PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie On Gonzales


Lip Man 1
09-22-2007, 11:39 AM
Ozzie has a few thoughts on Andy Gonzales. (And it doesn't look good for the kid, which in this case isn't bad news!)

From White Sox.com:

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070921&content_id=2222361&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

Lip

itsnotrequired
09-22-2007, 11:45 AM
Coming into today, Gonzales has played 24 games at third base (181 1/3 innings). He has committed NINE errors and has an other-worldly .862 fielding percentage at the hot corner. The league average is .957.

ondafarm
09-22-2007, 01:18 PM
I don't know why everyone is so down on the guy. Technically with the bat, he is considerably more advanced that either Owens or Richar. He is also been playing a wide variety of positions which are not his natural one, SS. I saw him play SS in Charlotte and Birmingham. He is reacting to 3B like a SS forced to play out of position.

dickallen15
09-22-2007, 01:53 PM
I don't know why everyone is so down on the guy. Technically with the bat, he is considerably more advanced that either Owens or Richar. He is also been playing a wide variety of positions which are not his natural one, SS. I saw him play SS in Charlotte and Birmingham. He is reacting to 3B like a SS forced to play out of position.

You are kidding, aren't you? He's hitting .189. He has 9 errors at 3rd on horrific throws mostly. There are no excuses. He is not good.

soxinem1
09-22-2007, 02:00 PM
The worst defensive 3B I have ever seen were Kenny Williams on the 1988 White Sox and Joel Youngblood on the 1984 SFG. Neither fielded over .900 at 3B!

Of course, both of them were natural OF's. And Ozzie was KW's teammate when the ill-fated 3B experiment with KW happened. He should know better.

While I am no Gonzalez fan, Guillen has used Mackowiak, Cintron, Ozuna, and AG drastically out of position. Uribe has been nothing special this year at SS, why won't Guillen give him some time at Ss like he said?

If he were given any type of playing time at SS, his natural spot, then I could understand the total hatred against the guy, but just like Fausto Carmona last year in CLE, when he was thrown in as a closer. This year they use him as a starter and he has 18 wins, despite being in AAA a little.

While I do not think he will ever be an everyday player, I still think they should try him at SS. What do we have to lose but a few more games in a lost season?

Cuck_The_Fubs
09-22-2007, 02:01 PM
The sox should have never gotten rid of Mackowiak. Now we're stuck with this Gonzalez as a bench player if they don't do anything about it.

Edit: I'm not implying that Mackowiak's D was rock solid, but his lefty bat can be marked as unquestionable.

oeo
09-22-2007, 02:02 PM
I don't know why everyone is so down on the guy. Technically with the bat, he is considerably more advanced that either Owens or Richar.

If by being more advanced means not hitting worth a lick in the minors or majors, then I guess I agree.

Danny Richar has impressed me since the day he was called up, and although I'm not a big supporter of Owens starting next year, the man is really turning it up a notch here in September.

Andy Gonzalez never has been, and probably never will be, a hitter. Unfortunately he can't throw the ball across the infield, either, so he's worthless at this point.

ondafarm
09-22-2007, 02:26 PM
You are kidding, aren't you? He's hitting .189. He has 9 errors at 3rd on horrific throws mostly. There are no excuses. He is not good.

So on the basis of 65 games and 188 at bats, only one at his natural position you are willing to throw the guy away. Man, I'd have loved to have taken Joe Crede, Jon Garland or even Robin Ventura off your hands when you threw them away.

dickallen15
09-22-2007, 02:33 PM
So on the basis of 65 games and 188 at bats, only one at his natural position you are willing to throw the guy away. Man, I'd have loved to have taken Joe Crede, Jon Garland or even Robin Ventura off your hands when you threw them away.
There are thousands of players who never even played one game in the major leagues. Does everyone need 2000 ABs for you to see their abilities? The guy was not considered much of a prospect, and he has done nothing but show you why. You can't possibly think Andy Gonzalez is anywhere near the baseball player that the others you mentioned are and were.

