PDA

View Full Version : Up for Discussion- Lead off Swisher?


ohiosoxfan
02-25-2008, 03:10 PM
Just to throw this out for some discussion. . . why not think about Nick Swisher as a lead off hitter? Since the Sox really don't have one everyone can agree on, here is a guy who can walk 100 times a year, has scored 100 runs in a season before, is a switch hitter, and can hit a homer to put you up 1-0. Granted, he doesn't have classic lead off speed, but if he can score from second on a single and go first to third on a single, I'd welcome it. With 100 walks, he could cut down on the Thome solo shots.

JorgeFabregas
02-25-2008, 03:14 PM
I'm down. Doubt Ozzie is, though.

sox1970
02-25-2008, 03:18 PM
I want Swisher batting in the middle of the order 3-4-5-6.

rdwj
02-25-2008, 03:18 PM
It's not ideal, but it might work - who knows?

balke
02-25-2008, 03:18 PM
I'm expecting the Sox to adopt this, rather than jump in feet first. I could see Swisher at leadoff. I could see him pulled the second it seems he's struggling.

I'd like to have a high OBP. guy there, but guys with power generally don't like wasting it with noone on base. Swisher (team player or not) could be throwing away a ton of money by giving up RBI to walk for the Sox. The Sox as well could be wasting RBI with a power guy at leadoff.

Tough decision, but if Owens isn't hitting well, or producing Cabrera or Swisher have to be there.

dickallen15
02-25-2008, 03:19 PM
If the object is to get the leadoff hitter on base, it makes a lot more sense thn Cabrera hitting there. Let Cabrera bat second. Obviously, I would rather the Sox acquire another guy to leadoff, but of the current options, Swisher is the best IMO.

dickallen15
02-25-2008, 03:21 PM
I'm expecting the Sox to adopt this, rather than jump in feet first. I could see Swisher at leadoff. I could see him pulled the second it seems he's struggling.

I'd like to have a high OBP. guy there, but guys with power generally don't like wasting it with noone on base. Swisher (team player or not) could be throwing away a ton of money by giving up RBI to walk for the Sox. The Sox as well could be wasting RBI with a power guy at leadoff.

Tough decision, but if Owens isn't hitting well, or producing Cabrera or Swisher have to be there.
There's only 1 time a game where he's guaranteed to leadoff. If your team goes down in order in the first, the clean-up guy leads off in the second. What's the difference? Have your best hitters get the most at bats.

munchman33
02-25-2008, 03:29 PM
There's only 1 time a game where he's guaranteed to leadoff. If your team goes down in order in the first, the clean-up guy leads off in the second. What's the difference? Have your best hitters get the most at bats.

This argument is always misleading. What people fail to realize is that the guys ahead of him tend not to get on base often. So even if he isn't leading off the inning, the bases are generally empty for the person in that slot. His job is still to get on base and get things going for people behind him.

LITTLE NELL
02-25-2008, 03:29 PM
Im still praying for the Owens miracle. Hes bulked up a little and maybe someone can help him how to play CF a little better. Jimmy Piersall would be a great teacher, but Im not sure if hes still with the Cubs minor league system.

JB98
02-25-2008, 03:32 PM
We've had this discussion a few times since the trade. I'm strongly in the camp that wants Swisher to lead off. He's not a basestealer, but he's got adequate speed. He works the pitchers, and he's on base nearly four times out of 10.

Yeah, he wouldn't have as many RBIs in that spot, but we have Thome, Konerko and Dye to knock in the runs. What we need is for someone to score runs.

Too many games last year, we had two outs and nobody on for Thome in the first inning. That needs to change.

dickallen15
02-25-2008, 03:38 PM
This argument is always misleading. What people fail to realize is that the guys ahead of him tend not to get on base often. So even if he isn't leading off the inning, the bases are generally empty for the person in that slot. His job is still to get on base and get things going for people behind him.
Leading off means more at bats. If he's one of the highest OBP guys on the team, that means more runners, which means more runs. I think the need for a prototypical leadoff guy went out the window when you didn't have an automatic out batting ninth.

munchman33
02-25-2008, 03:43 PM
Leading off means more at bats. If he's one of the highest OBP guys on the team, that means more runners, which means more runs. I think the need for a prototypical leadoff guy went out the window when you didn't have an automatic out batting ninth.

I can't remember the last time that wasn't the case for us...

balke
02-25-2008, 04:32 PM
I can't remember the last time that wasn't the case for us...


Miguel Olivo.

WhiteSox5187
02-25-2008, 05:18 PM
It's not a bad idea, but as you mentioned he's not going to steal a whole lot of bases which is going to put a lot of pressure on Cabrera, I'd really rather see Swish bat further down and break up the relay race between JD, Paulie,Thome and AJ...we don't have a real leadoff guy except for Owens, I wouldn't mind seeing him try out for the spot and see how he does, but I think we need a legit leadoff guy.

