
Just to make sure we are all on the same page - the difference between a .300 OBP and a .350 obp, over a 600 AB season is...

30 times on base

A leadoff hitter scores about 1/3 of the times he gets on

That's 10 runs

That's about 1% of our total output of runs on any given season.

I still don't believe there are people out there who bitch so much about obp when the actually difference between a bad OBP and a mediocre OBP is so damn insignificant.

Good teams that play good baseball win games. Getting on base is only a small part of it. Again - for all the handringing about Erstad, if we managed to upgrade to Crawford or Damon or Matthews Jr., the value of the OBP (let's leave slugging out of this) is about 10-12 runs on the year.

The Cards didn't win or lose last year because of David Eckstein's .350 OBP. Same with us with Pods the year before. Or Damon's .366 the year before that. This team isn't going to win or lose based on the if Erstad obps .300 or .350.

UserNameBlank
05-16-2007, 02:29 PM
Since the Sox aren't hitting, I'd like to see Ryan take over fulltime duties in RF with JD moving to left. That really tightens up the defense.

I hope the Sox are done with Pods and stick with Sweeney from here on out. Pods isn't going to run like the Sox want him to after undergoing groin surgery and suffering a tear in his hip in something like a 3 month period. He can hit and would make for a decent pinch hitter - especially if an AL team trades for Brad Lidge at some point - and would be another option as a pinch runner, but we already have enough pinch hitting/pinch running LF's as it is.

Ryan doesn't have the power yet obviously, but I see no point in waiting for him to develop it in Charlotte when he is clearly comfortable at the plate in the bigs.

On Erstad as a leadoff hitter, I don't like it. All the GLOBPH's out there can whine about who is supporting the team and who is not, but Erstad is not a leadoff hitter. Period. He does however play a very good CF and IMO should be there because of his defense. He has also been pretty clutch and his ability to play the small-ball game makes him valuable, but he is best suited at the 9 spot IMO. It would be nice to have a 9 hitter who can drive in some clutch runs and use his speed to his advantage when he gets on in front of the 1-2-3 hitters. Unfortunately the Sox have no other options besides Sweeney and/or Pablo, and Sweeney is more of a no. 2 hitter and Pablo is more of a bench player, so Erstad isn't a problem there right now.

This whole team is seriously lacking talent at the top and bottom of the order. Injuries have made it worse, and Ozzie has made some really weird decisions with his lineup, but I don't think age has as much to do with it as people are saying. Iguchi looks lost, not old. AJ is a catcher with a little bit of power and some huge clutch moments in between ugly, ugly ABs. Cintron, Pablo, Mack, etc. are not everyday players. Just look at the damn lineup. It's ugly. How many 9-spot hitters do we have? Thome is getting up there, but it is a lot easier to replace one 40 HR guy then it is to significantly upgrade at least 2 of the following positions: LF, RF, CF, 3B, C, SS.

jabrch
05-16-2007, 04:04 PM
This whole team is seriously lacking talent at the top and bottom of the order.

That's absolutely preposterous.

maurice
05-17-2007, 10:46 AM
I'm just waiting for the backlash that will occur once the anti-player-development crowd realizes that Sweeney's AVE is down to .231.

OTOH, that's good enough for 5th among active Sox players . . . and it's May 17th.
:mad:

FedEx227
05-17-2007, 10:50 AM
I'm just waiting for the backlash that will occur once the anti-player-development crowd realizes that Sweeney's AVE is down to .231.

OTOH, that's good enough for 5th among active Sox players . . . and it's May 17th.
:mad:

Kill him now, this is the New Sox we don't have time for player development or the future.

On Erstad as a leadoff hitter, I don't like it. All the GLOBPH's out there can whine about who is supporting the team and who is not, but Erstad is not a leadoff hitter. Period. He does however play a very good CF and IMO should be there because of his defense. He has also been pretty clutch and his ability to play the small-ball game makes him valuable, but he is best suited at the 9 spot IMO. It would be nice to have a 9 hitter who can drive in some clutch runs and use his speed to his advantage when he gets on in front of the 1-2-3 hitters. Unfortunately the Sox have no other options besides Sweeney and/or Pablo, and Sweeney is more of a no. 2 hitter and Pablo is more of a bench player, so Erstad isn't a problem there right now.