DickAllen72
09-22-2007, 02:46 PM
I don't know why everyone is so down on the guy. Technically with the bat, he is considerably more advanced that either Owens or Richar.
:rolling::roflmao:

lostfan
09-22-2007, 02:57 PM
So on the basis of 65 games and 188 at bats, only one at his natural position you are willing to throw the guy away. Man, I'd have loved to have taken Joe Crede, Jon Garland or even Robin Ventura off your hands when you threw them away.
Ok... so was Andy Gonzalez ever, EVER a highly-touted prospect like any of these other guys you just mentioned?

Brian26
09-22-2007, 03:57 PM
I don't know why everyone is so down on the guy. Technically with the bat, he is considerably more advanced that either Owens or Richar.

I'd be willing to give him a break on the defensive miscues if he'd show anything with the bat. He doesn't look like he could hit a homerun off the Fundamentals deck in between innings right now.

JB98
09-22-2007, 04:02 PM
I'd be willing to give him a break on the defensive miscues if he'd show anything with the bat. He doesn't look like he could hit a homerun off the Fundamentals deck in between innings right now.

That's the thing: What does Andy Gonzalez do well? What positives does he bring to the team? I don't have any answers to those questions. I can't say he's "versatile." He's only versatile in that he plays a lot of positions poorly, and he can't hit or run.

With Fields, Richar and Owens, I can pinpoint certain things that they do well. None of them are finished products by any means, but in each case, there is at least SOMETHING there that we can try to build on for the future. I can't say that for Andy Gonzalez.

Gonzalez needs to be in Charlotte next year.

upperdeckusc
09-22-2007, 05:42 PM
ill give him SOME slack on D. but like everyone else has mentioned, he has shown no promise on offense. at least B.A had some moments on offense (hrs off of felix hernandez, etc). AND he was good at D. AND he was actually good in the minors. andy g has always sucked IN THE MINORS at hitting. he's about 2 yrs away of strictly AAA ball from becoming something resembling a player thats decent.
p.s........maybe he wouldnt be so bad at the plate if he actually stood near it?? he sticks his bat out and it barely touches the inside corner. i swear, when i see him in the box it reminds me of henry rollingardner from rookie of the yr. he needs to go up there with a telephone pole to hit the outside pitch. :angry:

rookieroy
09-22-2007, 05:42 PM
Andy Gonzalez may be the most lathargic, boring, uninspired, non agressive and non enthusiastic player I have ever seen in my life! He walks slower than James Baldwin. I just don't understand this type of attitude. When he comes up to bat, I just turn the channel or go to the bathroom for a few minutes. :mad:

Hitmen77
09-22-2007, 06:34 PM
The sox should have never gotten rid of Mackowiak. Now we're stuck with this Gonzalez as a bench player if they don't do anything about it.

Edit: I'm not implying that Mackowiak's D was rock solid, but his lefty bat can be marked as unquestionable.

Why did the Sox get rid of Mackowiak? He had his avg. up to something like .270 when they traded him and, while I wouldn't want him as our permanent 3B, he would have been a much better backup than the Gonzalez/Cintron dynamic duo.

voodoochile
09-22-2007, 06:50 PM
Why did the Sox get rid of Mackowiak? He had his avg. up to something like .270 when they traded him and, while I wouldn't want him as our permanent 3B, he would have been a much better backup than the Gonzalez/Cintron dynamic duo.

Limit Ozzie's choices and force him to play the kids. Otherwise he might have run Mack out to CF for a good chunk of the second half and Owens would still be a massive question mark instead of the solid contributor he appears to be.

Daver
09-22-2007, 07:32 PM
Limit Ozzie's choices and force him to play the kids. Otherwise he might have run Mack out to CF for a good chunk of the second half and Owens would still be a massive question mark instead of the solid contributor he appears to be.

A solid contributor to what?

He is not a center fielder, and to start the next season with him in center means getting a real left fielder, not a third baseman wandering out there, because now you conceding half the outfield to the opposition as a scoring opportunity. Fields can't catch in left, and Owens can't throw from center, you can afford to have one bad defensive outfielder, you can't have two.

lostfan
09-22-2007, 08:34 PM
A solid contributor to what?

5-hit games maybe. /shrug

Yeah, granted he's not really a CF, but he's getting better as a hitter and looking less raw, and he hasn't reached his ceiling yet which very well may be a bona fide leadoff hitter. Gotta love his speed, he's probably the fastest guy on the team.