Navarro's Talent
02-25-2008, 05:40 PM
I've been thinking Swisher would be the lead-off hitter for awhile now. I guess a lot depends on how Carlos Quentin does. If he's going to be the starting leftfielder (when he's finally healthy), then I think there's a good chance that Swisher might be leading off (and playing CF). If Owens is starting and not Quentin, then Swisher will not even be considered, I think.

santo=dorf
02-25-2008, 05:47 PM
This argument is always misleading. What people fail to realize is that the guys ahead of him tend not to get on base often. So even if he isn't leading off the inning, the bases are generally empty for the person in that slot. His job is still to get on base and get things going for people behind him.
So that means the "leadoff" guy is no longer a "true leadoff" man because he is up to the plate with no one on and at least one out.

Even Ozzie said the leadoff man just has to get on base.
I want my leadoff hitter to get on base. I don't want a leadoff hitter to steal bases. The only way you are going to steal bases is if you are there. If you get on base, you have Thome, [Paul] Konerko and [Jermaine] Dye hitting behind you. We should score a lot of runs, but we have to get on base first."

munchman33
02-25-2008, 06:08 PM
So that means the "leadoff" guy is no longer a "true leadoff" man because he is up to the plate with no one on and at least one out.

Even Ozzie said the leadoff man just has to get on base.

Yes, yes. I agree that the leadoff guy needs to be a decent OBP guy for those reasons. But I wouldn't put Swisher there if that's going to take away from his power.

Daver
02-25-2008, 06:37 PM
Yes, yes. I agree that the leadoff guy needs to be a decent OBP guy for those reasons. But I wouldn't put Swisher there if that's going to take away from his power.

Well, last time I checked the White Sox play in the AL, which features a DH, and therefore you need a lead-off hitter in the classic sense once per game, in the first inning. Do you really think he's going to be told not to swing for the fence to start a game?

munchman33
02-25-2008, 07:14 PM
Well, last time I checked the White Sox play in the AL, which features a DH, and therefore you need a lead-off hitter in the classic sense once per game, in the first inning. Do you really think he's going to be told not to swing for the fence to start a game?


Most #9 hitters get on base less than 30% of the time. That's all I meant. You need the #1 guy to start rallies. Work pitchers and earn walks and such.

I can't say I know if Swisher would take a drastically different plate approach in that spot, or how it would effect him. But I really don't want to find out either. There's already a guy on the roster who we know can lead off.

btrain929
02-25-2008, 07:19 PM
Most #9 hitters get on base less than 30% of the time. That's all I meant. You need the #1 guy to start rallies. Work pitchers and earn walks and such.

I can't say I know if Swisher would take a drastically different plate approach in that spot, or how it would effect him. But I really don't want to find out either. There's already a guy on the roster who we know can lead off.

If there really was this said person, we wouldn't be having this conversation. There's a difference between who can leadoff, and who's actually effective in doing so....

munchman33
02-25-2008, 07:20 PM
If there really was this said person, we wouldn't be having this conversation. There's a difference between who can leadoff, and who's actually effective in doing so....

Cabrera can be effective in leadoff.

Frater Perdurabo
02-25-2008, 07:31 PM
I too would strongly consider Swisher for the leadoff spot.

Then the Sox could platoon Owens and Quentin in LF and batting ninth.

Boondock Saint
02-25-2008, 07:32 PM
I'm not familiar with Cabrera's numbers, but if he doesn't have a tendency to GIDP, I'm TOTALLY down with it. A good OBP who'll take pitches as lead off is fine with me if the #2 isn't grounding him out when he comes up. If 1 or 2 get on, 3-4-5 should be able to get them over/in.

santo=dorf
02-25-2008, 07:47 PM
Cabrera can be effective in leadoff.
Based on what? His career line batting #1 of: .243/.283/.394/.677 11 SB in 383 PA's? None on, none out: .267/.318/.398/.716

We don't need any of that Erstad garbage.

ChiTownTrojan
02-25-2008, 08:03 PM
Cabrera can be effective in leadoff.
We got Cabrera to be a #2, that's what he's good at and that's where I expect to see him most of the time. That really leaves Swisher, Owens, and Ozuna as our only options. When Owens is in the lineup, he's gonna lead off, and when Ozuna is in there, he'll lead off. If neither of them are, then it will have to be Swisher. I doubt we'll ever see Owens and Ozuna in the same lineup.

Craig Grebeck
02-25-2008, 08:09 PM
I too would strongly consider Swisher for the leadoff spot.

Then the Sox could platoon Owens and Quentin in LF and batting ninth.
Uh, why?