All that needs to be said is .301 OBP, good enough for 68th in the AL. The 2 guys above and below him. Kenny Lofton, Brandon Inge, Corey Patterson and Sean Casey. Elite company.

Erstad has been great for this team, but the fact is he's not a leadoff hitter. Like people have said, I would absolutely love to see him lower in the order, 7-8-9 helping to drive in runs. Maybe in the 2 hole, even since he hasn't really had a problem hitting the ball. Unfortunately though, when Pods comes back we still don't have a leadoff hitter.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 11:04 AM
I'm just waiting for the backlash that will occur once the anti-player-development crowd realizes that Sweeney's AVE is down to .231.

OTOH, that's good enough for 5th among active Sox players . . . and it's May 17th.
:mad:
Sweeney has shown a good eye at the plate and maintained a consistent approach, and really, can you say that about anyone else? Maybe Uribe (shocking) and Erstad, but I can't think of anyone else. His batting average right now leaves something to be desired, but considering this is his first real shot at playing regularly I like his chances at raising it. In fact, I think if Sweeney became the everyday LF (or RF hopefully since JD would be better in LF), by the end of the year he'd be towards the top of the team in batting average. He goes up there looking to drive the ball the other way, he's not afraid to take a pitch or to hit with 2 strikes, and at some point, that has to bring him success. Especially considering he seems comfortable in his role mentally, like another solid rookie we have in Danks.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 11:06 AM
Kill him now, this is the New Sox we don't have time for player development or the future.



All that needs to be said is .301 OBP, good enough for 68th in the AL. The 2 guys above and below him. Kenny Lofton, Brandon Inge, Corey Patterson and Sean Casey. Elite company.

Erstad has been great for this team, but the fact is he's not a leadoff hitter. Like people have said, I would absolutely love to see him lower in the order, 7-8-9 helping to drive in runs. Maybe in the 2 hole, even since he hasn't really had a problem hitting the ball. Unfortunately though, when Pods comes back we still don't have a leadoff hitter.

But OBP doesn't mean anything, remember?

FedEx227
05-17-2007, 11:18 AM
But OBP doesn't mean anything, remember?

Yeah exactly. The Indians don't benefit in any way from Sizemore's .400 OBP, 600 at-bats, 240 times on base compared to Erstads .301, 600 at-bats, 180 times on base. Being on base an extra 60 times a season doesn't mean a damn thing.

Having a man leadoff with the 68th best OBP in the AL doesn't hurt us at all.

Only seeing 3.8 pitchers per plate apperance compared to the division's leadoff hitters:

Sizemore: 4.3 / 300 extra pitches per year (600 at-bats)
Granderson: 3.9 / 60 extra pitches per year
DeJesus: 3.9 / 60 extra pitches per year
Castillo: 4.0 / 120 extra pitches per year


I honestly don't think this team would be having as many struggles getting runs if we had a successful leadoff hitter, getting on base constantly and turning some of our popups to the OF into tag-up runs. I still think Erstad can do a great job in this Sox lineup, infact he has been our most valuable offensive player.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 11:26 AM
That's absolutely preposterous.
You know what's really proposterous? This logic right here...

Just to make sure we are all on the same page - the difference between a .300 OBP and a .350 obp, over a 600 AB season is...

30 times on base

A leadoff hitter scores about 1/3 of the times he gets on

That's 10 runs

That's about 1% of our total output of runs on any given season.

Neal Cotts pitched 54 innings last year and posted a 5.17 ERA. He gave up 31 earned runs in total. What's the difference between his 5.17 ERA and an ERA of 3.00? 13 runs, which makes up just 1.7% of the total earned runs allowed on the season.