I do agree that they need a better defensive CF though... Owens belongs in LF where the weakest arm typically goes (Pods doesn't have much of an arm either). But then that'd mean Fields has to go somewhere else if Crede comes back, cuz no way in hell does he go in CF with that glove of his.

rdivaldi
09-22-2007, 08:35 PM
Ok... so was Andy Gonzalez ever, EVER a highly-touted prospect like any of these other guys you just mentioned?

Andy was briefly considered a hot prospect in 2001 after completing a very successful campaign in Arizona (back when that was one of our Rookie Ball affiliates) at the age of 19. There were questions about his size (too tall) not befitting a SS, so the consensus was that his future would be at 3B. However that move never seemed to materialize and he actually saw more time at 2B in the minors than at 3B. Anyway, his bat never really came around like a lot of us hoped it would, especially in terms of his power. His K/BB ratio has always been respectable, but I remember a couple of slow starts which had him below the Mendoza line until June.

Anyway, he's never been considered much more than a future utility guy over the past couple of years. With the impending emergence of Getz and Bourgeois impressing with his bat in AAA, I'd imagine that Andy will be fighting to stay with the organization next spring.

voodoochile
09-22-2007, 10:09 PM
A solid contributor to what?

He is not a center fielder, and to start the next season with him in center means getting a real left fielder, not a third baseman wandering out there, because now you conceding half the outfield to the opposition as a scoring opportunity. Fields can't catch in left, and Owens can't throw from center, you can afford to have one bad defensive outfielder, you can't have two.

Well say the Sox sunk all their extra cash into a veteran #3 pitcher or better, a couple of live bullpen arms and a major upgrade at SS (don't know if this is possible, don't know who's available) and Crede came back healthy at 3B. I think they could get by with Fields and Owens in the OF for the offense they potentially bring to the table.

Owens may not have the arm for CF, but he's got the wheels and the glove. I'm as concerned with finding an upgrade offensively as I am defensively. We probably disagree there, but if Owens truly is finding a comfort zone hitting (and I think he is) and the Sox can get back into the 850 runs territory next season then any runs given up by a weakened OF defense will be more than made up for with the runs scored.

Thome_Fan
09-22-2007, 10:16 PM
There are thousands of players who never even played one game in the major leagues. Does everyone need 2000 ABs for you to see their abilities? The guy was not considered much of a prospect, and he has done nothing but show you why. You can't possibly think Andy Gonzalez is anywhere near the baseball player that the others you mentioned are and were.

Sorry to change topics a little bit, but speaking of guys who never quite made it, does anyone here rememeber a prospect of the As' in the early 90s who was a starting pitcher named Don Peters? I believe he was one of the "four aces". He was supposed to have ended up being pretty good, but he ended up having a lot of problems with surgery that pretty much ended him eventually. He had two Tommy Johns.

drewcifer
09-22-2007, 10:19 PM
Danny Richar has impressed me since the day he was called up

He was not a call up.

But he's been one of the best youngins , I agree.

drewcifer
09-22-2007, 10:23 PM
A solid contributor to what?

He is not a center fielder, and to start the next season with him in center means getting a real left fielder, not a third baseman wandering out there, because now you conceding half the outfield to the opposition as a scoring opportunity. Fields can't catch in left, and Owens can't throw from center, you can afford to have one bad defensive outfielder, you can't have two.

I think Fields will adjust to playing LF, in all fairness to him, if he's asked to.

Britt Burns
09-22-2007, 10:52 PM
So on the basis of 65 games and 188 at bats, only one at his natural position you are willing to throw the guy away. Man, I'd have loved to have taken Joe Crede, Jon Garland or even Robin Ventura off your hands when you threw them away.

All three players-Crede, Garland, and Ventura-had a history of success in the minors. Crede was a league MVP twice, Robin went straight from college to AA, and Garland was for two years in a row having big-time seasons as the youngest player in the league.

Gonzales has none of that. He has no track record that will indicate these are growing pains versus his true level of ability. Big, big difference.