Have you even looked at Quentin's splits? The guy mashes both lefties and righties and has actually performed better against righties in MLB.

Why are people so desperate to get Owens' ****ty production on the field?

jabrch
02-25-2008, 08:40 PM
Who ****ing cares? Since we don't have a true leadoff hitter, the difference between putting a #2 guy there, a #5 guy, or a #8 guy is completely insignificant.

munchman33
02-25-2008, 08:48 PM
Based on what? His career line batting #1 of: .243/.283/.394/.677 11 SB in 383 PA's? None on, none out: .267/.318/.398/.716

We don't need any of that Erstad garbage.

Yikes!

That's what I get for not actually paying attention to what a guy does in a spot.

Consider my mind changed.

Metalthrasher442
02-25-2008, 09:51 PM
Now there's word Owens might have hurt his groin..

Sockinchisox
02-28-2008, 10:21 PM
Ozzie says he's serious about having Swisher hit lead-off because he wants to keep Cabrera in the 2nd spot in the order.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080228-white-sox-leadoff-hitter,1,7705822.story

ShoelessJoeS
02-28-2008, 10:40 PM
Ozzie says he's serious about having Swisher hit lead-off because he wants to keep Cabrera in the 2nd spot in the order.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080228-white-sox-leadoff-hitter,1,7705822.story I'm guessing it's going to look something like this...

1. Swisher
2. Cabrera
3. Thome
4. Konerko
5. Dye
6. AJ
7. Fields/Crede

Then it gets tricky...
I'm assuming 8 and 9 would be whoever wins the 2B and LF jobs (although I'd like to see Swisher in left if Owens gets the starting nod.

JorgeFabregas
02-29-2008, 04:10 PM
I'm down. Doubt Ozzie is, though.
Ozzie is full of surprises.
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080228-white-sox-leadoff-hitter,1,7705822.story

#1swisher
02-29-2008, 07:18 PM
If the object is to get the leadoff hitter on base, it makes a lot more sense thn Cabrera hitting there. Let Cabrera bat second. Obviously, I would rather the Sox acquire another guy to leadoff, but of the current options, Swisher is the best IMO.
I agree. I think the way Swisher hits/run he would turn it into doubles.

#1swisher
02-29-2008, 07:23 PM
Ozzie is full of surprises.
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-080228-white-sox-leadoff-hitter,1,7705822.story

thanks for the article.

nodiggity59
03-01-2008, 02:55 PM
The guy sees a ton of pitches, has a good OBP, and has enough speed to score when he's supposed to.

It makes me sick reading all the glowing reports of Owens the other day for getting a couple of infield singles. Pablo is fast enough as a pinch runner, plays more positions, and is a better hitter.

This would allow us to keep BA on the major league roster. I love the idea of starting Swish in CF, Quentin in LF, then just bring in BA as the defensive replacement.

If BA plays well this spring, why would we keep Owens? The guy makes Pods look dangerous at the plate.

Scottiehaswheels
03-01-2008, 03:00 PM
If BA plays well this spring, why would we keep Owens? The guy makes Pods look dangerous at the plate.Not to say that Swisher wouldn't made an adequate lead off guy but... Pods was dangerous at the plate when he had healthy legs/groin which is what Owens does have if the tweak from earlier this month is fine... If Owens can bat .280/.290 with his speed I think I'd prefer him over Swisher in the lead off as well. Still to early to say yet til I see more...

Milkman43
03-01-2008, 03:09 PM
Whats your knock on Owens? The kids' played only a couple games this spring and has gotten on base. Lead off hitters reach base with infield hits. Putting Swisher at the top of the order takes away from his rbi chances and lowers his power numbers. Also, Owens is talented in center field and Swisher is much more comfortable in left. Finally, Brian Anderson? I would take Owens over Brian in a heart beat.

Craig Grebeck
03-01-2008, 03:26 PM
Whats your knock on Owens? The kids' played only a couple games this spring and has gotten on base. Lead off hitters reach base with infield hits. Putting Swisher at the top of the order takes away from his rbi chances and lowers his power numbers. Also, Owens is talented in center field and Swisher is much more comfortable in left. Finally, Brian Anderson? I would take Owens over Brian in a heart beat.
The knock is that playing Owens would mean we are benching Carlos Quentin, a player who has been superior to Owens at every level.

...
03-01-2008, 03:46 PM
The knock is that playing Owens would mean we are benching Carlos Quentin, a player who has been superior to Owens at every level.

Not the Major League level...

...yet anyway

Craig Grebeck
03-01-2008, 03:56 PM
Not the Major League level...

...yet anyway
Quentin was fantastic in 2006 when he first broke in. His injuries last year slowed him down considerably.

Owens was abysmal last season.