You want Neal back? Do you think the people bitching about our bullpen ERA last year was unwarranted?

Fact is, you can take any stat from any player and put it in a context that makes it seem virtually irrelevant. But most stats aren't irrelevant. A .350 OBP ballplayer is a better than a .300 OBP ballplayer who plays the same position with the same skillset, and his paycheck reflects it.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 11:33 AM
Yeah exactly. The Indians don't benefit in any way from Sizemore's .400 OBP, 600 at-bats, 240 times on base compared to Erstads .301, 600 at-bats, 180 times on base. Being on base an extra 60 times a season doesn't mean a damn thing.

Having a man leadoff with the 68th best OBP in the AL doesn't hurt us at all.

Only seeing 3.8 pitchers per plate apperance compared to the division's leadoff hitters:

Sizemore: 4.3 / 300 extra pitches per year (600 at-bats)
Granderson: 3.9 / 60 extra pitches per year
DeJesus: 3.9 / 60 extra pitches per year
Castillo: 4.0 / 120 extra pitches per year


I honestly don't think this team would be having as many struggles getting runs if we had a successful leadoff hitter, getting on base constantly and turning some of our popups to the OF into tag-up runs. I still think Erstad can do a great job in this Sox lineup, infact he has been our most valuable offensive player.
LMAO

Yeah, Sizemore sure wouldn't look great wearing the black and white...

I agree on all counts. I accept Erstad leading off right now because we don't have anyone better, but he is much better suited IMO as a 9th place, RBI/lineup turnover guy. But, we don't have a true leadoff hitter, and true leadoff hitters are pretty darn hard to come by, so if and when we get one, then Darin should move down.

jabrch
05-17-2007, 11:50 AM
Fact is, you can take any stat from any player and put it in a context that makes it seem virtually irrelevant.

Actually, single statistics out of context ARE irrelevant.

ondafarm
05-17-2007, 12:03 PM
You know what's really proposterous? This logic right here...



Neal Cotts pitched 54 innings last year and posted a 5.17 ERA. He gave up 31 earned runs in total. What's the difference between his 5.17 ERA and an ERA of 3.00? 13 runs, which makes up just 1.7% of the total earned runs allowed on the season.

You want Neal back? Do you think the people bitching about our bullpen ERA last year was unwarranted?

Fact is, you can take any stat from any player and put it in a context that makes it seem virtually irrelevant. But most stats aren't irrelevant. A .350 OBP ballplayer is a better than a .300 OBP ballplayer who plays the same position with the same skillset, and his paycheck reflects it.

I really don't want Neal back, but for relief pitchers ERA is not the most important stat. For closers, saves is it. For guys used like Cotts was or Aardsma is, I'd say inherited runners scored would be most important. Probably turn that around with number of runners stranded.

Why? Most of the time Cotts would come in to bail the starter or a fellow reliever out of a jam. RISP, facing one or two guys, with the game on the line. Stranding a guy means he doesn't score (or doesn't score on your watch) and that sounds like the optimum for me. I guess I'd keep both a total number stranded and a percentage of how many of all possible inherited runners. Holds was supposed to help equalize the poor stats for set up guys. ERA doesn't cause if you come in with two men on and the next guy hits a triple and then you strike the next guy out, you give up zero earned runs but the starter has given up two after he left the mound.

INSox56
05-17-2007, 12:08 PM
Since the Sox aren't hitting, I'd like to see Ryan take over fulltime duties in RF with JD moving to left. That really tightens up the defense.

IIRC, managers like to put lefties in left field, righties in right. Something to do with covering the lines. Not obviously a rule (See: Ichiro), but it's something a lot of them do I've heard.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 12:10 PM
I really don't want Neal back, but for relief pitchers ERA is not the most important stat. For closers, saves is it. For guys used like Cotts was or Aardsma is, I'd say inherited runners scored would be most important. Probably turn that around with number of runners stranded.