Domeshot17
09-22-2007, 11:48 PM
Gonzalez sucks, it doesn't matter what position he plays, if its above double A he won't hit .240. You can live with that if hes a golf glove back up, hes not, at any position. I don't think there is any more arguement to that, if you can't hit .200, and you can't throw the ball to first base in the majors, you should probably learn another trade.

With Owens, I just don't see how you can live with him in center. His speed makes up for average route running, but his arm is terrible. He is a poor mans Jaun Pierre, and we didn't want him. Even with his average coming up, he is hitting .260+ in the 2nd half but has a poor OBP. So you have to get a lead off man at short now to play owens and hit him 9. If Owens is your 9 hitter, you can live with him, if not, you are screwed.

I know people hate OBP and OPS, but the truth is, if your leadoff hitter isn't on base 34% of the time, he probably isn't a good lead off hitter. 34% is even low. At any rate, Ozzie is in love with Owens, he will be leading off in center next year. You have to hope as freaking athletically gifted as Fields is, he can learn to be a GOOD left fielder, because right now you are below average in left and center and just above in right.

Its a shame Richar can't play short, because if he could, you could go after Luis Castillo, who would be a good option leading off playing 2nd.

kittle42
09-23-2007, 05:42 AM
Gonzalez sucks, it doesn't matter what position he plays, if its above double A he won't hit .240. You can live with that if hes a golf glove back up, hes not, at any position. I don't think there is any more arguement to that, if you can't hit .200, and you can't throw the ball to first base in the majors, you should probably learn another trade.

With Owens, I just don't see how you can live with him in center. His speed makes up for average route running, but his arm is terrible. He is a poor mans Jaun Pierre, and we didn't want him. Even with his average coming up, he is hitting .260+ in the 2nd half but has a poor OBP. So you have to get a lead off man at short now to play owens and hit him 9. If Owens is your 9 hitter, you can live with him, if not, you are screwed.

I know people hate OBP and OPS, but the truth is, if your leadoff hitter isn't on base 34% of the time, he probably isn't a good lead off hitter. 34% is even low. At any rate, Ozzie is in love with Owens, he will be leading off in center next year. You have to hope as freaking athletically gifted as Fields is, he can learn to be a GOOD left fielder, because right now you are below average in left and center and just above in right.


QFT. Don't get all ga-ga over the guy because of one 5-hit game and 29 SBs. I wish we had a better option for the top of the lineup, and I'd like to see Owens stay on as a bench player next year.

voodoochile
09-23-2007, 09:12 AM
QFT. Don't get all ga-ga over the guy because of one 5-hit game and 29 SBs. I wish we had a better option for the top of the lineup, and I'd like to see Owens stay on as a bench player next year.

It's not about one game. Owens OBP is up to .328 for the season and is over .400 this month. His BB/K ratio is 1:1 for the month showing he is becoming more comfortable at the plate, IMO.

August was a rough stretch for him when he hit .229, but he hit .287/.333 in July. Seems equally bad to assume that he is never going to put up a .340 or higher OBP as it does to assume September will be the norm for his career.

Daver
09-23-2007, 09:21 AM
Well say the Sox sunk all their extra cash into a veteran #3 pitcher or better, a couple of live bullpen arms and a major upgrade at SS (don't know if this is possible, don't know who's available) and Crede came back healthy at 3B. I think they could get by with Fields and Owens in the OF for the offense they potentially bring to the table.

Owens may not have the arm for CF, but he's got the wheels and the glove. I'm as concerned with finding an upgrade offensively as I am defensively. We probably disagree there, but if Owens truly is finding a comfort zone hitting (and I think he is) and the Sox can get back into the 850 runs territory next season then any runs given up by a weakened OF defense will be more than made up for with the runs scored.

The pitching and defense approach worked pretty well a couple of years ago.

voodoochile
09-23-2007, 09:52 AM
The pitching and defense approach worked pretty well a couple of years ago.

That team also scored 741 runs which is about 100 more than they will score this year. In addition, most of the great run prevention was due to the pitchers having amazing years and posting team marks of 3.61 ERA and 1.25 WHIP. The team as a whole gave up 53 Un-earned runs that year this year the number stands at 75. Now I'd love to see a season like 2005 defensively, but if the Sox had put up another 100 runs this year, the extra UER would pale in comparison. Add in that probably 30 of those UER have happened while the Sox have been playing several players who won't be on the team next year especially where they have been playing and I expect it to drop again.