Why? Most of the time Cotts would come in to bail the starter or a fellow reliever out of a jam. RISP, facing one or two guys, with the game on the line. Stranding a guy means he doesn't score (or doesn't score on your watch) and that sounds like the optimum for me. I guess I'd keep both a total number stranded and a percentage of how many of all possible inherited runners. Holds was supposed to help equalize the poor stats for set up guys. ERA doesn't cause if you come in with two men on and the next guy hits a triple and then you strike the next guy out, you give up zero earned runs but the starter has given up two after he left the mound.

Holds are very important, yes, but I was just using a basic everyday stat. The idea that 13 extra earned runs aren't important over the course of an entire season is dumb, just like the idea that there isn't much of a difference between a guy who gets on at a .300 clip and a guy who gets on at a .350 clip. While Neal did allow a lot of inherited runners, he also came in with no one on and gave up runs as well, or came in with inherited runners on base and let them in plus gave up more that he was charged with.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 12:12 PM
IIRC, managers like to put lefties in left field, righties in right. Something to do with covering the lines. Not obviously a rule (See: Ichiro), but it's something a lot of them do I've heard.
True, but I worry about Dye out there sometimes. I think he's lost a step each year since we got him, and some of those plays he ends up diving on I think Sweeney could catch on his feet.

maurice
05-17-2007, 12:15 PM
Actually, single statistics out of context ARE irrelevant.

Absolutley right. OTOH, the single best commonly used statistic probably is OBP. If I want to evaluate a position player who I've never seen, the first thing I look at is how often he makes outs. If he's got a low OBP, then I look to see whether he makes up for it with huge power numbers or excellent SB numbers & %. If he doesn't, then he'd better be a fantastic defensive player at a key position or a part-time / bench player.

ondafarm
05-17-2007, 12:35 PM
IIRC, managers like to put lefties in left field, righties in right. Something to do with covering the lines. Not obviously a rule (See: Ichiro), but it's something a lot of them do I've heard.

It has to do with the classic speed turn. A right fielder chasing a ball down by the line is going with his left (glove) hand. He gets the ball in the glove and turns his back to the infield, pivoting counter clockwise and firing the ball toward second. This allows him to plant his right foot and extend his left leg, the more natural throwing position for a right hander. A right handed right fielder is faster at this than a left-hander. Obviously, this reverses for left field.

jabrch
05-17-2007, 02:03 PM
Absolutley right. OTOH, the single best commonly used statistic probably is OBP. If I want to evaluate a position player who I've never seen, the first thing I look at is how often he makes outs. If he's got a low OBP, then I look to see whether he makes up for it with huge power numbers or excellent SB numbers & %. If he doesn't, then he'd better be a fantastic defensive player at a key position or a part-time / bench player.

Maurice - how many extra wins do you think we'd get from a .350 OBP from Erstad vs a .300?

ondafarm
05-17-2007, 02:11 PM
Sweeney's batting average has dropped to .220, I wonder how soon the mediots will starm swarming over him and writing how the Sox should be sending him down.

sox1970
05-17-2007, 02:25 PM
Sweeney's batting average has dropped to .220, I wonder how soon the mediots will starm swarming over him and writing how the Sox should be sending him down.

Sweeney could use some more time at Charlotte. Nothing wrong with sending him down if they do.

SoxxoS
05-17-2007, 02:46 PM
He definitely needs to be sent down - he needs another year in AAA, IMO.

INSox56
05-17-2007, 02:52 PM
It has to do with the classic speed turn. A right fielder chasing a ball down by the line is going with his left (glove) hand. He gets the ball in the glove and turns his back to the infield, pivoting counter clockwise and firing the ball toward second. This allows him to plant his right foot and extend his left leg, the more natural throwing position for a right hander. A right handed right fielder is faster at this than a left-hander. Obviously, this revereses for left field.That's pretty much what I figured it was.

maurice
05-17-2007, 04:28 PM
Maurice - how many extra wins do you think we'd get from a .350 OBP from Erstad vs a .300?