Unfortunately I don't know where to find team splits for runs and unearned runs, so cannot post a month by month breakdown, but if anyone can post a link it would be great. However I would venture to guess that the 14 errors that Gonzalez and Cintron posted in their combined 44 games at 3B have a lot to do with it.

Tragg
09-23-2007, 10:55 AM
That team also scored 741 runs which is about 100 more than they will score this year. In addition, most of the great run prevention was due to the pitchers having amazing years and posting team marks of 3.61 ERA and 1.25 WHIP. The team as a whole gave up 53 Un-earned runs that year this year the number stands at 75.
So to equate, we need to score 125 more runs next year (100 more than this year and 25 more to offset the unearned runs). And that's just unearned runs - we had a better defensive Dye in 2005 and Rowand, love him or hate him, is a better defender than Owens. Where are the 125 runs coming from?

And then, look at Owens by himself. If I grant him .340 OBP (a generous projection) and 50 steals and bad defense, how much value is that really? We could get more than that offensively with Richar at the top of the order.

voodoochile
09-23-2007, 11:42 AM
So to equate, we need to score 125 more runs next year (100 more than this year and 25 more to offset the unearned runs). And that's just unearned runs - we had a better defensive Dye in 2005 and Rowand, love him or hate him, is a better defender than Owens. Where are the 125 runs coming from?

And then, look at Owens by himself. If I grant him .340 OBP (a generous projection) and 50 steals and bad defense, how much value is that really? We could get more than that offensively with Richar at the top of the order.

I think getting Cintron and Gonzalez off the team or at least off of 3B will lower the UER allowed dramatically all by itself. I still think getting the run production back to an acceptable level is more important than upgrading the defense. If all else remains the same from an UER standpoint than the Sox would still be up 75 runs next year by scoring 100 more. That's still a net improvement of nearly 1/2 run per game.

Pitching first (should improve the defense too)
Offense second
Defense third

That's the way I would build any team.

Daver
09-23-2007, 12:45 PM
I think getting Cintron and Gonzalez off the team or at least off of 3B will lower the UER allowed dramatically all by itself. I still think getting the run production back to an acceptable level is more important than upgrading the defense. If all else remains the same from an UER standpoint than the Sox would still be up 75 runs next year by scoring 100 more. That's still a net improvement of nearly 1/2 run per game.

Pitching first (should improve the defense too)
Offense second
Defense third

That's the way I would build any team.

That worked real well in 2000.

voodoochile
09-23-2007, 01:03 PM
That worked real well in 2000.

Worked just fine until the pitching staff came apart at the seams.

In addition, looking back at what we considered a good pitching staff at the time, history doesn't bear it out. In reality that team was built offense first, pitching second and defense third, so it's not a great example...

upperdeckusc
09-23-2007, 02:26 PM
He was not a call up.

But he's been one of the best youngins , I agree.

:?:

was he not in the minors, then called up to the majors? has he been on the white sox bench since opening day?

Daver
09-23-2007, 05:20 PM
Worked just fine until the pitching staff came apart at the seams.

In addition, looking back at what we considered a good pitching staff at the time, history doesn't bear it out. In reality that team was built offense first, pitching second and defense third, so it's not a great example...

The playoff pitching in 2000 was fine, it was the bats that died, you build your team based on offense you live and die by the slumps, which is why building on offense is a flawed approach. Defense is fairly consistent, pitching somewhat less so, and offense is the least consistent of them all.

If you are going to live by offense alone, it will kill you.

Brian26
09-23-2007, 06:08 PM
How much does Owen's weak arm in CF hurt you compared to his ability to overcompensate on routes with his speed? I've seen him make some plays this year on balls that he had no right being anywhere near, case in point the diving catch he made last Sunday against the Angels.

In time, I think Owens will learn his positioning and how to read a ball better in CF. With his speed, he could become pretty good. The arm will always be weak.

I think Owens can get to balls that Rowand, Mackowiak, Erstad and even Anderson wouldn't have a prayer of catching. He's going to save some doubles and triples that way. Question is, how many extra bases does the opposition take on his arm?

Brian26
09-23-2007, 06:12 PM
The playoff pitching in 2000 was fine, it was the bats that died, you build your team based on offense you live and die by the slumps, which is why building on offense is a flawed approach.

To this day, I'm not quite sure that's fair to say because it was such a short series. Game 1 was a pitching failure (didn't Foulke blow the lead late?). Game 2 and 3, I agree with you that the offense didn't show up.

Honestly, if we would have advanced, I would have felt more confident in the boppers in the lineup than running Parque, an injured Baldwin, and an injured Sirotka out there against the Yankees. I have no idea who would have even pitched in the 4th game (was Eldred available?).

Daver
09-23-2007, 06:29 PM
I think Owens can get to balls that Rowand, Mackowiak, Erstad and even Anderson wouldn't have a prayer of catching. He's going to save some doubles and triples that way. Question is, how many extra bases does the opposition take on his arm?

I have yet to see Owens get to a ball Anderson couldn't get to.

Tragg
09-23-2007, 06:46 PM
There are other small things that contribute to inept offense......including bizarre lineups (positioning of players in the lineup) on a consistent basis.
Fields at 2, while slappers bat 5 and 6; I know Ozzie loves Erstad's slap-hitting, but he has had a horrible offensive year (4 homers, .312 OBP) and batting him in a premium position in the order, including 3 today, is just cynical. Richar consistently at the bottom of the order, with no protection at all all season.
Players certainly haven't been positioned to maximize this offense.

Lip Man 1
09-23-2007, 07:31 PM
Brian:

Eldred was left off the 2000 ALDS playoff roster. I don't think he would have been added for the ALCS although you never know.

Lip

Brian26
09-23-2007, 08:48 PM
I have yet to see Owens get to a ball Anderson couldn't get to.

I'm not sure Anderson would have reached that ball last Sunday against the Angels. Unfortunately I can't find the mlb.com highlight to link, and I'm not even sure they have one since Thome overshadowed everything in that game.

I wish Anderson could get his game together because I'm a big fan of BA.

Brian26
09-23-2007, 08:49 PM
Brian:

Eldred was left off the 2000 ALDS playoff roster. I don't think he would have been added for the ALCS although you never know.

Lip

You never know, but I'm remembering now that he had two cortisone shots and had a screw placed in his elbow at that point. It would have been a heck of a story if he came back and pitched if the Sox could have advanced.

delben91
09-23-2007, 08:59 PM
:?:

was he not in the minors, then called up to the majors? has he been on the white sox bench since opening day?

He came over from Arizona's farm system in June I believe. Played about a month in Charlotte, and was called up to the big club.

So yes, he was called up, albeit after a very brief stop in the Sox' minor league system.

Dick Allen
09-23-2007, 09:37 PM
Andy Gonzalez may be the worst player I've ever seen in a Sox uniform, and I've been watching for 48 years. If someone who is hitting .190 is playing everyday, he'd either have to be a big HR hitter or exceptional on defense. I think we know the answer to both of those. And I've seen enough mental errors from him to last a season. I really think Ozzie needs to explain to us how someone this awful continues to play nearly every day. I don't care if the season is over, he is not exactly a budding superstar.

KyWhiSoxFan
09-24-2007, 07:01 AM
If Gonzalez is on the team next year, I would have little faith in either KW or Ozzie.

ondafarm
09-24-2007, 11:01 AM
I have yet to see Owens get to a ball Anderson couldn't get to.

I agree with Daver. No teal.

voodoochile
09-24-2007, 11:04 AM
I agree with Daver. No teal.

I do too, but for whatever reason, Anderson isn't getting a chance. It might be due to the type of hitter he is and the desire to have Owens lead off more than anything. Anderson isn't a lead off hitter from what I have seen. Owens at least has that potential if he can continue to raise his batting average and OBP.

ondafarm
09-24-2007, 11:06 AM
I do too, but for whatever reason, Anderson isn't getting a chance. It might be due to the type of hitter he is and the desire to have Owens lead off more than anything. Anderson isn't a lead off hitter from what I have seen. Owens at least has that potential if he can continue to raise his batting average and OBP.

And I agree with Voodoochile. No teal. [Note to self: Try not to get in a habit-forming rut, for the rest of today.]