I have no idea. Sounds like a question for Mr. Win Shares, Bill James. I don't follow that stuff.

Honestly, I'm hoping that KW is able to swing a deal for a LF who would be better than a .350 OBP Erstad--i.e., much better OBP than Erstad + much better speed and/or power than Erstad . . . just like I was hoping for Abreu last year.

maurice
05-17-2007, 04:34 PM
Sweeney's batting average has dropped to .220

Now .209 . . . but that's only 7 points lower than JD, 21 points beter than Konerko, and 15 points better than Mackowiak.

OTOH, it's also 16 points lower than The Worst Person In The World hit last year, during his unforgivably horrible rookie campaign.

At least Sweeney isn't batting cleanup and making $12 mil. / year!

Tragg
05-17-2007, 05:09 PM
The Cards didn't win or lose last year because of David Eckstein's .350 OBP. Same with us with Pods the year before. Or Damon's .366 the year before that. This team isn't going to win or lose based on the if Erstad obps .300 or .350.
But it sure helped a lot, particularly at leadoff and with a lineup like we have. Tim Raines' immense OBP went a long way in the early 1990s toward Jorge Belle's 120 RBIs and neutralizing some less than stellar hitting in the 8 and 9 holes.

What else is more important when leading off other than getting on base (realistically - sure homering is better)? (and the leadoff hitter, aside from the start of the game, will lead off more than any other position as well because he usually has the hitter that makes the most outs hitting in front of him).

It's not the only skill needed on a baseball team- but when you bat with no one on base more than any other position and have power hitters stacked behind you, getting on base is a more needed skill than driving in runs or moving runs over at leadoff.

JB98
05-17-2007, 05:12 PM
Now .209 . . . but that's only 7 points lower than JD, 21 points beter than Konerko, and 15 points better than Mackowiak.

OTOH, it's also 16 points lower than The Worst Person In The World hit last year, during his unforgivably horrible rookie campaign.

At least Sweeney isn't batting cleanup and making $12 mil. / year!

At least Sweeney has had a couple big hits for the club. He's definitely slumping a bit now. He's not ready to play everyday at the big-league level for a contending club. In that regard, he's very similar to Anderson. Both players belong at triple-A, and I'm sure Ryan will be headed back down once we get healthy.

jabrch
05-17-2007, 05:13 PM
But it sure helped a lot,

It doesn't warrant the ridiculous volume of complaining going on from a very small group of people, when it will equate to nothing more than 10 - 15 runs over the course of 600 ABs.

maurice
05-17-2007, 05:37 PM
I can't complain about Erstad, because I didn't buy into the hype. I never expected him to bat .350 or make every play in CF or advance every runner in grindery fashion. Also, I never expected him to bat .200 and run like Paul Konerko. Erstad has been exactly what I expected him to be.

It's not his fault that KW didn't upgrade the leadoff spot, and it's not his fault if Ozzie overplays him into an injury because he's obsessed with mediocre left-handed hitting OF.

FarWestChicago
05-17-2007, 07:17 PM
It's not his fault that KW didn't upgrade the leadoff spot, and it's not his fault if Ozzie overplays him into an injury because he's obsessed with mediocre left-handed hitting OF.You're seriously not in any position to talk about anybody being obsessed. Your thing for BA is not normal. :dunno:

southside rocks
05-17-2007, 07:26 PM
All I read in the papers today from Ozzie and KW is 'Sweeney's staying, he's here until Pods comes back and maybe even after that.'

Gee, I guess they see something different in Mr. Sweeney than some fans/posters do. Of course, they have to be dead wrong -- nobody ever, anywhere, can top Brian Anderson.

KW even made some reference to maturity -- "baseball maturity" in his words -- and said that Sweeney has more of it right now than Anderson does. What does Kenny know, he's just Ozzie's puppet.

:rolleyes:

ondafarm
05-17-2007, 09:49 PM
All I read in the papers today from Ozzie and KW is 'Sweeney's staying, he's here until Pods comes back and maybe even after that.'

Gee, I guess they see something different in Mr. Sweeney than some fans/posters do. Of course, they have to be dead wrong -- nobody ever, anywhere, can top Brian Anderson.

KW even made some reference to maturity -- "baseball maturity" in his words -- and said that Sweeney has more of it right now than Anderson does. What does Kenny know, he's just Ozzie's puppet.

:rolleyes:

I think you have to consider Ozzie as semi-reliable but not always straight with the press. I think he wants to keep Sweeney's confidence up. Sweeney will be with the Sox organization for many years. Getting him a good taste of major league play is an important thing, but definately important for next year and following years, not this year.

If Sweeney's average plummets, he'll be back down in Charlotte.

UserNameBlank
05-17-2007, 10:31 PM
Sweeney has only has 43 AB's for God's sakes. He has nine hits. Four more hits in that span and he's hitting .302 and the next great Sox player in the minds of the fans here at WSI.

You can't judge these really small sample sizes and then make some blanket judgement like "he's not ready" after 43 AB's. What has he done that has shown anyone he isn't ready?

If there is anything - anything at all - that you can take from his short 43 AB season so far is that he has only K'd 4 times and also walked 4 times. That means that - da da da - he's making contact. He's displayed a good eye at the plate and kept the same approach, and meanwhile Sox hitters that are paid millions have looked different every single day.

Give the kid a break. His hits will come and if you actually watch him standing there at the plate he you'll notice he has looked more comfortable up there recently than Paulie or Crede have looked most of the year.

ondafarm
05-18-2007, 08:44 AM
Give the kid a break. His hits will come and if you actually watch him standing there at the plate he you'll notice he has looked more comfortable up there recently than Paulie or Crede have looked most of the year.

I don't know how you judge a hitter's comfort level at the plate. During my career I got ripped by people for a) looking too comfortable (one guy kept yelling "lazy boy" at me, his Japanese accent made that quite amusing) b) looking too tense (another fan always yelled "lighten up" at me.) Of course, I may have been missconstruing what they were saying and since they were fans, nobody ever paid attention to them.

A few times in my career, I really wasn't comfortable at the plate: nagging injury or something. But 99% of the time, it felt exactly the same.

UserNameBlank
05-18-2007, 09:22 AM
I don't know how you judge a hitter's comfort level at the plate. During my career I got ripped by people for a) looking too comfortable (one guy kept yelling "lazy boy" at me, his Japanese accent made that quite amusing) b) looking too tense (another fan always yelled "lighten up" at me.) Of course, I may have been missconstruing what they were saying and since they were fans, nobody ever paid attention to them.

A few times in my career, I really wasn't comfortable at the plate: nagging injury or something. But 99% of the time, it felt exactly the same.

All I mean by that is that he looks like he has a plan at the plate. He's not diving out after pitches he knows he can't do anything with, he's taking bad pitches very nicely, he tries to go the other way, and he shortens up to make contact with two strikes. I have no idea what is going on in his head, but he certainly is no Mackowiak up there.

I didn't exactly have a career myself, but when I played I was usually feeling good at the plate. It didn't help that I sucked though and had no earthly idea what fundamental baseball was. I just tried to turn on everything and hit home runs, kind of like Adam Dunn if he sucked and had no power and struck out more and played little league. I was a pitcher though, so that should count for something.

ondafarm
05-18-2007, 10:03 AM
All I mean by that is that he looks like he has a plan at the plate. He's not diving out after pitches he knows he can't do anything with, he's taking bad pitches very nicely, he tries to go the other way, and he shortens up to make contact with two strikes. I have no idea what is going on in his head, but he certainly is no Mackowiak up there.

I didn't exactly have a career myself, but when I played I was usually feeling good at the plate. It didn't help that I sucked though and had no earthly idea what fundamental baseball was. I just tried to turn on everything and hit home runs, kind of like Adam Dunn if he sucked and had no power and struck out more and played little league. I was a pitcher though, so that should count for something.

In pro ball, even lower minors, if as a hitter you look nervous one up and easy going the next, you are giving away too much to the opposition and will get your head handed to you.

I had one rule, dig in against my pitcher and you'll get a good view of the ground. One guy comes up and starts digging in. Knockdown pitch. Gets up dusts off starts digging in again. Knockdown again. Gets up, dusts off again, starts digging in again. Stops midway thru and just looks at me, my hand is already in neutral position. He asks me what I will call. I tell him I already did call to knock him down. He laughs and says "At 0-2, you wouldn't" (Japanese reference the count as strike-ball.) Pitch comes in and I thought it hit his bat as he went down but the ump called it ball three. He gets up looks at me and says "May I dig in now?" I respond in English with a Whitey Fordism "Only if you can hit from the seat of your pants." The ump tells both of us the next pitch will be a ball because I spoke English in a Japanese league. So I signal knockdown pitch, but get up and act as if intentional walk is called. Pitch comes in hard and fast, nails the guy right in the back. No one else on the team dug in against us that day.

maurice
05-18-2007, 11:14 AM
That's quite a newsflash: maurice is interested in White Sox player development and relatively disinterested in all those riveting mediocre left-handed hitting OF. Somebody alert the media.
:rolleyes:

It's just an amazing coincidence that I'm one of the main contributors on the minor-league forum, that I plan my vacations around minor-league baseball schedules, and that, in years past, I defended the likes of Aaron Rowand and Jon Garland against the sea of WSI posters calling them "AAAron" and "Judy."

You call it an "obsession"; I call it a "hobby."
:dunno:

ondafarm
05-18-2007, 11:33 AM
Ultimately, it is always cheaper to develop your own players than to buy them as free agents, unless you are the Yankee$ in which case you just plug holes with money.

FarWestChicago
05-18-2007, 05:18 PM
You call it an "obsession"; I call it a "hobby."
:dunno:Caring more about BA than the Sox is obesssion. Get over it. You have a problem.

UserNameBlank
05-18-2007, 05:35 PM
Caring more about BA than the Sox is obesssion. Get over it. You have a problem.
Um, doesn't Brian play for the Sox organization? Is it possible to care about the Sox as a whole so much that you actually care about the individual players as well? Why is it such a terrible thing to express faith in a prospect?

CLR01
05-18-2007, 05:55 PM
Um, doesn't Brian play for the Sox organization? Is it possible to care about the Sox as a whole so much that you actually care about the individual players as well? Why is it such a terrible thing to express faith in a prospect?

No. If you support Brian Anderson you hate the White Sox.

FarWestChicago
05-18-2007, 09:57 PM
Um, doesn't Brian play for the Sox organization? Is it possible to care about the Sox as a whole so much that you actually care about the individual players as well? Why is it such a terrible thing to express faith in a prospect?There's nothing wrong with supporting a prospect until you begin exhibiting delusional and compulsive behavior. Much like any other aspect of life, you are then disturbed.

FarWestChicago
05-18-2007, 09:58 PM
No. If you support Brian Anderson you hate the White Sox.If you think Brian Anderson is the second coming of Mickey Mantle you are insane, period.

maurice
05-22-2007, 11:52 AM
Aside from the obvious strawmen and juvenile name-calling, this is an amazing criticism coming from a person who is so obsessed with the Oakland MLB franchise and Brandon McCarthy's nickname that he actually programmed the site to automatically convert them into "the scum-ladden A's" and "Fingernails on a blackboard."
:D:

maurice
05-22-2007, 12:00 PM
No. If you support Brian Anderson you hate the White Sox.

:D:

Um, doesn't Brian play for the Sox organization? Is it possible to care about the Sox as a whole so much that you actually care about the individual players as well? Why is it such a terrible thing to express faith in a prospect?

We have another thread asking which young players you like to watch. My answer: All of them. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1572344&postcount=31)
Apparently only an insane person follows prospects.
:dunno: