PDA

View Full Version : Ramirez is the starting CF, and could keep the job.


Pages : [1] 2 3

Sockinchisox
03-30-2008, 11:36 AM
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/867991,CST-SPT-sox30.article

Ozzie said Alexei will be the starting CF until Owens returns with Swisher shifting to left. And Alexei could stay there and possibly lead off if he plays well.

goon
03-30-2008, 11:37 AM
Holy ****.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 11:41 AM
I think this is the kind of move that will have to work out for the WSox if they are going to contend this year. If Ramirez turned out to be a solid CF with a good throwing arm and a lead off man (all things referred to in the article) then you have the chance to have three major upgrades from last year: Swisher in LF, Ramirez in CF and Cabrera at SS. If Uribe continues his solid play from spring training (Ozzie's assessment) then that's four positions upgraded from '07. It may be a bit of a longshot...but longshot's will need to come through for us to contend this year.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 11:48 AM
This is ****ing bull ****. Just ****ing trade Anderson and let him play somewhere else. I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 11:49 AM
:o:

Cuck the Fubs
03-30-2008, 11:49 AM
WOW!

I didn't see this one coming...........This just changed they dynamic of the club big time.

I like this move:gulp:

russ99
03-30-2008, 11:56 AM
This is ****ing bull ****. Just ****ing trade Anderson and let him play somewhere else. I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.

Seriously, lay off the Anderson Kool-Aid.

Brian's a above-average defensive outfielder, but until he disproves the belief that he can't hit major league pitching consistently, (Arizona spring pitching doesn't count) he won't be playing everyday. Hopefully he'll get a chance in the early going to see if he can do that or if it's the same old Anderson at the plate. His strong spring just bought him another chance.

Ramirez has enough raw talent, the Sox are giving him a shot to see what he can do in the majors, and if he could hit lead-off, that would be a huge bonus. If he hits .225 over 350+ AB like BA did in 2006, he'll be in the same boat.

That's the difference. Scouts say you can tell a lot about a hitter in 150-200 at-bats at the big league level. Anderson's had many more than that, Ramirez has had none so far. I don't see why Sox fans (even Anderson backers) wouldn't want Ramirez the get the same shot in his rookie season that Anderson did...

doublem23
03-30-2008, 11:58 AM
This is ****ing bull ****. Just ****ing trade Anderson and let him play somewhere else. I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=97276

Making claims that decisions about Sox player personnel or the playing time they receive is based on racial bias: Be prepared to back it up with some kind of evidence other than your opinion.

Tread lightly.

btrain929
03-30-2008, 12:02 PM
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/867991,CST-SPT-sox30.article

Ozzie said Alexei will be the starting CF until Owens returns with Swisher shifting to left. And Alexei could stay there and possibly lead off if he plays well.

No way in hell does he lead off. He'd have about 9 walks all year. I'd rather see him in the bottom 3 of the lineup to actually give us some pop down there. Hopefully it'll be a little more consistent pop then what Crede and Uribe gives us.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 12:03 PM
Seriously, lay off the Anderson Kool-Aid.

Brian's a above-average defensive outfielder, but until he disproves the belief that he can't hit major league pitching consistently,
How is he gonna do it on the bench?
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=97276



Tread lightly.
Ya sorry about that. That was just alot of anger coming out.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 12:04 PM
No way in hell does he lead off. He'd have about 9 walks all year. I'd rather see him in the bottom 3 of the lineup to actually give us some pop down there. Hopefully it'll be a little more consistent pop then what Crede and Uribe gives us.
I hear people compare him to Soriano and until this season coming up Soriano has been a primary leadoff hitter.

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 12:07 PM
This is absolutely insane. If you want Ramirez in the lineup so bad, then do it at the expense of Uribe - not anyone on the team who has actually earned playing time. The lack of respect for BA and Quentin is flat out crazy. If Ramirez wasn't quick this move would have never been made. Unbelievable.

russ99
03-30-2008, 12:08 PM
How is he gonna do it on the bench?


As I said:"Hopefully he'll get a chance in the early going".

It's a long season. He's on the 25-man roster and a whole heck of a lot more usable and versatile than our backups, Erstad or Mackowiak the last 2 years. Ozzie doesn't seem to have an issue with having him play, at least from his quotes about Brian.

He'll get playing time, and likely a few starts in the first few weeks. Just because Ramirez is starting tomorrow, doesn't mean he's our CF for the season.

Brian26
03-30-2008, 12:09 PM
Supposedly Ramirez' natural position is shortstop. Defensively, it seems Anderson would have the advantage as your CF.

Yesterday I saw Ramirez look horrendous in striking out on three straight breaking balls with the bases loaded. I haven't seen enough at-bats from him this Spring to know if he's completed been exposed on breaking pitches now, but he looked awful.

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 12:09 PM
This is absolutely insane. If you want Ramirez in the lineup so bad, then do it at the expense of Uribe - not anyone on the team who has actually earned playing time. The lack of respect for BA and Quentin is flat out crazy. If Ramirez wasn't quick this move would have never been made. Unbelievable.



:nod:

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:09 PM
This is absolutely insane. If you want Ramirez in the lineup so bad, then do it at the expense of Uribe - not anyone on the team who has actually earned playing time. The lack of respect for BA and Quentin is flat out crazy. If Ramirez wasn't quick this move would have never been made. Unbelievable.



Uribe just finished off a monster spring, too...

We have a situation where everyone in competition played very well. I'm sure things will straighten out and we'll get a better idea of a starting 9, but right now it's not that clear.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 12:10 PM
They need to trade Dye, Uribe, and Crede ASAP.

Outfield should be Swisher-Owens/Anderson--Quentin
Infield should be Fields--Cabrera--Ramirez--Konerko

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 12:11 PM
So who's our leadoff man now if Uribe is starting second after Ozzie made it clear that Ozuna was going to have that job on Opening Day? Is it Swisher? Does Uribe have some photos of Ozzie? I'm so ****ing confused.

btrain929
03-30-2008, 12:11 PM
Seriously, lay off the Anderson Kool-Aid.

Brian's a above-average defensive outfielder, but until he disproves the belief that he can't hit major league pitching consistently, (Arizona spring pitching doesn't count) he won't be playing everyday. Hopefully he'll get a chance in the early going to see if he can do that or if it's the same old Anderson at the plate. His strong spring just bought him another chance.

Ramirez has enough raw talent, the Sox are giving him a shot to see what he can do in the majors, and if he could hit lead-off, that would be a huge bonus. If he hits .225 over 350+ AB like BA did in 2006, he'll be in the same boat.

That's the difference. Scouts say you can tell a lot about a hitter in 150-200 at-bats at the big league level. Anderson's had many more than that, Ramirez has had none so far. I don't see why Sox fans (even Anderson backers) wouldn't want Ramirez the get the same shot in his rookie season that Anderson did...

How can he do that if he doesn't get another shot at starting?

And do use that spring training pitching or Arizona air bull****. I didn't see Crede and Dye hitting .400 against that same pitching...

I'd rather see Anderson in CF and Ramirez at 2B instead of Ramirez in CF (not his natural position) and Uribe at 2B (why is he still here?).

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:12 PM
Supposedly Ramirez' natural position is shortstop. Defensively, it seems Anderson would have the advantage as your CF.

Yesterday I saw Ramirez look horrendous in striking out on three straight breaking balls with the bases loaded. I haven't seen enough at-bats from him this Spring to know if he's completed been exposed on breaking pitches now, but he looked awful.

I haven't seen him very good with the breaking ball, but as I mentioned yesterday, hopefully that was just the side-arming righty that got him all confused.

That said, I also mentioned that he would eventually be sent down.

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 12:13 PM
Uribe just finished off a monster spring, too...

We have a situation where everyone in competition played very well. I'm sure things will straighten out and we'll get a better idea of a starting 9, but right now it's not that clear.
Spring training stats shouldn't outweigh the abominable seasons Uribe has posted prior to this season. He has been garbage for three years now. When will they learn? Out of he, Ramirez, Quentin, and Anderson, he is the only one who is suited for a bench spot. He's a good defender who can play 3 IF spots and can't hit for ****. The rest should play daily - Quentin and Anderson in the bigs and Ramirez in AAA.

btrain929
03-30-2008, 12:13 PM
They need to trade Dye, Uribe, and Crede ASAP.

Outfield should be Swisher-Owens/Anderson--Quentin
Infield should be Fields--Cabrera--Ramirez--Konerko

That will be pretty damn close to our lineup in '09 if I had to guess today...

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:19 PM
Spring training stats shouldn't outweigh the abominable seasons Uribe has posted prior to this season. He has been garbage for three years now. When will they learn?

I guess you can say the same about Anderson. :dunno:

We have nothing but Spring Training stats to base decisions off of. Neither Quentin or Anderson has hit major league pitching in the regular season yet, and Ramirez hasn't even seen it. This is all we have right now. And as I said...things will straighten out and our starting 9 will be more clear, but right now, it isn't.

Out of he, Ramirez, Quentin, and Anderson, he is the only one who is suited for a bench spot. He's a good defender who can play 3 IF spots and can't hit for ****. The rest should play daily - Quentin and Anderson in the bigs and Ramirez in AAA.Then who plays 2B in this scenario? And who are we going to bench, Swisher or Dye? :scratch:

Face it, we just had a bunch of guys play way over their heads in Spring Training. There are no clear cut starters because 4 guys just played out of their minds. I'd imagine things will straighten out...

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 12:22 PM
I guess you can say the same about Anderson. :dunno:

We have nothing but Spring Training stats to base decisions off of. Neither Quentin or Anderson has hit major league pitching in the regular season yet, and Ramirez hasn't even seen it. This is all we have right now. And as I said...things will straighten out and our starting 9 will be more clear, but right now, it isn't.

Then who plays 2B in this scenario? And who are we going to bench, Swisher or Dye? :scratch:
Ideally, Ozuna will play it until Richar is healthy. I would prefer an outfield of Swisher/Anderson/Quentin - but I know JD and his horrendous defense are entrenched. At the very least, Anderson should be the fourth OF but Quentin has earned his shot more than anyone else.

manders_01
03-30-2008, 12:23 PM
This is fairly crazy. Ramirez has potential - POTENTIAL - but he's not starting material in the batter's box yet. He came up with some good hits in ST but he was so amazingly inconsistent. Let's hope that his gun of an arm can keep scores down and we won't have to worry about how many hits he's producing. If he's going to be leading-off, he better learn how to lay off ****ty pitches and get on base.

I hope he proves me wrong. :D:

Frontman
03-30-2008, 12:23 PM
I like the sound of this. It gives the Sox some speed.

We'll see how this all works out over time. It could be that Ramierez is in CF this season, Cabrerra moves on after 08 and Alexei goes to SS, opening up CF for Anderson.

As far as Quentin and dis-respect? He's coming off of surgery. I don't have a problem with working him slowly.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 12:25 PM
I guess you can say the same about Anderson. :dunno:

We have nothing but Spring Training stats to base decisions off of. Neither Quentin or Anderson has hit major league pitching in the regular season yet, and Ramirez hasn't even seen it. This is all we have right now. And as I said...things will straighten out and our starting 9 will be more clear, but right now, it isn't.

Then who plays 2B in this scenario? And who are we going to bench, Swisher or Dye? :scratch:

Face it, right now, we had a bunch of guys play way over their heads in Spring Training. There are no clear cut starters because 4 guys just played out of their minds. I'd imagine things will straighten out...

Dye's gotta go. The signing wasn't bad, but it's time to move on with Quentin.

A lineup that makes sense:
Owens, Cabrera, Thome, Konerko, Swisher, Quentin, Pierzynski, Fields, Ramirez

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:29 PM
Ideally, Ozuna will play it until Richar is healthy. I would prefer an outfield of Swisher/Anderson/Quentin - but I know JD and his horrendous defense are entrenched. At the very least, Anderson should be the fourth OF but Quentin has earned his shot more than anyone else.

On what planet is starting Ozuna everyday better than Uribe?

The only reason you're here arguing is because Quentin isn't starting. You've defended Ozzie's decision of the outfield the last few days...now that your boy isn't starting, suddenly Anderson looks good in your eyes. :scratch:

Again, things will straighten out. I'm going out on a limb here, but I don't think Ramirez, Uribe, Anderson, and Quentin are going to hit .350+. Someone will struggle (hopefully not all of them), and the jobs will fall in the right spots.

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:30 PM
Dye's gotta go. The signing wasn't bad, but it's time to move on with Quentin.

Well, then come talk to me in June when we can deal him, not now. Dye is on the team right now...no one is going to deal for him at this point.

And plus, I think for all you people that are telling me not to look at Spring Training stats, you're getting a little too excited on Spring Training stats. Anderson and Quentin look good now, but Dye is the only proven one of the bunch. Trading Dye now because a couple of guys had good springs would be stupid.

Frontman
03-30-2008, 12:32 PM
Well, then come talk to me in June when we can deal him, not now. Dye is on the team right now...no one is going to deal for him at this point.

Agreed. Trading Dye now? There's no need to, as most MLB rosters carry enough OF talent. Come June, as injuries happen, we might be needing to keep Dye, or someone else will need him bad enough to offer a lot.

russ99
03-30-2008, 12:33 PM
They need to trade Dye, Uribe, and Crede ASAP.

Outfield should be Swisher-Owens/Anderson--Quentin
Infield should be Fields--Cabrera--Ramirez--Konerko

Dye will likely be our DH next season.

You guys obviously didn't read the article.

Ozzie's quote:

"I'm not going to give somebody a job just because. You have to earn it. This year, we are in a really tough spot, but good spot. We need to win this year... This year, the players always have somebody behind their butt to perform. If you don't perform, we have somebody else to do it.''

I love this mindset.

DickAllen72
03-30-2008, 12:33 PM
The way I read it, Ozzie named Ramirez his opening day CF, not his regular starting CF.

I'm sure Anderson and Quentin are both going to see their share of playing time. The interesting question to me is who is going to go down when Owens comes off the DL.

Frontman
03-30-2008, 12:33 PM
Dye will likely be our DH next season.

You guys obviously didn't read the article.

Ozzie's quote:

"'Whoever plays better ... I'm not going to give somebody a job just because. You have to earn it. This year, we are in a really tough spot, but good spot. We need to win this year... This year, the players always have somebody behind their butt to perform. If you don't perform, we have somebody else to do it.''

I love this mindset.

I love this mindset too. Unfortunately, Ozzie brought along Nick Masset which kinda blows this mindset out of the water.......

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 12:37 PM
This is absolutely insane. If you want Ramirez in the lineup so bad, then do it at the expense of Uribe - not anyone on the team who has actually earned playing time. The lack of respect for BA and Quentin is flat out crazy. If Ramirez wasn't quick this move would have never been made. Unbelievable.



Agreed, I want Ramirez at second and Anderson in center with or without Owens. I'm not sure there is anything Anderson can do to earn a spot in the starting lineup.

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:38 PM
I love this mindset too. Unfortunately, Ozzie brought along Nick Masset which kinda blows this mindset out of the water.......

That obviously wasn't Ozzie's decision. Look higher up the chain.

I honestly don't think Ozzie gives a **** about options, he wants results. The same goes for the manager on the other side of town.

Frontman
03-30-2008, 12:38 PM
That obviously wasn't Ozzie's decision. Look higher up the chain.

I honestly don't think Ozzie gives a **** about options, he wants results. The same goes for the manager on the other side of town.

Just saying having the mindset and executing said mindset isn't always going to happen.

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:40 PM
Just saying having the mindset and executing said mindset isn't always going to happen.

It's a different situation, though. Masset is out of options, so Kenny was going to veto any move that had Wassermann winning the job. Ramirez, Anderson, and Quentin can all be sent down and lose their jobs. Kenny won't veto a move like that because those guys are still Sox property.

kjhanson
03-30-2008, 12:41 PM
It seems that everyone here has reasons why Quentin/Anderson/Ramirez/Owens (pre d.l.) should get the last OF spot. As someone who just wants to see the best player out there in every game, I can do nothing but smile. You honestly can make a fair case for every single one of these guys. Ramirez and Anderson had incredible springs and play above average defense. Owens was having a fine spring, and the last two months of last year were very encouraging. Quentin has been swinging the bat better over the past two weeks and has enormous upside. All in all, this is one of the greatest problems that we could have. Of course the debate will still rage on, but this sure beats the hell out of having Coco Crisp penned in out there since March 1st. I'm excited to see these four guys push each other all year long.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 12:42 PM
Dye will likely be our DH next season.

You guys obviously didn't read the article.

Ozzie's quote:

"I'm not going to give somebody a job just because. You have to earn it. This year, we are in a really tough spot, but good spot. We need to win this year... This year, the players always have somebody behind their butt to perform. If you don't perform, we have somebody else to do it.''

I love this mindset.

I understand the mindset, and believe they'll stick to this. But to me, I'm more realistic in thinking this team is a middle of the pack team even with Dye, Crede, and Uribe. So I'd rather give young guys an extra year of experience.

I'm not the biggest Owens supporter, but this is the year to find out if he can be an everyday CF/leadoff guy in the major leagues.

Quentin is a good hitter, and a good corner outfielder. What's the point of him being on the bench?

Ramirez should learn how to play 2B. He's obviously a good athlete. Let him do it now.

HomeFish
03-30-2008, 12:44 PM
I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.

You mean like noted Latino ballplayer Rob Mackowiak?

If Brian Anderson wants the starting CF job, he should try hitting major league pitching.

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:45 PM
I understand the mindset, and believe they'll stick to this. But to me, I'm more realistic in thinking this team is a middle of the pack team even with Dye, Crede, and Uribe. So I'd rather give young guys an extra year of experience.

The team is currently in a transition phase. Obviously, putting Crede and Uribe on the bench isn't going to help their trade value. I'm sure Kenny wants to deal those guys, but he's not going to deal them for nothing. This is why they need to play right now. And hopefully they play well, so we can get the younger guys in there.

If Anderson and Quentin really do continue their success in the regular season, then Dye can be trade bait, too. What we have right now isn't a bad problem to have. Look at the Tigers...with Granderson out, they have Ordonez and garbage in their outfield.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 12:48 PM
The way I read it, Ozzie named Ramirez his opening day CF, not his regular starting CF.

I'm sure Anderson and Quentin are both going to see their share of playing time. The interesting question to me is who is going to go down when Owens comes off the DL.

Thank you for bringing some perspective.

The reality is for the third OF spot ..we have four options that performed well in spring training: Anderson, Ramirez, Quentin and Owens (when healthy), same for 2B: Uribe, Ramirez and Ozuna all had good springs.

All will see decent playing time in the first month of the season...their production when they are given the chance will set the stage for who gets most of the ABs once the season really gets rolling.

I love BA...but Ramirez brings a nice spark and Quentin is showing signs of realizing his potential...they'll have to continue to compete to see who earns playing time. I'm not a big Uribe fan...but with his back against the wall and the level of competition...this might bring out the best in him. Ramirez could be an exciting option 2B. I see Ozuna as a utility player, not a starter...but a case could be made of him as well.

The good news is that KW's moves to get these guys (Quentin and Ramirez) look like good moves early on, potentially upgrading the team while giving us some depth against injury or to use as trade bait later in the season to upgrade our pitching or replenish the farm system.

TheOldRoman
03-30-2008, 12:48 PM
Uribe just finished off a monster spring, too...

We have a situation where everyone in competition played very well. I'm sure things will straighten out and we'll get a better idea of a starting 9, but right now it's not that clear.That is far too rational. We are rounding people up and lighting torches. You should join us.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 12:52 PM
Uribe just finished off a monster spring, too...
.
After 4 years of garbage hitting when it counts. Uribe's spring should have
little merit - certainly far less than anyone else's.

It's remarkable how Ozzie continues to push high ceiling young players out of the lineup to make room for bad veteran hackers. He obviously should replace Uribe, not Quentin or Anderson.

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 12:54 PM
I just don't trust Ozzie to make a change if someone is struggling (which Juan will, that is not debatable; he is absolute trash). He still ran Erstad out there with his .313 OBP all the way through April!

oeo
03-30-2008, 12:56 PM
After 4 years of garbage hitting when it counts. Uribe's spring should have
little merit - certainly far less than anyone else's.

But we have reason to believe that Anderson's spring means something? The guy had good springs in 2006 and 2007, as well.

It's remarkable how Ozzie continues to push high ceiling young players out of the lineup to make room for bad veteran hackers. He obviously should replace Uribe, not Quentin or Anderson.Uribe is the only one of the four that has actually proven to be a major leaguer (albeit not a very good one, but one nonetheless).

And again, we need to play Uribe in order to get him out of town. You should all be cheering for Uribe so we can get something for him.

BTW, I'm glad you managed to get one of your favorite words into yet another post.

Cuck the Fubs
03-30-2008, 12:56 PM
That is far too rational. We are rounding people up and lighting torches. You should join us.

Are we looking for Shrek :D:

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 12:58 PM
But we have reason to believe that Anderson's spring means something? The guy had good springs in 2006 and 2007, as well.



Ramirez isn't a 'high ceiling young player?'

Uribe is the only one of the four that has actually proven to be a major leaguer (albeit not a very good one, but one nonetheless).

BTW, I'm glad you managed to get one of your favorite words into yet another post.
Being on the major league roster does not mean one is of major league quality (see Macias, Jose and Erstad, Darin). He has been an abysmal hitter for years now and is undeserving of this incumbent treatment.

This move makes the Garland trade look even worse.

oeo
03-30-2008, 01:01 PM
Being on the major league roster does not mean one is of major league quality (see Macias, Jose and Erstad, Darin). He has been an abysmal hitter for years now and is undeserving of this incumbent treatment.

This move makes the Garland trade look even worse.

Uribe does a lot of things very, very bad, but he also has a lot of pop in his bat, and plays very good defense (when the effort is put forth). He's the only that's proven that he can play in the major leagues. Anderson and Quentin's history still haven't even warranted a fourth outfielder job.

stacksedwards
03-30-2008, 01:02 PM
This is ****ing bull ****. Just ****ing trade Anderson and let him play somewhere else. I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.
I don't think it matter if his name was Ozzie Guillen Jr. when you hit at about a .100 clip your not going to play

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 01:07 PM
Uribe does a lot of things very, very bad, but he also has a lot of pop in his bat, and plays very good defense (when the effort is put forth). He's the only that's proven that he can play in the major leagues. Anderson and Quentin's history still haven't even warranted a fourth outfielder job.
How on earth has Quentin's history not warranted a fourth OF job?! Minor league numbers are meaningful - and he tore the cover off the ball upon arriving in MLB in 2006. Anderson is a god defensively - something that is useful of a fourth OF.

KyWhiSoxFan
03-30-2008, 01:07 PM
Ramirez, Anderson, Uribe, and Quentin. Those are the names being argued about who should start and who should get more playing time from two positions (CF and 2B). Of those 4, Ramirez has the most upside if only for the fact that we don't know how good (or bad) he is. He has a chance to be really good, but it may take him a year through the league to get there.

Uribe figures to be the same guy we saw the last three years, regardless of what he batted in spring training. And spring training numbers is all that Anderson has going for him, finally putting up decent numbers, but what he does when it counts is all that matters, however, and the jury is still out on him.

Quentin has the least credentials of the four, and perhaps a lot of upside, but my take is the Sox will be a lot more patient with him and give him a chance to succeed and not rush to judgment on him.

So, with Owens out for now, I think they'll juggle Ramirez between second and CF and give some playing time to Anderson and Quentin. If Ramirez starts slowly, my guess is that Anderson would be given the next shot if Owens still has not returned from the DL. They might as well find out if he can play or not and do it early in the year.

I don't have a problem with the lineup as constructed for opening day. The arguments are not revolving around gamebreakers. These are the minor characters in the cast.

The thing that really matters is the pitching, and based on spring training, I'm not convinced the bullpen in particular has been fixed. But I would like to be pleasantly surprised.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 01:09 PM
But we have reason to believe that Anderson's spring means something? The guy had good springs in 2006 and 2007, as well. Much better chance than Uribe; Anderson didn't get 4 years of starting to prove he couldn't hit. Last year, Ozzie wouldn't play him because he had veteran hacker extraorniaire Erstad. Oh, and Anderson does hit better than Uribe. Anderson(or Quentin) in the lineup gives us much better chance to win than Uribe.




Uribe is the only one of the four that has actually proven to be a major leaguer (albeit not a very good one, but one nonetheless).
Does Ramirez have CF experience? Uribe's terrible. Look at this year v. last year - Iguchi/Uribe or Uribe/Cabrera. That's no better than a push offensively -oh, and we lost Jon Garland for the privilege of the even swap(we better get those draft choices).


And again, we need to play Uribe in order to get him out of town. You should all be cheering for Uribe so we can get something for him.
We had all off season to do that. And there's little evidence that Ozzie wants him off the team anyway. In fact, Williams didn't execute a single deal for his surplus all off season - not one.



BTW, I'm glad you managed to get one of your favorite words into yet another post.


No problem - did it again - see above. Start playing the better talent and you won't read it as much.

oeo
03-30-2008, 01:09 PM
How on earth has Quentin's history not warranted a fourth OF job?! Minor league numbers are meaningful - and he tore the cover off the ball upon arriving in MLB in 2006. Anderson is a god defensively - something that is useful of a fourth OF.

Because he hasn't done it in the major leagues.

I wasn't implying they shouldn't be with the team, I was just trying to make a point that they haven't proven jack **** in the big leagues yet.

BTW, Anderson is a 'god' defensively? What is Quentin, then, since he's apparently our best defensive outfielder?

You've changed a lot since the announcement came that your man Quentin wasn't going to be starting. Suddenly, you've hopped right on that Anderson bandwagon, and are willing to insert Ozuna in as our starting 2B/do whatever it takes to get Quentin in the starting lineup. All those people you were arguing with not even two hours ago, you suddenly agree with...

It wouldn't surprise me if you were okay with an outfield of Quentin/Bourgeious/whatever other garbage we have in Charlotte, just as long as Quentin was starting.

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 01:12 PM
He was fantastic in 2006 and deserves a shot. OEO, how would you ever break a minor leaguer into a major league lineup? You talk poorly of minor leaguers saying they haven't proven jack ****, but you don't realize that THEY NEED A CHANCE TO PROVE THEMSELVES. Quentin was injured last season, and his 2006 (as well as the most impressive minor league history in the organization) is indicative of what he brings to this team.

Craig Grebeck
03-30-2008, 01:15 PM
Because he hasn't done it in the major leagues.

I wasn't implying they shouldn't be with the team, I was just trying to make a point that they haven't proven jack **** in the big leagues yet.

BTW, Anderson is a 'god' defensively? What is Quentin, then, since he's apparently our best defensive outfielder?

You've changed a lot since the announcement came that your man Quentin wasn't going to be starting. Suddenly, you've hopped right on that Anderson bandwagon, and are willing to insert Ozuna in as our starting 2B/do whatever it takes to get Quentin in the starting lineup. All those people you were arguing with not even two hours ago, you agree with...

It wouldn't surprise me if you were okay with an outfield of Quentin/Bourgeious/whatever other garbage we have in Charlotte, just as long as Quentin was starting.
I clarified the Quentin statement. Go back and read it.

I wanted Ozuna as the starting 2b until Richar is healthy. I don't see how he's a worse option than Juan.

I don't want garbage in the lineup. I want us to not have wasted our two best hitting prospects (Cunningham, Carter) on two guys we refuse to give a shot to.

santo=dorf
03-30-2008, 01:15 PM
But we have reason to believe that Anderson's spring means something? The guy had good springs in 2006 and 2007, as well.
2006 flashback:
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1069799&postcount=18
He will be fine, it's obviously something in his head right now. He was dominating in Spring Training, and on Opening Night...since then there's just something that hasn't been working right. He'll pull it together, and like doublem said, as long as we're winning and our offense is clicking we can take the time to let him get into a groove.
Chisox1500: Did you not see him play in Spring Training? He was absolutely mashing the ball. Get over it, as long as we're winning games and still putting up great offensive numbers, give him the time to get into a groove. He's hitting in the 9 slot, we don't need great numbers from him, and when he does get going we will get great numbers from him.
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1177143&postcount=476
The amazing thing about this whole discussion:

Opening Night, Brian went 2/3 with a walk, and 2 RBI's. I seriously thought we had a Rookie of the Year on our hands. He had a great spring as well, which means this is a slump, and not what some think, that this is Brian Anderson and he will never improve. He's thinking too much, and you can't do that when you're at the plate.
:o::o:
You are a Mariotti-like windsock blowing only in the direction that management decides to go

So how come Anderson's great spring warranted playing time as late as June 2006 when he was hitting, but now, and before the 2007 season with the embarrassing Erstad signing, it doesn't mean something. :rolleyes:

Tragg
03-30-2008, 01:17 PM
I don't want garbage in the lineup. I want us to not have wasted our two best hitting prospects (Cunningham, Carter) on two guys we refuse to give a shot to.
That's exactly what we did if Quentin and Richar (when healthy) don't start or play a lot.
A very reactive, instead of proactive, offseason.

russ99
03-30-2008, 01:17 PM
I just don't trust Ozzie to make a change if someone is struggling (which Juan will, that is not debatable; he is absolute trash). He still ran Erstad out there with his .313 OBP all the way through April!

Yeah, but Uribe isn't "Grindy". :D:

At the end of the season, Ozzie was Uribe's greatest critic. I seriously doubt if Juan hits .200 and is lazy on the field, Ozzie will want to keep him there.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 01:17 PM
This will likely all work itself out when word gets around that Ramirez is a hacker and will swing at anything. Can anyone think of a reason why a pitcher would throw Ramirez a fastball?

btrain929
03-30-2008, 01:18 PM
Dye's gotta go. The signing wasn't bad, but it's time to move on with Quentin.

A lineup that makes sense:
Owens, Cabrera, Thome, Konerko, Swisher, Quentin, Pierzynski, Fields, Ramirez

That lineup is sexy. I'd probably switch Fields and Quentin, but that is loaded top to bottom.

russ99
03-30-2008, 01:19 PM
That's exactly what we did if Quentin and Richar (when healthy) don't start or play a lot.
A very reactive, instead of proactive, offseason.

I thought dealing for Cabrera and Swisher was quite proactive. Especially since neither were on the block, per se.

The problem is nobody wants to give us anything for our leftovers. But I think this will all shake out in a few months anyway.

oeo
03-30-2008, 01:20 PM
He was fantastic in 2006 and deserves a shot. OEO, how would you ever break a minor leaguer into a major league lineup? You talk poorly of minor leaguers saying they haven't proven jack ****, but you don't realize that THEY NEED A CHANCE TO PROVE THEMSELVES. Quentin was injured last season, and his 2006 (as well as the most impressive minor league history in the organization) is indicative of what he brings to this team.

You've just twisted this whole argument into your favor. Read the rest of the thread...the only reason I have Uribe starting is so we can gauge interest and deal him. I want Fields at 3B, Richar at 2B, Ramirez at SS, Quentin in RF, and Anderson in CF (although this one is iffy) at some point, and you should know this from my post history. While a lot of people are there drooling over Crede, and still wishing we had Iguchi, I've been defending Fields and Richar.

Yes, I'm Dusty Baker, and just want to see the crappy vets out there every year. :rolleyes:

santo=dorf
03-30-2008, 01:20 PM
This will likely all work itself out when word gets around that Ramirez is a hacker and will swing at anything. Can anyone think of a reason why a pitcher would throw Ramirez a fastball?
By then Owens will be back and Anderson will be sent down and Ramirez will be sent back to be the utility IF.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 01:21 PM
By then Owens will be back and Anderson will be sent down and Ramirez will be sent back to be the utility IF.

Unfortunately, that's probably true. But hopefully KW gives Ramirez some much needed time in AAA to develop.

btrain929
03-30-2008, 01:27 PM
You mean like noted Latino ballplayer Rob Mackowiak?

If Brian Anderson wants the starting CF job, he should try hitting major league pitching.

And sticking him at the end of the bench will let him prove that.......how?

He started the most games this spring of anyone. He faced a lot of quality SP's. He 200% earned a 2nd shot at starting CF, ESPECIALLY with Owens going down.

ksimpson14
03-30-2008, 01:31 PM
I like Alexei,but I don't think he's ML ready. Didn't even think he should've started with us, so I'm not thrilled about this. I mean, I like the kid and the type of player he is, it could be one of those great moves that can be significant, but yeah I would rather go with Swisher/Anderson and/or Quentin/Swisher though. This also makes me think the club doesn't like the idea of Swisher in CF for many games

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 01:33 PM
And sticking him at the end of the bench will let him prove that.......how?

He started the most games this spring of anyone. He faced a lot of quality SP's. He 200% earned a 2nd shot at starting CF, ESPECIALLY with Owens going down.

Can we at least let the team play a few games before all the outrage about poor Brian Anderson being mistreated begins. Nothing is set in stone. Look how many times things have changed this spring already. Uribe is starting at 2B. Uribe is waived. Ozuna is starting at 2B on Opening Day. Uribe is starting at 2B Opening Day. Fields is the 3B. Crede is the 3B. Swisher is playing center. Swisher is playing left. Etc. Etc. Nothing is set in stone. If Ramirez goes 0-12 in his first three games, everything may change.

btrain929
03-30-2008, 01:37 PM
Can we at least let the team play a few games before all the outrage about poor Brian Anderson being mistreated begins. Nothing is set in stone. Look how many times things have changed this spring already. Uribe is starting at 2B. Uribe is waived. Ozuna is starting at 2B on Opening Day. Uribe is starting at 2B Opening Day. Fields is the 3B. Crede is the 3B. Swisher is playing center. Swisher is playing left. Etc. Etc. Nothing is set in stone. If Ramirez goes 0-12 in his first three games, everything may change.

Hahaha, touche'.

CubKilla
03-30-2008, 01:38 PM
Ramirez belongs in the line-up but NOT in CF

It's Dankerific
03-30-2008, 01:39 PM
Can we at least let the team play a few games before all the outrage about poor Brian Anderson being mistreated begins. Nothing is set in stone. Look how many times things have changed this spring already. Uribe is starting at 2B. Uribe is waived. Ozuna is starting at 2B on Opening Day. Uribe is starting at 2B Opening Day. Fields is the 3B. Crede is the 3B. Swisher is playing center. Swisher is playing left. Etc. Etc. Nothing is set in stone. If Ramirez goes 0-12 in his first three games, everything may change.

My favorite line of reasoning. Let's wait and see, like history has nothing to do with the future. A mistake is a mistake.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 01:41 PM
Well hopefully Pie and Reed Johnson suck. Then i'll know a team looking for a Jermaine Dye.

FedEx227
03-30-2008, 01:42 PM
This is ****ing retarded. End of story. I love Ramirez but this is the wrong time, position and situation for him to play, especially over Anderson who won the Spring "COMPETITION" two years in a row.

gobears1987
03-30-2008, 01:46 PM
I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.:rolleyes: Just shut up already with your baseless ****. Please travel 8.1 miles north.

gobears1987
03-30-2008, 01:50 PM
Uribe just finished off a monster spring, too...

We have a situation where everyone in competition played very well. I'm sure things will straighten out and we'll get a better idea of a starting 9, but right now it's not that clear.And the starting 9 means nothing with Ozzie's lineups. People bitching about Anderson not starting need to realize that Ozzie will frequently change the lineup around to allow people like Anderson to get in there.

Taliesinrk
03-30-2008, 01:50 PM
Can we at least let the team play a few games before all the outrage about poor Brian Anderson being mistreated begins. Nothing is set in stone.

We have. It was called spring training.



Look how many times things have changed this spring already. Uribe is starting at 2B. Uribe is waived. Ozuna is starting at 2B on Opening Day. Uribe is starting at 2B Opening Day. Fields is the 3B. Crede is the 3B. Swisher is playing center. Swisher is playing left. Etc. Etc. Nothing is set in stone. If Ramirez goes 0-12 in his first three games, everything may change.

That's fine if it changes, but it's about the principle. What if it doesn't change? Why is BA NOT our starting CF at this point? Anyone. I can't believe that both Quentin and Anderson will be riding the bench for the unforseeable future.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 01:54 PM
What's wrong with Anderson being a 4th outfielder, defensive replacement?

He wasn't in competition to be the every day CF. He was in competition to make the roster.

Mission accomplished for BA.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 01:59 PM
:rolleyes: Just shut up already with your baseless ****. Please travel 8.1 miles north.
Hahahahahaha.

oeo
03-30-2008, 02:00 PM
Well hopefully Pie and Reed Johnson suck. Then i'll know a team looking for a Jermaine Dye.

Jermaine Dye can play CF?

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 02:13 PM
Jermaine Dye can play CF?
Fukodome can.

oeo
03-30-2008, 02:15 PM
Fukodome can.

One of the reasons Fukudome didn't sign here was because Dye was in RF.

getonbckthr
03-30-2008, 02:16 PM
One of the reasons Fukudome didn't sign here was because Dye was in RF.
True. But if the Cubs are in the race and Johnson and Pie suck i'm sure Fukodome would switch for the chance to win.

Daver
03-30-2008, 02:19 PM
Further proof that Ozzie Guillen is a moron.

This team won in 2005 despite the manager, not because of him.

oeo
03-30-2008, 02:20 PM
Further proof that Ozzie Guillen is a moron.

This team won in 2005 despite the manager, not because of him.

You still believe this ****?

FedEx227
03-30-2008, 02:46 PM
Further proof that Ozzie Guillen is a moron.

This team won in 2005 despite the manager, not because of him.

It's starting to look more and more like that, unfortunately. Not because of just this, but he always seems confused with his lineups, likes to double talk, go over his GM, etc. One second we want to stress OBP, then we don't. Then we want great defense up the middle, then we put Ramirez/Swisher in CF, stuff like this to me is just getting old.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 02:46 PM
Well hopefully Pie and Reed Johnson suck. Then i'll know a team looking for a Jermaine Dye.

Why did we sign Dye for a big contract (in a down year) , if we were going to trade for 2 more outfielders and sign a 3rd? Williams' first instincts were to trade him - when he couldn't do that, he signs him.
And now we have excess because we traded our best prospects for more outfielders. They'll either sit or be traded for $.25 on a dollar.

TornLabrum
03-30-2008, 02:47 PM
You mean like noted Latino ballplayer Rob Mackowiak?

If Brian Anderson wants the starting CF job, he should try hitting major league pitching.

I don't think it matter if his name was Ozzie Guillen Jr. when you hit at about a .100 clip your not going to play

:rolleyes: Just shut up already with your baseless ****. Please travel 8.1 miles north.

Quoting and ommenting on a post for which somebody has gotten a warning is not a good thing.

oeo
03-30-2008, 02:49 PM
It's starting to look more and more like that, unfortunately.

Yes...certainly. :rolleyes:

That comment is just as far off base as saying Ozzie favors Latino players. There is absolutely nothing to back it up, and in fact, by all reports, it couldn't be any more wrong.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 02:52 PM
I haven't seen him very good with the breaking ball, but as I mentioned yesterday, hopefully that was just the side-arming righty that got him all confused.

That said, I also mentioned that he would eventually be sent down.

At the games I went to last week, all I saw was him destroy fastballs.

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 02:53 PM
You still believe this ****?

:rolleyes:

oeo
03-30-2008, 02:54 PM
:rolleyes:

Very nice response.

I'm still waiting for someone to back up that asinine claim...

Daver just says that **** because he hasn't liked Ozzie from Day 1. I've yet to see him give any evidence as to why it would be true.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 02:56 PM
I thought dealing for Cabrera and Swisher was quite proactive. Especially since neither were on the block, per se.

The problem is nobody wants to give us anything for our leftovers. But I think this will all shake out in a few months anyway.
Well, we traded our 2 best minor league hitters for Richar and Quentin - and we got Richar before Cabrera and Quentin before Swisher. Are Richar and Quentin starting?

Both were completely reactive. We signed Uribe and then a few days later we react for the Angels offer for Cabrera...now were stuck with Uribe.
We signed Dye and traded one of our 2 best minor league hitters for Quentin. We look hard for a CF, but can't land one as a FA. THEN we react to Beane's offer of Swisher (not concidentally made AFTER we lost out on the others; and paid a premium price for it). If we knew that was coming, we never would have signed Dye and traded for Quentin.

I guess ultimately it boils down to what we do with Quentin, Richar, Fields and Anderson - the talented youngsters we have. Whether they play, whether we get good return in trade, or whether we get A ball pitcher fodder and the constant refrain of "no value".

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 02:57 PM
Very nice response.

I'm still waiting for someone to back up that asinine claim...

Daver just says that **** because he hasn't liked Ozzie from Day 1. I've yet to see him give any evidence as to why it would be true.

In 2005 the Sox won because of good pitching, good defense, timely hitting, and a few players having career years that they haven't come close to duplicating.

You haven't provided any evidence to the contrary besides your usual whining about other people's opinions that may differ from yours.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 02:59 PM
Both were completely reactive. We signed Uribe and then a few days later we react for the Angels offer for Cabrera...now were stuck with Uribe.
We signed Dye and traded one of our 2 best young hitters for Quentin. We look hard for a CF, but can't land one as a FA. THEN we react to Beane's offer of Swisher. If we knew that was coming, we never would have signed Dye and traded for Quentin.



:roflmao:Oh how we will miss our single A first baseman.

FedEx227
03-30-2008, 02:59 PM
In 2005 the Sox won because of good pitching, good defense, timely hitting, and a few players having career years that they haven't come close to duplicating.

You haven't provided any evidence to the contrary besides your usual whining about other people's opinions that may differ from yours.

Exactly. And largely since the All-Star Break in 2006 we've seen very questionable personnel decisions and horrible bullpen management en route to a very mediocre record since that time. Obviously injuries play a very large part in that, but the management of the lineup last year was a joke... why were Andy Gonzalez and Luis Terrero getting playing time is still a mystery.

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 03:02 PM
Exactly. And largely since the All-Star Break in 2006 we've seen very questionable personnel decisions and horrible bullpen management en route to a very mediocre record since that time.

We've also seen injuries and players getting past their prime.

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:02 PM
We've also seen injuries and players getting past their prime.

Some of them never even had a prime.

FedEx227
03-30-2008, 03:03 PM
:roflmao:Oh how we will miss our single A first baseman.

To be fair he was a career .284/.373 hitter. He's 22 years old, where do you expect him to play? Just because he was in Single A is not in any way a reflection on his skills... everyone has to start somewhere. It's not as if every superstar in the major leagues started in AAA.

Daver
03-30-2008, 03:03 PM
Very nice response.

I'm still waiting for someone to back up that asinine claim...

Daver just says that **** because he hasn't liked Ozzie from Day 1. I've yet to see him give any evidence as to why it would be true.

I would say trotting Mackowiak out to center, as well as Erstad is proof.

Playing Angel Gonzalez every day, at every position other than the position he actually played is proof.

Playing Josh Fields in left is proof.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 03:05 PM
To be fair he was a career .284/.373 hitter. He's 22 years old, where do you expect him to play? Just because he was in Single A is not in any way a reflection on his skills... everyone has to start somewhere. It's not as if every superstar in the major leagues started in AAA.


That is the point. Who cares? We filled a need in Quentin who is ready now for a 22 year old A baller. Who knows what he will become, if anything.

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:06 PM
I would say trotting Mackowiak out to center, as well as Erstad is proof.

Playing Angel Gonzalez every day, at every position other than the position he actually played is proof.

Playing Josh Fields in left is proof.

Andy Gonzalez. He is forgettable, though.

:redneck

FedEx227
03-30-2008, 03:07 PM
That is the point. Who cares? We filled a need in Quentin who is ready now for a 22 year old A baller. Who knows what he will become, if anything.

Oh I know, but you were laughing as if being in Single A was a problem. He was our best hitting prospect, plain and simple, doesn't matter where he was. Obviously he could turn into everything but being in Single A when your 22 is not a reflection of your skills.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 03:07 PM
I would say trotting Mackowiak out to center, as well as Erstad is proof.

Playing Angel Gonzalez every day, at every position other than the position he actually played is proof.

Playing Josh Fields in left is proof.

And taking a chance with a rookie closer in a pennant race, oh wait that one worked out so forget about that one.

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 03:09 PM
And taking a chance with a rookie closer in a pennant race, oh wait that one worked out so forget about that one.

You're right. Ozzie should get full credit for a move by KW in acquiring Jenks.

He should be exempt from all criticism because of OMGZ 2005!!!!!!111

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 03:09 PM
Oh I know, but you were laughing as if being in Single A was a problem. He was our best hitting prospect, plain and simple, doesn't matter where he was. Obviously he could turn into everything but being in Single A when your 22 is not a reflection of your skills.

I was laughing because there is no reason to get worked up about a guy that far from the major leagues who I am sure 99% of us have never seen. Especially when we got Carlos in return.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 03:10 PM
You're right. Ozzie should get full credit for a move by KW in acquiring Jenks.

He should be exempt from all criticism because of OMGZ 2005!!!!!!111

You cant have it both ways, dismissing 2005 and hammering him for decisions since then. I never said he should be exempt from criticism dont be ridiculous.

oeo
03-30-2008, 03:11 PM
In 2005 the Sox won because of good pitching, good defense, timely hitting, and a few players having career years that they haven't come close to duplicating.

Would the 2005 team ever been assembled without Ozzie? And if you believe that it would have, why didn't it happen during the Jerry Manuel era?

He also won 83 games in 2004 without his best two hitters, and followed up 2005 with a 90-win season. If there's a fluke in there, it's the 2007 season.

How does a team win despite their manager? He has to be doing something...

You haven't provided any evidence to the contrary besides your usual whining about other people's opinions that may differ from yours.

:lol:

Isn't that the point of a forum? You disagree with someone's opinion, and debate it. What are you here for, the milk and cookies?

chisoxfanatic
03-30-2008, 03:17 PM
It's starting to look more and more like that, unfortunately. Not because of just this, but he always seems confused with his lineups, likes to double talk, go over his GM, etc. One second we want to stress OBP, then we don't. Then we want great defense up the middle, then we put Ramirez/Swisher in CF, stuff like this to me is just getting old.

Completely agreed. Ozzie went to the same school of coaching as Denis Savard, unfortunately.

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 03:18 PM
Isn't that the point of a forum? You disagree with someone's opinion, and debate it. What are you here for, the milk and cookies?

I thought the point was to agree with the popular opinion and if you dissent, then you're a dark cloud.

Cuck the Fubs
03-30-2008, 03:29 PM
Isn't that the point of a forum? You disagree with someone's opinion, and debate it. What are you here for, the milk and cookies?

Wait a minute..........

There's no double stuffs and milk here :o:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:34 PM
I don't think it matter if his name was Ozzie Guillen Jr. when you hit at about a .100 clip your not going to play


At what point in his career at any level has Anderson hit at a .100 clip

:rolleyes:

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:35 PM
I thought the point was to agree with the popular opinion and if you dissented, then you're a dark cloud.


I thought that was the WSI way...

2005 duuuuudeeeeeeee!!1

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:35 PM
That lineup is sexy. I'd probably switch Fields and Quentin, but that is loaded top to bottom.

any lineup with Jerry Owens leading off shoudl not be described as "sexy" unless you like the way Owens looks in baseball pants.

Owens is an ugly ugly leadoff prospect, from a ballplaying standpoint. Nauseatingly ugly.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 03:37 PM
My favorite line of reasoning. Let's wait and see, like history has nothing to do with the future. A mistake is a mistake.

Uhh, ok. Then why doesn't this history have anything to do with the future?

Brian Anderson's major league career:

.216/.279/.353/.632

So...to sum things up:

We're allowed to use the past to assume that Brian Anderson won't be given a chance to play more in the future. However, if I used the past to proclaim that Brian Anderson is a crappy player, I bet you'd say that I was overreacting, or that he needs more time, correct? Not too much of a double standard there...

We have. It was called spring training.

Yes, it's called Spring Training. That's it. It's not called "meaningful games." BA had a great Spring Training. Awesome. Maybe it means something. Or maybe, given the fact that BA has had a great Spring Training every year since 05, it means nothing. We won't know until BA plays in the regular season. But excuse me for not throwing a fit because the Sox have decided to start Alexei Ramirez for one game.

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:37 PM
any lineup with Jerry Owens leading off shoudl not be described as "sexy" unless you like the way Owens looks in baseball pants.

Owens is an ugly ugly leadoff prospect, from a ballplaying standpoint. Nauseatingly ugly.


BUT HEZ FAST!

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:38 PM
Can we at least let the team play a few games before all the outrage about poor Brian Anderson being mistreated begins. Nothing is set in stone. Look how many times things have changed this spring already. Uribe is starting at 2B. Uribe is waived. Ozuna is starting at 2B on Opening Day. Uribe is starting at 2B Opening Day. Fields is the 3B. Crede is the 3B. Swisher is playing center. Swisher is playing left. Etc. Etc. Nothing is set in stone. If Ramirez goes 0-12 in his first three games, everything may change.

Well...ok...but in the past Ozzie's moronic decisions to start people in CF who have no business playing CF from a defensive standpoint (Mackowiack, a hobbled Erstad, and now Ramirez/Swisher/Owens) have cost Anderson playing time and put him into horrible matchups (see: his 17 AB in 2007 vs. Sabathia, Verlander, Santana)...

But I mean...MAYBE he'll treat Anderson differently this year...even though...he's....already....named a ****ty defensive CF....as opening day CF....:?:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:40 PM
Yes...certainly. :rolleyes:

That comment is just as far off base as saying Ozzie favors Latino players. There is absolutely nothing to back it up, and in fact, by all reports, it couldn't be any more wrong.

It's almost as baseless as your assertion that a guy who in his 3 non-world series seasons has had his team woefully underperform somehow deserves credit for his pitching rotation having a flukily awesome season and playoff run :shrug:

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 03:41 PM
Well...ok...but in the past Ozzie's moronic decisions to start people in CF who have no business playing CF from a defensive standpoint (Mackowiack, a hobbled Erstad, and now Ramirez/Swisher/Owens) have cost Anderson playing time and put him into horrible matchups (see: his 17 AB in 2007 vs. Sabathia, Verlander, Santana)...

But I mean...MAYBE he'll treat Anderson differently this year...even though...he's....already....named a ****ty defensive CF....as opening day CF....:?:

Yeah, because as all the BA fans know, the Opening Day starting centerfielder always plays every game after that.

Oh noes, BA started the first game in 2006 but then was on the bench in game 2, which BA fans spent the next 2 seasons complaining about. Argument destructing....:tantrum:

BTW, funny you bring up BA and horrible matchups, since, you know, if he did start tomorrow he'd be facing none other than....C.C. Sabathia...

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 03:42 PM
Well...ok...but in the past Ozzie's moronic decisions to start people in CF who have no business playing CF from a defensive standpoint (Mackowiack, a hobbled Erstad, and now Ramirez/Swisher/Owens) have cost Anderson playing time and put him into horrible matchups (see: his 17 AB in 2007 vs. Sabathia, Verlander, Santana)...

But I mean...MAYBE he'll treat Anderson differently this year...even though...he's....already....named a ****ty defensive CF....as opening day CF....:?:

I wish Ozzie would place a higher emphasis on outfield defense. With the shaky starting rotation the Sox have, there will be lots of long flies to the gap. Anderson is the best candidate to chase those down.

It's unlikely the Sox will receive big offensive numbers from Anderson, Owens or Ramirez, so why not go with the guy who take doubles away?

Daver
03-30-2008, 03:44 PM
Uhh, ok. Then why doesn't this history have anything to do with the future?

Brian Anderson's major league career:

.216/.279/.353/.632

So...to sum things up:

We're allowed to use the past to assume that Brian Anderson won't be given a chance to play more in the future. However, if I used the past to proclaim that Brian Anderson is a crappy player, I bet you'd say that I was overreacting, or that he needs more time, correct? Not too much of a double standard there...




Baseball is not an offense only sport the last time I checked.

Did they change the rules?

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 03:44 PM
I wish Ozzie would place a higher emphasis on outfield defense. With the shaky starting rotation the Sox have, there will be lots of long flies to the gap. Anderson is the best candidate to chase those down.

It's unlikely the Sox will receive big offensive numbers from Anderson, Owens or Ramirez, so why not go with the guy who take doubles away?
None of us will ever fully understand Ozzie's managing philosophy, so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. I agree with your statement that we should definitely take the best defender from that kind of group.

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:44 PM
I wish Ozzie would place a higher emphasis on outfield defense. With the shaky starting rotation the Sox have, there will be lots of long flies to the gap. Anderson is the best candidate to chase those down.

It's unlikely the Sox will receive big offensive numbers from Anderson, Owens or Ramirez, so why not go with the guy who take doubles away?

Because, in a disturbing trend for the Sox the past few seasons, they sacrifice defense for offense, something I'm getting tired of paying good money to watch.

soxinem1
03-30-2008, 03:46 PM
This is ****ing bull ****. Just ****ing trade Anderson and let him play somewhere else. I wonder if his name was Brian Andersonez if he would be starting.


Double bullseye!!!

Especially when the team leads the league in errors and highest ERA for good by end of April.

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 03:46 PM
It's almost as baseless as your assertion that a guy who in his 3 non-world series seasons has had his team woefully underperform somehow deserves credit for his pitching rotation having a flukily awesome season and playoff run :shrug:

You must be here for the milk and cookies.

Daver
03-30-2008, 03:46 PM
None of us will ever fully understand Ozzie's managing philosophy, so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. I agree with your statement that we should definitely take the best defender from that kind of group.

I do not have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 03:46 PM
Because, in a disturbing trend for the Sox the past few seasons, they sacrifice defense for offense, something I'm getting tired of paying good money to watch.

I wouldn't say they got much offense from their center fielders the last two seasons.

Taliesinrk
03-30-2008, 03:47 PM
Yes, it's called Spring Training. That's it. It's not called "meaningful games." BA had a great Spring Training. Awesome. Maybe it means something. Or maybe, given the fact that BA has had a great Spring Training every year since 05, it means nothing. We won't know until BA plays in the regular season. But excuse me for not throwing a fit because the Sox have decided to start Alexei Ramirez for one game.

Not meaningful games.. ok. But we won't know until BA plays CONSISTANTLY in the regular season. Something that those stats you threw out earlier do not show. Give him a legit shot, and then judge him. To date, he has been afforded no such opportunity.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:48 PM
You cant have it both ways, dismissing 2005 and hammering him for decisions since then. I never said he should be exempt from criticism dont be ridiculous.

:rolling:

You pro-Ozzie people are the only ones who "want it both ways"

You can name maybe one or two good "Decisions" Ozzie made in his entire managerial career (that is, other than the no-brainers)...but that somehow is supposed to outweigh the myriad embarrassingly ****ty decisions he's made from 2006 on just because he happened to helm a very very good defensive and pitching team in 2005?

Would the 2005 team ever been assembled without Ozzie? And if you believe that it would have, why didn't it happen during the Jerry Manuel era?

Considering Kenny hired Ozzie because Kenny thought he was the manager he wanted to run the team Kenny wanted to build--a team based on speed, defense, and pitching, I think it's pretty safe to say that the 2005 team would have been assembled w/o Ozzie.

I think it's also pretty safe to assume that, considering KW has emphatically claimed that Ozzie (or Cooper) has never recommended any of his personnel acuisitions


He also won 83 games in 2004 without his best two hitters, and followed up 2005 with a 90-win season. If there's a fluke in there, it's the 2007 season.


2004 was fine. 2006 was a little more than a "90 win season". Seems like you're leaving out some data--like a 90-win season in which we dropped out of the playoff hunt with an embarrassing stretch run in which our pitching and our defense failed us due to

a.) stupid bullpen decisions by a certain someone
and
b.) stupid defensive decisions by a certain someone


How does a team win despite their manager? He has to be doing something...


Yeah, he's been lately making stupid decisions and the team, by virtue of playing as well as they can with the lineup and pitching decisions he makes, is winning in spite of him.

If you can't understand how a team could conceivably win "in spite" of their coach, then I don't know what to tell you. It's not exactly the theory of relativity. It's more like "the basic way sports work"



Isn't that the point of a forum? You disagree with someone's opinion, and debate it. What are you here for, the milk and cookies?[/quote]

Taliesinrk
03-30-2008, 03:48 PM
I wouldn't say they got much offense from their center fielders the last two seasons.

So we agree. They traded defense for NOTHING. Perhaps, they would get something if HE were given a chance out there.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 03:48 PM
Would the 2005 team ever been assembled without Ozzie? And if you believe that it would have, why didn't it happen during the Jerry Manuel era?

He also won 83 games in 2004 without his best two hitters, and followed up 2005 with a 90-win season. If there's a fluke in there, it's the 2007 season.

How does a team win despite their manager? He has to be doing something...



The decline was not just 2007 ..it's the 2nd half of 2006 and 2007.
Ozzie certainly was instrumental in changing the offense in 2005. (The key to 2005, imo, wasn't the offense but was defense and pitching. )
He found a good balance in 2005 - unfortunately, after winning the WS, Ozzie continued to advance his offensive preferences, well beyond any reasonable balance: he added swing-at-everything hitters (his preferred style) to the team; he degraded defense in return for merely average offensive production; and the only young hitters he showed any interest in were, again, slap hitters. (and his way of handling difficult youngsters is to banish them).
There's no reason for Uribe to be on this team - he's a bad hitter and his D isn't overly compelling; we had far better 2nd baseman in Iguchi and he had "no value". Essentially Ozzie has picked Uribe to start over Anderson or Quentin...Uribe hits like Ozzie did.

But JR said Ozzie did a fantastic job last year; and KW rewarded him with a huge extension in a 72 win season. So he isnt' going anywhere.

chisoxmike
03-30-2008, 03:49 PM
I wouldn't say they got much offense from their center fielders the last two seasons.

No, they haven't. Which is why I don't understand why they don't play the best defensive player for that position. Less balls hit the ground, less pitches the pitchers have to throw...

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:49 PM
Yeah, because as all the BA fans know, the Opening Day starting centerfielder always plays every game after that.

Oh noes, BA started the first game in 2006 but then was on the bench in game 2, which BA fans spent the next 2 seasons complaining about. Argument destructing....:tantrum:

BTW, funny you bring up BA and horrible matchups, since, you know, if he did start tomorrow he'd be facing none other than....C.C. Sabathia...

Ok...but here's the thing: do you really believe that?

Do you really believe BA will get a solid amount of At-Bats and that Ramirez just "happens" to be starting opening day?

Do you really believe that BA is the "starting" CF and just happens to be getting opening day off?

I really can't believe that you believe that.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 03:50 PM
Baseball is not an offense only sport the last time I checked.

Did they change the rules?

Nope. But they certainly didn't give you the ability to use another hitter for someone who has been a black hole in the lineup.

No one is saying offense only matters. But it's foolish to think that any player can put up those kind of offensive numbers on a permanent basis and remain in the lineup. I mean hell, Brad Ausmus had an OPS .030 higher, and he played a more valuable defensive position.

And before this goes into an argument I really don't care to get into, I'm not saying Anderson will not improve on those numbers. I was simply making a point based on what that poster said about the past predicting the future.

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 03:52 PM
So we agree. They traded defense for NOTHING. Perhaps, they would get something if HE were given a chance out there.

My point is that there is no good offensive candidate who can competently play center, so they should go with the guy who can catch some of the numerous long fly balls that Floyd and Danks are going to be serving up. That person is Brian Anderson.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 03:54 PM
Nope. But they certainly didn't give you the ability to use another hitter for someone who has been a black hole in the lineup.

No one is saying offense only matters. But it's foolish to think that any player can put up those kind of offensive numbers on a permanent basis and remain in the lineup. I mean hell, Brad Ausmus had an OPS .030 higher, and he played a more valuable defensive position.

And before this goes into an argument I really don't care to get into, I'm not saying Anderson will not improve on those numbers. I was simply making a point based on what that poster said about the past predicting the future.

If it was Swisher OR Anderson or Quenting OR Anderson, or "someone from whom we can expect a modicum of offensive production" OR Anderson then this would be an adequate argument.

But when you're putting ****ty defensive CF's out there who will likely only be marginal offensive improvements over even the worst Anderson's capable of (i.e. his .220 2006 avg), what's the ****ing point?

You said yourself Ramirez won't hit once teams figure out he's a hacker. And we have seen that Owens is pretty much a **** hitter.

We aren't the Giants or Diamondbacks...we'll finish 7th or so in the AL in run production no matter who we run out there. Why not give our pitchers a break by not putting CF's out there who have 2 left feet?

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 03:58 PM
[quote=fquaye149;1832638]:rolling:

You pro-Ozzie people are the only ones who "want it both ways"

You can name maybe one or two good "Decisions" Ozzie made in his entire managerial career (that is, other than the no-brainers)...but that somehow is supposed to outweigh the myriad embarrassingly ****ty decisions he's made from 2006 on just because he happened to helm a very very good defensive and pitching team in 2005?


Or it is just that much easier to point out a bad decision, because it is out in the open to anyone when it goes wrong. I have never said Ozzie should not be criticized for what has happened since. But all of you ozzie haters just say 2005 was a fluke and say we won despite Ozzie? When was the last time a team won a championship despite its manager? (not counting Ozzie of course)

Daver
03-30-2008, 03:59 PM
Nope. But they certainly didn't give you the ability to use another hitter for someone who has been a black hole in the lineup.



How much offense did you get from Darin Erstad in center?

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:00 PM
Or it is just that much easier to point out a bad decision, because it is out in the open to anyone when it goes wrong. I have never said Ozzie should not be criticized for what has happened since. But all of you ozzie haters just say 2005 was a fluke and say we won despite Ozzie? When was the last time a team won a championship despite its manager? (not counting Ozzie of course)


Bad decisions are things that baseball managers SHOULDN'T make. Baseball managers have such a small effect on their team's success or failure that when they deliberately harm their team, it's a BIG DEAL. Ozzie, even at his best, isn't HELPING HIS TEAM that much, so yeah it's a big ****ing deal when he makes moronic decisions that harm his team even a moderate amount.

And when he does it a lot? well..:angry::angry::angry:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:01 PM
How much offense did you get from Darin Erstad in center?

:rolling:

To be fair, Mackowiack almost won a Silver Slugger in 2006

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 04:01 PM
Baseball managers have such a small effect on their team's success or failure that when they deliberately harm their team, it's a BIG DEAL.

You think he is deliberately harming the team?

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:03 PM
Not meaningful games.. ok. But we won't know until BA plays CONSISTANTLY in the regular season. Something that those stats you threw out earlier do not show. Give him a legit shot, and then judge him. To date, he has been afforded no such opportunity.

He's simply not going to get that opportunity. This team has too many options to put BA in there and give him two months to produce. BA will get a shot at some point. It's not likely going to come in the form of playing everyday. That may not be fair, but it's the reality. Not taking into consideration injuries, rest days or any potential trades, this team has 4 OFs battling for 1 spot. Swisher and Dye have guaranteed spots. That leaves one OF spot open for BA, Quentin, Ramirez and Owens. Given how Ozzie uses his bench, they are all going to play. The one who makes the most of their opportunities will get the most playing time as the season moves on. BA would be advised not to waste a single plate appearance or defensive opportunity, because if he does, others will get a shot.

Ok...but here's the thing: do you really believe that?

Do you really believe BA will get a solid amount of At-Bats and that Ramirez just "happens" to be starting opening day?

Do you really believe that BA is the "starting" CF and just happens to be getting opening day off?

I really can't believe that you believe that.

Did I say I believe that? No. I simply said Ramirez is playing on Opening Day, and I find it ironic that people who constantly bitch about BA sitting in the 2nd game of 2006 now believe that it's a sure thing Ramirez will play in center everyday.

We've all watched Ozzie. He loves to use different lineups. And this year, he has arguably as much versatility in making out the lineup as he has ever had. BA is going to get chances to play. Are they going to run him out there everyday for 2 months straight and wait for him to show something? No. And they shouldn't. Like I said in reply to the previous post, this team has 4 (3 until Owens returns) options for 1 open OF spot. Ramirez is getting the call tomorrow. I'd bet Quentin and Anderson both find themselves in the starting lineup for a game before this time next Sunday. Whoever performs best will get the most at-bats. And if Ramirez struggles early, he will get the hook in favor of Anderson or Quentin.

I know everyone has their favorites for who should start, but the truth is that this decision isn't cut and dry at all. Anderson is the best defensive centerfielder, but hasn't cut it at the plate thus far in his major league career. Ramirez tore it up in Spring Training, but he's raw. Quentin probably has the highest upside of the three, and KW specifically targeted Quentin, giving up a top prospect to acquire him. Owens, while probably the worst of the four, is the only player who could be a threat on the bases at the top of the order.

They all have things they bring to the team. If we could combine all 4, we'd have some Carlos Beltran type of player out there. But as it stands, there all figure to receive some playing time initially.

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 04:05 PM
Bad decisions are things that baseball managers SHOULDN'T make. Baseball managers have such a small effect on their team's success or failure that when they deliberately harm their team, it's a BIG DEAL. Ozzie, even at his best, isn't HELPING HIS TEAM that much, so yeah it's a big ****ing deal when he makes moronic decisions that harm his team even a moderate amount.

And when he does it a lot? well..:angry::angry::angry:
Who says this is a bad decision? I didn't know it turned out that way. What was our record in '08?

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:06 PM
How much offense did you get from Darin Erstad in center?

Not much. And the team won 72 games. What's the point? :?:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:08 PM
Did I say I believe that? No. I simply said Ramirez is playing on Opening Day, and I find it ironic that people who constantly bitch about BA sitting in the 2nd game of 2006 now believe that it's a sure thing Ramirez will play in center everyday.

We've all watched Ozzie. He loves to use different lineups. And this year, he has arguably as much versatility in making out the lineup as he has ever had. BA is going to get chances to play. Are they going to run him out there everyday for 2 months straight and wait for him to show something? No. And they shouldn't. Like I said in reply to the previous post, this team has 4 (3 until Owens returns) options for 1 open OF spot. Ramirez is getting the call tomorrow. I'd bet Quentin and Anderson both find themselves in the starting lineup for a game before this time next Sunday. Whoever performs best will get the most at-bats. And if Ramirez struggles early, he will get the hook in favor of Anderson or Quentin.

I know everyone has their favorites for who should start, but the truth is that this decision isn't cut and dry at all. Anderson is the best defensive centerfielder, but hasn't cut it at the plate thus far in his major league career. Ramirez tore it up in Spring Training, but he's raw. Quentin probably has the highest upside of the three, and KW specifically targeted Quentin, giving up a top prospect to acquire him. Owens, while probably the worst of the four, is the only player who could be a threat on the bases at the top of the order.

They all have things they bring to the team. If we could combine all 4, we'd have some Carlos Beltran type of player out there. But as it stands, there all figure to receive some playing time initially.

I only ask if you believed that because, since you don't really believe what I laid out, why it is ridiculous that I wouldn't believe it either.

Yes, I know Ozzie uses different lineups throughout the year. To a certain extent that's kind of the point--I believe that this will be a platoon situation, with Ramirez and Anderson splitting time in center.

That's what frustrates me, since Ramirez has no business being in CF

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:09 PM
Who says this is a bad decision? I didn't know it turned out that way. What was our record in '08?

THIS isn't a bad decision yet. However, it resembles many of the bad decisions Ozzie's made in the past re: CF

gobears1987
03-30-2008, 04:09 PM
It's almost as baseless as your assertion that a guy who in his 3 non-world series seasons has had his team woefully underperform somehow deserves credit for his pitching rotation having a flukily awesome season and playoff run :shrug:
Thanks for the contribution Jay, now please go back to the Sun Times.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:09 PM
Bad decisions are things that baseball managers SHOULDN'T make. Baseball managers have such a small effect on their team's success or failure that when they deliberately harm their team, it's a BIG DEAL. Ozzie, even at his best, isn't HELPING HIS TEAM that much, so yeah it's a big ****ing deal when he makes moronic decisions that harm his team even a moderate amount.

And when he does it a lot? well..:angry::angry::angry:

Christ, fquaye, settle down...

The season hasn't even started yet. Save the energy for when Ozzie starts making these decisions on an everyday basis, not when he's only making them in theory. If he's running Ramirez out there in center everyday and Ramirez is sucking, fine, I'll be right there with you crucifying Ozzie. But let's at least let a few games play out under the manager who has changed his mind about 30 times this Spring Training already.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:09 PM
You think he is deliberately harming the team?

No, but I think he's making DELIBERATE decisions.

Those decisions harm the team because, although Ozzie truly wants to win, these decisions he makes deliberately (i.e. based on a reasoned philosophy of how Ozzie wants to play) are poor decisions

Daver
03-30-2008, 04:10 PM
Not much. And the team won 72 games. What's the point? :?:

With Ramirez and Owens in center, 72 is a good goal to shoot for.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:10 PM
Thanks for the contribution Jay, now please go back to the Sun Times.

The position that "Ozzie is a lousy manager" is not one unique to Jay Mariotti.

Most intelligent baseball minds who DON'T work for the wall street journal think Ozzie's a lousy manager

QCIASOXFAN
03-30-2008, 04:11 PM
:rolleyes: At some people going nuts over this. Let it play out for a bit before COMPLETELY freaking out!

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:12 PM
Christ, fquaye, settle down...

The season hasn't even started yet. Save the energy for when Ozzie starts making these decisions on an everyday basis, not when he's only making them in theory. If he's running Ramirez out there in center everyday and Ramirez is sucking, fine, I'll be right there with you crucifying Ozzie. But let's at least let a few games play out under the manager who has changed his mind about 30 times this Spring Training already.

I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF

when you put these together with the myriad stupid decisions Ozzie's made in the past 2 years, I don't feel like I'm putting the horse before the cart in getting frustrated

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:14 PM
:rolleyes: At some people going nuts over this. Let it play out for a bit before COMPLETELY freaking out!

This offseason has been a parade of stupid decisions by our manager.

Being a baseball manager is not a tough job--all you have to do is NOT MAKE STUPID LINEUP DECISIONS. Joe Torre built a HOF managing career doing nothing else but "NOT MAKING OBVIOUSLY STUPID LINEUP DECISIONS"

We have a manager that seems to do little BUT make obviously stupid lineup decisions

Der, MAYBE it could work out....but this has nothing to do with 2005 nor with "wehdder da games iz played yet" but whether he is making decisions that fly in the face of all logical thought

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:15 PM
I only ask if you believed that because, since you don't really believe what I laid out, why it is ridiculous that I wouldn't believe it either.

Yes, I know Ozzie uses different lineups throughout the year. To a certain extent that's kind of the point--I believe that this will be a platoon situation, with Ramirez and Anderson splitting time in center.

That's what frustrates me, since Ramirez has no business being in CF

I don't agree. I think we're going to see plenty of Swisher in center as the season progresses.

Just to further prove my point. Today is March 30th. 4 days ago was March 26th (I'm great at math...). Here's the Trib headline from March 26th...

Swisher to lead off, play center for White Sox

3 days later, Ozzie announced the opening day centerfielder would be Alexei Ramirez. Why isn't it plausible to believe that maybe, just maybe, Ozzie isn't committed to playing Ramirez in center everyday?

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 04:15 PM
I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF

when you put these together with the myriad stupid decisions Ozzie's made in the past 2 years, I don't feel like I'm putting the horse before the cart in getting frustrated

Well, at least they have solid starting pitching to bail them out.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF

when you put these together with the myriad stupid decisions Ozzie's made in the past 2 years, I don't feel like I'm putting the horse before the cart in getting frustrated

Ozzie decisions or KW decisions?

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
With Ramirez and Owens in center, 72 is a good goal to shoot for.

Do you really think that Anderson in center would change that number to, say, 95?

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
I don't agree. I think we're going to see plenty of Swisher in center as the season progresses.

Just to further prove my point. Today is March 30th. 4 days ago was March 26th (I'm great at math...). Here's the Trib headline from March 26th...



3 days later, Ozzie announced the opening day centerfielder would be Alexei Ramirez. Why isn't it plausible to believe that maybe, just maybe, Ozzie isn't committed to playing Ramirez in center everyday?
[/size][/font]

Where do I say I think he'll play Ramirez in center every day?

The point is that Ramirez has no business in center EVER

A. Cavatica
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
You still believe this ****?

Daver's not the only one.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:16 PM
Ozzie decisions or KW decisions?

Who knows. They seem quite in keeping with Ozzie's managing philosophy though.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 04:17 PM
Where do I say I think he'll play Ramirez in center every day?

The point is that Ramirez has no business in center EVER

When Ramirez threw out Byrd at home from center, it was all over.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:17 PM
Do you really think that Anderson in center would change that number to, say, 95?

So if a personnel decision's not going to be a 23 win difference, why make it, even if it's the right decision?

Ok....

I would agree that the Anderson hoopla wasn't as big a deal last year as it was in 2006, but that doesn't mean it wasn't ridiculous.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:18 PM
I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF

when you put these together with the myriad stupid decisions Ozzie's made in the past 2 years, I don't feel like I'm putting the horse before the cart in getting frustrated

We don't know that it was solely Ozzie making these decisions. KW has a significant stake in some of these decisions as well.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 04:19 PM
We don't know that it was solely Ozzie making these decisions. KW has a significant stake in some of these decisions as well.

Sure. But Kenny has generally shown that he has a clue how to run a team (except for extending Ozzie).

for instance, many of his personnel moves last year seemed to be intended to FORCE Ozzie's hand. At some point, you have to say that Fields being sent to Charlotte has a lot to do with Kenny's acknowledgement that Fields won't get any playing time at the MLB level as long as Ozzie has Crede around to satisfy his hard-on for washed up veterans :shrug:

QCIASOXFAN
03-30-2008, 04:20 PM
I feel like I've been in a coma for 5 months and it's late August and we're 20 games out from reading this thread.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:20 PM
So if a personnel decision's not going to be a 23 win difference, why make it, even if it's the right decision?

Ok....

I would agree that the Anderson hoopla wasn't as big a deal last year as it was in 2006, but that doesn't mean it wasn't ridiculous.

Didn't say that. I was addressing the question to Daver and wondering if he thinks a team with Owens/Ramirez in center is a 72 team win, then does he think this team is done regardless of the centerfielder? Because it's going to take about 95 wins to win the division.

Although now that I think about it, I believe Daver said in another thread that he thinks this is a 3rd place team, so maybe it's a moot question.

Daver
03-30-2008, 04:21 PM
Didn't say that. I was addressing the question to Daver and wondering if he thinks a team with Owens/Ramirez in center is a 72 team win, then does he think this team is done regardless of the centerfielder? Because it's going to take about 95 wins to win the division.

Although now that I think about it, I believe Daver said in another thread that he thinks this is a 3rd place team, so maybe it's a moot question.

This team isn't good enough to compete for third.

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 04:22 PM
I feel like I've been in a coma for 5 months and it's late August and we're 20 games out from reading this thread.
And that's exactly what's going on in fquaye's world right now.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 04:24 PM
Sure. But Kenny has generally shown that he has a clue how to run a team (except for extending Ozzie).

for instance, many of his personnel moves last year seemed to be intended to FORCE Ozzie's hand. At some point, you have to say that Fields being sent to Charlotte has a lot to do with Kenny's acknowledgement that Fields won't get any playing time at the MLB level as long as Ozzie has Crede around to satisfy his hard-on for washed up veterans :shrug:

Kenny had longed for a washed up veteran, Erstad for years. Kenny chose to keep crede around and send Fields down. I believe Kenny is keeping Massett around soley because of him being out of options and doesnt want to look silly for dumping the guy he traded for.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 04:24 PM
I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF



Those are all horrible decisions. I think this team is really gonna suck.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 04:25 PM
This team isn't good enough to compete for third.

We are not good enough to compete for third?:scratch:

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 04:26 PM
Sure. But Kenny has generally shown that he has a clue how to run a team (except for extending Ozzie).

for instance, many of his personnel moves last year seemed to be intended to FORCE Ozzie's hand. At some point, you have to say that Fields being sent to Charlotte has a lot to do with Kenny's acknowledgement that Fields won't get any playing time at the MLB level as long as Ozzie has Crede around to satisfy his hard-on for washed up veterans :shrug:

Ok... so right now you are named interim manager for this team.

KW still hasn't dealt Crede. Are you telling me that you would bench him in favor of Fields?

That makes no sense.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 04:28 PM
Sure. But Kenny has generally shown that he has a clue how to run a team (except for extending Ozzie).

for instance, many of his personnel moves last year seemed to be intended to FORCE Ozzie's hand. At some point, you have to say that Fields being sent to Charlotte has a lot to do with Kenny's acknowledgement that Fields won't get any playing time at the MLB level as long as Ozzie has Crede around to satisfy his hard-on for washed up veterans :shrug:

Why? Kenny has his own reasons for these moves. I know everyone wants to believe that Kenny only cares about winning this year, but regardless of how much he cares about this year, he does have to keep in mind the future. Crede and Masset don't have much value right now. But they are assets, at least to some extent.

If Kenny was so dead set against Masset and Crede being around, he could rectify it very quickly by releasing them. And he has the power to do so. But he hasn't.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 04:28 PM
Ok... so right now you are named interim manager for this team.

KW still hasn't dealt Crede. Are you telling me that you would bench him in favor of Fields?

That makes no sense.

No you do the job right and deal Crede for what you can get. It's Crede, not David Wright we're talking about.

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 04:30 PM
Ok... so right now you are named interim manager for this team.

KW still hasn't dealt Crede. Are you telling me that you would bench him in favor of Fields?

That makes no sense.
Right on. Though I have no idea whether Crede will break out of his spring slump, you can't keep a player of his kind on the bench on a regular basis. If he plays well, teams will be interested in him and will offer more to get him. I'm just afraid we lose him to FA or we trade him for nothing.

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 04:32 PM
No you do the job right and deal Crede for what you can get. It's Crede, not David Wright we're talking about.

Well that's not Ozzie's department.

How does Ozzie get the blame for Crede still being around? You NEED to play Crede in order to trade him. You're right. He isn't David Wright. That's why he must be showcased or show something to attract prospective suitors.

If no one was offering anything for Crede and KW sent him packing, that would have caused an even bigger uproar. Benching him for a rookie would be an even bigger mistake.

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 04:35 PM
Right on. Though I have no idea whether Crede will break out of his spring slump, you can't keep a player of his kind on the bench on a regular basis. If he plays well, teams will be interested in him and will offer more to get him. I'm just afraid we lose him to FA or we trade him for nothing.



I'm sure Joe Crede will play for the Sox for his entire career.

http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/watchdog/blog/ScottBoras.jpg

Elephant
03-30-2008, 04:35 PM
Well that's not Ozzie's department.

How does Ozzie get the blame for Crede still being around? You NEED to play Crede in order to trade him. You're right. He isn't David Wright. That's why he must be showcased or show something to attract prospective suitors.

If no one was offering anything for Crede and KW sent him packing, that would have caused an even bigger uproar. Benching him for a rookie would be an even bigger mistake.

I didn't say it was. The point is KW muffed this one.

Showcase schmowcase. Watch if/when we deal Crede midseason and we get a Durham/Iguchi type package. Yeah, that's worth stunting a possible future home run champ's career.

TornLabrum
03-30-2008, 04:36 PM
Why? Kenny has his own reasons for these moves. I know everyone wants to believe that Kenny only cares about winning this year, but regardless of how much he cares about this year, he does have to keep in mind the future. Crede and Masset don't have much value right now. But they are assets, at least to some extent.

If Kenny was so dead set against Masset and Crede being around, he could rectify it very quickly by releasing them. And he has the power to do so. But he hasn't.

First, for whoever it was who said Crede should be traded (not this post obviously), can you name one team who has indicated they want him?

Now to address this post: Crede won't go to the minors to rehab. If Williams releases Crede, he eats the salary and can't get anything for him. If Crede plays and shows he's healthy, he can be used in a trade before July 31. If Crede is traded, Fields returns.

Masset is out of options. Wasserman isn't. Kenny Williams loves live arms. Masset stays. Wasserman goes down.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 04:38 PM
First, for whoever it was who said Crede should be traded (not this post obviously), can you name one team who has indicated they want him?

Now to address this post: Crede won't go to the minors to rehab. If Williams releases Crede, he eats the salary and can't get anything for him. If Crede plays and shows he's healthy, he can be used in a trade before July 31. If Crede is traded, Fields returns.

Masset is out of options. Wasserman isn't. Kenny Williams loves live arms. Masset stays. Wasserman goes down.

Who cares? Masset can't get guys out and Wassserman can. He was the only bright spot in the damn bullpen last year besides the obvious. Unbelievable this team.

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 04:39 PM
Being a baseball manager is not a tough job--all you have to do is NOT MAKE STUPID LINEUP DECISIONS. Joe Torre built a HOF managing career doing nothing else but "NOT MAKING OBVIOUSLY STUPID LINEUP DECISIONS"


What do you think Torre (a HOF manager who never makes "obviously stupid lineup decisions") would do in this situation?

If I recall, Melky Cabrera sat on the bench even though they had a few under preforming outfielders.

But let's not think clearly. Let's just blame Guillen (even for things he doesn't control). He's dumb and you're smart.

Dan Mega
03-30-2008, 04:41 PM
But let's not think clearly. Let's just blame Guillen (even for things he doesn't control). He's dumb and you're smart.

I blame Guillen for trotting Mackowiak out in CF.

Or is that fquaye's fault?

Tragg
03-30-2008, 04:42 PM
Do you really think that Anderson in center would change that number to, say, 95?
No, but why play a terrible veteran like Erstad over Anderson whose current level of play was no worse than Erstad's and who obviously could improve?
That wouldn't get us 95 wins, but I doubt we'll ever return to the land of 95 without playing and developing talented youngsters. Williams acquired talented young hitters, but Ozzie puts them on his bench because he needs Uribe's bat out there.
The only way the bad veterans don't play is if they are off the team. Maybe this is on Williams - it's his job to get rid of the bad veterans and to acquire GOOD swing at everything veterans for Ozzie.

thomas35forever
03-30-2008, 04:43 PM
I'm sure Joe Crede will play for the Sox for his entire career.


I never said he would. Losing him is inevitable after this season, if not sooner. What I said was I hope we can get a decent player in exchange for him in a trade, like a good starting pitcher for example.

QCIASOXFAN
03-30-2008, 04:44 PM
I blame Guillen for trotting Mackowiak out in CF.

Why would you blame him for that?:scratch:

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 04:46 PM
I blame Guillen for trotting Mackowiak out in CF.

Or is that fquaye's fault?


That was a valid criticism in 2006. One could also say that Ozzie didn't really have many options either. But I'd have to agree with you... I wouldn't have done it either.

HOWEVER, criticizing Ozzie for playing Crede makes no sense. I really need it explained to me.

A. Cavatica
03-30-2008, 04:52 PM
You play the better player. Until Crede remembers how to swing the bat, that would be Fields. It's not up to the Sox to help Crede earn a big payday in free agency.

Daver
03-30-2008, 04:54 PM
You play the better player.

That is why Crede is playing and Fields is in Charlotte.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 04:55 PM
That is why Crede is playing and Fields is in Charlotte.

Baseball is not just defensive.:redneck

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 05:00 PM
You play the better player. Until Crede remembers how to swing the bat, that would be Fields. It's not up to the Sox to help Crede earn a big payday in free agency.

Fields hit .244 last year and Crede only played in 47 games. It's hard to say who is better.

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 05:04 PM
You play the better player. Until Crede remembers how to swing the bat, that would be Fields. It's not up to the Sox to help Crede earn a big payday in free agency.

I don't understand about 80% of the people on this message board. Seriously. I'm amazed sometimes. People complain that KW never gets enough back in trades and then want the guys on the trading block to sit on the bench. :?::scratch::?::scratch:

Crede and Fields cannot play at the same time.
If you want to trade Crede, Crede must play.
Sox Want to trade Crede
Fields cannot play
Crede plays


How is this not simple?

DoItForDanPasqua
03-30-2008, 05:09 PM
I don't understand about 80% of the people on this message board. Seriously. I'm amazed sometimes. People complain that KW never gets enough back in trades and then want the guys on the trading block to sit on the bench. :?::scratch::?::scratch:

Crede and Fields cannot play at the same time.
If you want to trade Crede, Crede must play.
Sox Want to trade Crede
Fields cannot play
Crede plays


How is this not simple?

I hope the Sox did not base this decision on increasing Joe Crede's trade value alone. They need to start the player that they think will help them win more games. The season hasn't even started yet.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 05:11 PM
Crede and Fields cannot play at the same time.
If you want to trade Crede, Crede must play.
Sox Want to trade Crede
Fields cannot play
Crede plays


How is this not simple?

Well I was told Ozzie is a moron for playing Crede and sending down Fields.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 05:13 PM
I'm not necessarily upset about this decision in particular. I'm upset that Ozzie continues to make stupid lineup decisions based on his stupid philosophy about hackers and grinders and veterans.

So far we had

1.) Fields sent down to Charlotte, and the bionic man named as our starting 3B
2.) Owens named starting CF until he got hurt
3.) Masset over Wasserman
4.) A guy (Ramirez) who has shown that he couldn't find his ass in CF named opening day CF

when you put these together with the myriad stupid decisions Ozzie's made in the past 2 years, I don't feel like I'm putting the horse before the cart in getting frustrated


The right decision, very little trade value for Crede until a contender loses their starting 3rd baseman and will "overpay" for a 1 season player. Fields still needs to work on his defense and strikeout frequency...this will not stunt his development in the long run.
Not a good decision...so I agree with you.
The right decision. We don't have the organizational depth to just let Masset go, the 12 pitcher on a staff will not have a huge impact in April....Wassemann is only a phone call away. If our 12th pitcher is having a huge impact on our team...then we have a bigger problem with our starting pitching.
We'll see on this one. It's only one game....and by all reports (local and national press) Ramirez has turned heads. He's played CF before...he's not as good as BA...but I'd put him ahead of Owens or Swisher in CF.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:13 PM
And that's exactly what's going on in fquaye's world right now.

Oh really? Could have fooled me. I thought I was just frustrated that our manager continually makes stupid decisions.

Thanks for explaining what I really was frustrated about:rolleyes:

Daver
03-30-2008, 05:13 PM
Well I was told Ozzie is a moron for playing Crede and sending down Fields.

KW controls the roster, not Ozzie.

Ozzie is a moron for mismanaging the players he has on his roster.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:15 PM
Ok... so right now you are named interim manager for this team.

KW still hasn't dealt Crede. Are you telling me that you would bench him in favor of Fields?

That makes no sense.

What makes no sense about giving the majority of playing time to the player best equipped to help the team win?

I suppose given the option of either

a.) a guy coming off back surgery who has looked to be a shell of his former self in ST

and

b.) a young player who doesn't field his position well, but has a ton of power, is healthy, and has tons of upside

it ONLY MAKES SENSE to choose option a :rolleyes:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:16 PM
Why? Kenny has his own reasons for these moves. I know everyone wants to believe that Kenny only cares about winning this year, but regardless of how much he cares about this year, he does have to keep in mind the future. Crede and Masset don't have much value right now. But they are assets, at least to some extent.

If Kenny was so dead set against Masset and Crede being around, he could rectify it very quickly by releasing them. And he has the power to do so. But he hasn't.

It's hard to explain to your owner why you have outright released a guy you just extended for 8 million because you thought you could either move him or that he would be able to play at a decent level

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:17 PM
Right on. Though I have no idea whether Crede will break out of his spring slump, you can't keep a player of his kind on the bench on a regular basis. If he plays well, teams will be interested in him and will offer more to get him. I'm just afraid we lose him to FA or we trade him for nothing.

A player of his kind? You mean a below average hitter who once was a great fielder but is now coming off back surgery and has shown and incredible decrease in range of motion?

Yeah, you really want to get a player of his kind in the lineup EVERY DAY :rolleyes:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:20 PM
What do you think Torre (a HOF manager who never makes "obviously stupid lineup decisions") would do in this situation?

If I recall, Melky Cabrera sat on the bench even though they had a few under preforming outfielders.

Torre had done a lot more to earn the benefit of the doubt for ONE questionable decision. Ozzie won a WS, yes, but he hardly has done what Torre has to earn the benefit of the doubt for his innumerable lousy decisions


But let's not think clearly. Let's just blame Guillen (even for things he doesn't control). He's dumb and you're smart.

Let's accuse me of not thinking clearly even though I'm the one rationally pointing out Ozzie's lousy decisions and you're the one shouting 2005 at the top of your lungs with your fingers in your ears.

Am I smart? Who knows. Is Ozzie dumb? Indubitably.

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 05:21 PM
What makes no sense about giving the majority of playing time to the player best equipped to help the team win?

I suppose given the option of either

a.) a guy coming off back surgery who has looked to be a shell of his former self in ST

and

b.) a young player who doesn't field his position well, but has a ton of power, is healthy, and has tons of upside

it ONLY MAKES SENSE to choose option a :rolleyes:

Why didn't your boy, Joe Torre (never makes stupid decisions) play someone like Melky Cabrera (a young player, healthy, upside) instead of Bernie Williams in 2005 (a guy who looked to be a shell of his former self in the REGULAR SEASON).

Sounds like a move Guillen (always makes stupid decisions) would make.

champagne030
03-30-2008, 05:23 PM
This is insane. He cannot judge a flyball and looks like Uribe when thrown an offspeed pitch. I didn't think so before (I thought it was just Ozzie being a dumbass), but I'm beginning to think that it's true about Ozzie and a certain offense on these boards that will get you banned.

BadBobbyJenks
03-30-2008, 05:23 PM
KW controls the roster, not Ozzie.

Ozzie is a moron for mismanaging the players he has on his roster.

Getting back to the original point of the thread, can you or someone else tell me about Alexei in CF? The one chance I got to see him last week, he saw no action out there so I really have no idea what he looks like getting reads in center. He did play centerfield in the WBC though did he not?

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:24 PM
That was a valid criticism in 2006. One could also say that Ozzie didn't really have many options either. But I'd have to agree with you... I wouldn't have done it either.

HOWEVER, criticizing Ozzie for playing Crede makes no sense. I really need it explained to me.

Ozzie has established time and time again that he won't play the young kids if he has a guy he thinks is a proven veteran.

I know I'm setting myself for a "conspiracy" and "tinfoil hat" flame series, but most of the moves KW made during the end of last season seemed to be made as an acquiescence to the fact that Ozzie won't play rookies if he has veteran talent. Iguchi for a bucket of balls is the most obvious example of KW trading someone apparently for the sole purpose of preventing Ozzie from playing him, but Mackowiack and Cintron seem to be other jettisons under this idea.

What choice did KW have but to send Fields down? Even though he will give the Sox a better chance, Crede will start every game till his back falls off and Fields won't get the at bats he deserves. From Kenny's pov, he has the choice of

a.) keeping Fields on the MLB roster, where he belongs, and have Ozzie sit him every everloving day

or

b.) send Fields down to Charlotte, where he'll at least get regular AB's.

Since KW promised Ozzie not to tell him who to play (a huge mistake) what choice did he have? Ozzie forced his hand.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:24 PM
Why didn't your boy, Joe Torre (never makes stupid decisions) play someone like Melky Cabrera (a young player, healthy, upside) instead of Bernie Williams in 2005 (a guy who looked to be a shell of his former self in the REGULAR SEASON).

Sounds like a move Guillen (always makes stupid decisions) would make.


My boy? Who are you Michael Wilbon?

Why don't you read the post I made that deals with this question :rolleyes:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 05:25 PM
Getting back to the original point of the thread, can you or someone else tell me about Alexei in CF? The one chance I got to see him last week, he saw no action out there so I really have no idea what he looks like getting reads in center. He did play centerfield in the WBC though did he not?

This is insane. He cannot judge a flyball and looks like Uribe when thrown an offspeed pitch. I didn't think so before (I thought it was just Ozzie being a dumbass), but I'm beginning to think that it's true about Ozzie and a certain offense on these boards that will get you banned.


Champagne's post pretty well sums it up

also: He seems to have a pretty good arm :shrug:

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 05:30 PM
Let's accuse me of not thinking clearly even though I'm the one rationally pointing out Ozzie's lousy decisions and you're the one shouting 2005 at the top of your lungs with your fingers in your ears.



I know I'm setting myself for a "conspiracy" and "tinfoil hat" flame series, but

To be fair, I tried to find a quote where I mentioned 2005 in this thread, but I didn't find one. Can you help me out?

voodoochile
03-30-2008, 05:38 PM
I feel like I've been in a coma for 5 months and it's late August and we're 20 games out from reading this thread.

Yeah, and can you imagine the posts if Ramirez, Anderson, Owens, Quentin and Uribe had all had BAD Springs?

Lukin13
03-30-2008, 05:40 PM
This preseason has been hillarious!

Ozzie kept saying he has some hard decisions at 3rd, 2nd, CF and the last bullpen spot.

He apparently is going with: Crede, Uribe, Ramirez and Masset.

I give him a F.

Wrong on every single front, and he picked IMHO the third best option at a few positions.

Unbelievable.

This sucks.

Brian26
03-30-2008, 05:44 PM
Oh really? Could have fooled me. I thought I was just frustrated that our manager continually makes stupid decisions.

Thanks for explaining what I really was frustrated about:rolleyes:

I gave up on Ozzie after he brought Boone Logan in to face Derrek Lee last year with the bases loaded.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 05:45 PM
This preseason has been hillarious!

Ozzie kept saying he has some hard decisions at 3rd, 2nd, CF and the last bullpen spot.

He apparently is going with: Crede, Uribe, Ramirez and Masset.

I give him a F.

Wrong on every single front, and he picked IMHO the third best option at a few positions.

Unbelievable.

This sucks.

This isn't all on Ozzie Guillen. Ken Williams has more say on who is on the club. Guillen manages the players Williams gives him.

The bottom line is, Kenny didn't accomplish what he should have-trading Crede, Uribe, Anderson, and Masset.

Owens needs to be given a shot in CF when he gets off the DL, because Swisher leading off is going to get old real quick.

Daver
03-30-2008, 05:46 PM
This isn't all on Ozzie Guillen. Ken Williams has more say on who is on the club. Guillen manages the players Williams gives him.

The bottom line is, Kenny didn't accomplish what he should have-trading Crede, Uribe, Anderson, and Masset.

Owens needs to be given a shot in CF when he gets off the DL, because Swisher leading off is going to get old real quick.

So we need to overlook the fact that Owens can't play CF?

sox1970
03-30-2008, 05:48 PM
So we need to overlook the fact that Owens can't play CF?

Unfortunately, yes.

Who else is going to lead off?

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 05:49 PM
but I'm beginning to think that it's true about Ozzie and a certain offense on these boards that will get you banned.

Ozzie refers to Jon Garland as Judy?:smile:

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 05:51 PM
The bottom line is, Kenny didn't accomplish what he should have-trading Crede, Uribe, Anderson, and Masset.

Owens needs to be given a shot in CF when he gets off the DL, because Swisher leading off is going to get old real quick.

How do you "create a market" for Crede (FA at the end of the season), Uribe (coming off a bad year), Anderson (coming off two mediocre seasons, self acknowledge that he wasn't applying himself) and Masset (mediocre results at all stops above AA)?

I'd put Ramirez and/or Anderson ahead of Owens on the depth chart.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 05:57 PM
How do you "create a market" for Crede (FA at the end of the season), Uribe (coming off a bad year), Anderson (coming off two mediocre seasons, self acknowledge that he wasn't applying himself) and Masset (mediocre results at all stops above AA)?

I'd put Ramirez and/or Anderson ahead of Owens on the depth chart.

They could have traded any and all of them. The market is the market. If it meant that all they would get is A and AA prospects, then so be it. Now we're stuck with a bunch of question marks going into the season. And the media is going to talk about these guys for months, which can only be a distraction to the team. But hey, Go Sox.

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 06:01 PM
They could have traded any and all of them. The market is the market. If it meant that all they would get is A and AA prospects, then so be it.


In this thread, people were still complaining about what RAY DURHAM brought back in a trade SIX YEARS AGO.

Daver
03-30-2008, 06:11 PM
Unfortunately, yes.

Who else is going to lead off?

You want to play a guy that can't hit for average or power, and doesn't walk, because he is your lead off hitter?

Good luck winning seventy ball games.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 06:15 PM
You want to play a guy that can't hit for average or power, and doesn't walk, because he is your lead off hitter?

Good luck winning seventy ball games.

So they're going to use a run producer in the 1-hole? Makes sense.

balke
03-30-2008, 06:21 PM
I agree with the move. Ramirez showed close to the same as Anderson this spring, and has less of a checkered past. Anderson will get more playing time if anyone falters, and that can pay off big.

One thing I don't like, Ozuna should be in versus Sabathia. I do understand the thought of setting the starting lineup to what you think your best players are though.

Glad to see the depth is good enough to do some bitching this year.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:21 PM
So they're going to use a run producer in the 1-hole? Makes sense.

Swisher's not going to hit 3, 4, or 5

You want to waste a run producer at six at the expense of a great OBP guy at 1?

:?:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:22 PM
I agree with the move. Ramirez showed close to the same as Anderson this spring,

Except despite being as spotty a hitter, he can't field his position in CF. But yeah, even though Anderson outperformed him on both sides of the ball, he "Showed close to the same" as Anderson

and has less of a checkered past. Anderson was a teenage runaway!

Daver
03-30-2008, 06:23 PM
So they're going to use a run producer in the 1-hole? Makes sense.

Makes more sense than using a player that does a fantastic job of not getting on base, and can't play his position.


This isn't rocket surgery to anyone not named Ozzie Guillen.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:24 PM
They could have traded any and all of them. The market is the market. If it meant that all they would get is A and AA prospects, then so be it. Now we're stuck with a bunch of question marks going into the season. And the media is going to talk about these guys for months, which can only be a distraction to the team. But hey, Go Sox.

I think it's an example of players having more potential worth to their team than in "the market".

I'm willing to give Crede a little more time to show if he can make it back from the surgery...if he can, we have GG defense along with strong offense at 3B, if Uribe could put up .260-20-70 as a starting 2B with 2005 type defense..that's great production from the 2nd base position. If Anderson can deliver .270-15-75 while delivering the type of defense he's capable of...we're solid at CF. These are all calculated risks...but I think they're worth taking over the type of talent we'd get in return for a trade.

sox1970
03-30-2008, 06:25 PM
Swisher's not going to hit 3, 4, or 5

You want to waste a run producer at six at the expense of a great OBP guy at 1?

:?:

What I want is Dye traded, and Quentin in RF, but I'll have to wait until at least July for that.

This roster is in shambles if you axe me.

balke
03-30-2008, 06:27 PM
Except despite being as spotty a hitter, he can't field his position in CF. But yeah, even though Anderson outperformed him on both sides of the ball, he "Showed close to the same" as Anderson

Anderson was a teenage runaway!

their SLG% was very close. Anderson had a higher OBP, Ramirez had a higher avg.

Ramirez had 6 more RBI.

Hitting wise, they showed about the same, Ramirez overall might have shown more. Anderson has messed up big twice in the past. He's found himself a way onto the roster, he needs to keep fighting if he wants to be a permanent starter. He'll lose every close battle like this, because he's already dropped the ball twice before.


Better at defense, probably. That won't make him opening day starter. He might get more playing time in the long run if he keeps hitting. That's really all he deserves at this point.

Tragg
03-30-2008, 06:31 PM
How do you "create a market" for Crede (FA at the end of the season), Uribe (coming off a bad year), Anderson (coming off two mediocre seasons, self acknowledge that he wasn't applying himself)

You don't for Uribe - he's terrible. (Yet somehow, he's Ozzie's starter at 2nd).

As for Anderson, the Sox (Ozzie) hurt his value by mismanaging him. He really got 1/2 a season trial - that's it. And he was no worse than his successors (Mack, ERstad, Owens) and much better in the field. We won't get anything for him. And despite all that, he'd still bring more than Owens would in trade. What's checkered is Guillen's general development of young players.


ON another subject, the debate shouldn't be Ramirez v. Anderson or Quinten. It should be Ozuna v. Ramirez and Anderson v. Quinten. What is Uribe doing on this team?

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:32 PM
Except despite being as spotty a hitter, he can't field his position in CF. But yeah, even though Anderson outperformed him on both sides of the ball, he "Showed close to the same" as Anderson

It's one game that Ramirez has been named the starter. We didn't cut BA or anyone else...just one game.

Sure Ramirez hasn't proven himself yet..but he's the only CF option that brings the combination of lead off hitter type speed (which Anderson doesn't have) with potentially better defense than Owens or Swisher.

The only way we make the jump to really contending this year and winning 90+ games is to roll the dice here and there and hope to catch lightening in a bottle. We're set pretty much everywhere on this team other than CF or 2B...so that's where we'll probably see some mixing and matching until the players prove during the regular season who belongs in which role.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:38 PM
the Sox (Ozzie) hurt his value by mismanaging him. He really got 1/2 a season trial - that's it. What's checkered is Guillen's general development of young players.

Jenks turned out OK. Anderson didn't. Ozzie helped Garland turn the corner after replacing Manuel. Jury's out on Fields, Richar, Owens, Floyd, etc. What other young talent has he really had to work with?

As far as Anderson goes....Ozzie could have handled it better...but so could BA. He had almost 400 ABs to prove himself...and he didn't do it. BA has publically stated several times that he didn't have the right work ethic, focus, etc.. the past few years. To paint him as a "victim" is inaccurate.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:38 PM
It's one game that Ramirez has been named the starter. We didn't cut BA or anyone else...just one game.

He just plain shouldn't be playing CF at all. That's all. I'm not accusing Ozzie of being an idiot because he's "made Ramirez his full time starter", I'm accusing Ozzie of being an idiot because Ramirez is going to get more starts in CF this year than he should (that number would be zero)


Sure Ramirez hasn't proven himself yet..but he's the only CF option that brings the combination of lead off hitter type speed (which Anderson doesn't have) with potentially better defense than Owens or Swisher.


I'm excited about having Ramirez on this team. I think he brings a lot to the table. I don't think he's there yet but I think he will be soon. The problem I have with Ramirez isn't with him at the plate. It's the fact that he's shown time and again in ST to be a butcher with the glove in CF.

Play him at 2nd instead of Uribe if you want him in the lineup.


The only way we make the jump to really contending this year and winning 90+ games is to roll the dice here and there and hope to catch lightening in a bottle. We're set pretty much everywhere on this team other than CF or 2B...so that's where we'll probably see some mixing and matching until the players prove during the regular season who belongs in which role.


I agree with that first part. But you don't catch lightning in a bottle by playing players out of position.

If you're saying Ramirez should be playing at 2B, sure, I can get behind that.

Ramirez plays bad CF. Period. If you're going to put Ramirez in CF, you might as well put Swisher in CF and Ramirez in LF.

Ramirez is really really really really bad at CF

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:39 PM
What I want is Dye traded, and Quentin in RF, but I'll have to wait until at least July for that.

This roster is in shambles if you axe me.

I agree. But playing players in moronic spots is not the answer. :shrug:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:42 PM
Jenks turned out OK. Anderson didn't. Ozzie helped Garland turn the corner after replacing Manuel. Jury's out on Fields, Richar, Owens, Floyd, etc. What other young talent has he really had to work with?

As far as Anderson goes....Ozzie could have handled it better...but so could BA. He had almost 400 ABs to prove himself...and he didn't do it. BA has publically stated several times that he didn't have the right work ethic, focus, etc.. the past few years. To paint him as a "victim" is inaccurate.

Ozzie mismanaged Fields last year as well. If Ozuna hadn't gotten hurt, Fields would have had about 200 AB.

That's two top prospects Ozzie butchered.

If Jenks hadn't come out slow he might have been butchered as well.

Ozzie simply has no patience developing players. That doesn't make Anderson a "victim"--Fields succeeded with much of the same handicaps Anderson faced--but it certainly doesn't speak well for our manager's ability to be patient with young players.

Ozzie is so similar to Dusty Baker it makes me want to puke. Ozzie's crimes aren't nearly as stupid as Dusty starting Corey ****ing Patterson over Jay Bruce, but it's the same model

Tragg
03-30-2008, 06:45 PM
Jenks turned out OK. Anderson didn't. Ozzie helped Garland turn the corner after replacing Manuel. Jury's out on Fields, Richar, Owens, Floyd, etc. What other young talent has he really had to work with?

As far as Anderson goes....Ozzie could have handled it better...but so could BA. He had almost 400 ABs to prove himself...and he didn't do it. BA has publically stated several times that he didn't have the right work ethic, focus, etc.. the past few years. To paint him as a "victim" is inaccurate.You're right about the pitchers.
I notice a big difference in his handling of and patience with pitchers. It may be because of Cooper, I don't know. (Cooper v. Cora/Walker - huge difference). You could add Cotts - they turned him into an excellent pitcher (for 1 year).
They aren't victims - they just aren't developed. The season was lost last year, and Ozzie still wouldn't just put the kids out there and let them learn.
The only one he showed any interest in was Owens - a swing at everything slapper, so no suprise there.

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:50 PM
The problem I have with Ramirez isn't with him at the plate. It's the fact that he's shown time and again in ST to be a butcher with the glove in CF.

Play him at 2nd instead of Uribe if you want him in the lineup.

If you're saying Ramirez should be playing at 2B, sure, I can get behind that.

Ramirez plays bad CF. Period. If you're going to put Ramirez in CF, you might as well put Swisher in CF and Ramirez in LF.

Ramirez is really really really really bad at CF

I'm surprised by your assessment...I thought Ramirez has had significant experience at both SS and CF before coming here and that 2B was his "new" position where his defense was suspect.

Well...if he's as bad as you say he his....I'm pretty sure that will be exposed on a cold, blustery day in Cleveland...so the experiment won't last long.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 06:55 PM
I'm surprised by your assessment...I thought Ramirez has had significant experience at both SS and CF before coming here and that 2B was his "new" position where his defense was suspect.

Well...if he's as bad as you say he his....I'm pretty sure that will be exposed on a cold, blustery day in Cleveland...so the experiment won't last long.

Cuba=/= America.

When they signed him there were claims that he was a CF/SS but that CF part was pretty easily put to rest by watching him play.

He has a good arm but can't play CF to save his life. He misjudges flyballs, and that's unforgivable for a CF.

As for the second part, how long did Ozzie stick with Rob Mackowiak in CF? What makes you think he wont' stick with Ramirez as long?

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:57 PM
Ozzie mismanaged Fields last year as well. If Ozuna hadn't gotten hurt, Fields would have had about 200 AB.

That's two top prospects Ozzie butchered.

If Jenks hadn't come out slow he might have been butchered as well.

Ozzie simply has no patience developing players. That doesn't make Anderson a "victim"--Fields succeeded with much of the same handicaps Anderson faced--but it certainly doesn't speak well for our manager's ability to be patient with young players.

Ozzie is so similar to Dusty Baker it makes me want to puke. Ozzie's crimes aren't nearly as stupid as Dusty starting Corey ****ing Patterson over Jay Bruce, but it's the same model

So he "might have" butchered Fields or Jenks and those count as real mistakes he made? Can you give me another example of a position player prospect he "actually" mishandled (not "might have" or "would have")?

Has Fields ever been accused of a lack of work ethic, focus or maturity? That's Anderson's SELF ASSESSMENT of his performance the past few years. I'm a big BA fan and think he could still be a solid CF. His problems his first two years in the major leagues are mostly of his own doing, with Ozzie partly to blame...not the other way around.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 06:57 PM
Cuba=/= America.

When they signed him there were claims that he was a CF/SS but that CF part was pretty easily put to rest by watching him play.

He has a good arm but can't play CF to save his life. He misjudges flyballs, and that's unforgivable for a CF.

As for the second part, how long did Ozzie stick with Rob Mackowiak in CF? What makes you think he wont' stick with Ramirez as long?

That's the problem--he will. He's making the wrong choices right off the bat.

I've seen this song and dance before so has everyone else. If you choose not to recognize it, fine. I'll be right next to you in a month complaining when it wasn't, in fact "just one game, relax."

TomBradley72
03-30-2008, 06:59 PM
Cuba=/= America.

As for the second part, how long did Ozzie stick with Rob Mackowiak in CF? What makes you think he wont' stick with Ramirez as long?

Well if you can judge fly balls in Cuba....I'm pretty sure you can judge fly balls in America. Like I said....I just haven't heard anyone else assessing his CF defense so badly. If Ozzie hasn't learned from the Mack fiasco...we're done for anyway.

Elephant
03-30-2008, 07:00 PM
Well if you can judge fly balls in Cuba....I'm pretty sure you can judge fly balls in America. Like I said....I just haven't heard anyone else assessing his CF defense so badly. If Ozzie hasn't learned from the Mack fiasco...we're done for anyway.

You can also be a butcher in either country. :shrug:

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:01 PM
So he "might have" butchered Fields or Jenks and those count as real mistakes he made? Can you give me another example of a position player prospect he "actually" mishandled (not "might have" or "would have")?

A REAL mistake he made was playing Ozuna at 3B when Crede got hurt. Fields should have been starting every day.

People bitch and bitch and bitch about Fields's strikeouts. Well, guess what--had he played more, we might have seen an increased ability to hit the fastball and work counts.

This isn't an abstract thing. Here are rookies Ozzie's developed:

Jenks

Here are rookies he has deliberately avoided playing even when his team was out of it:

Sweeney
Anderson
Fields
Richar

But yeah...I'm just being "hypothetical" here :rolleyes:


Has Fields ever been accused of a lack of work ethic, focus or maturity? That's Anderson's SELF ASSESSMENT of his performance the past few years. I'm a big BA fan and think he could still be a solid CF. His problems his first two years in the major leagues are mostly of his own doing, with Ozzie partly to blame...not the other way around.If anything that MAKES MY ****ING POINT. Fields is a model ballplayer, and even he wasn't allowed to play because Ozzie had a ****ty veteran (Ozuna) he could plug in at 3B.

It's not hard to see unless you deliberately refuse to see it.

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:02 PM
Well if you can judge fly balls in Cuba....I'm pretty sure you can judge fly balls in America. Like I said....I just haven't heard anyone else assessing his CF defense so badly. If Ozzie hasn't learned from the Mack fiasco...we're done for anyway.'

Well, guy, he has been unable to judge flyballs in America which suggests he probably butchered quite a few in Cuba.

What I meant by that cuba=/=America was that JUST BECAUSE THEY LET HIM PLAY CF IN CUBA DOES NOT MEAN HE IS AN ACCEPTABLE CF

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:03 PM
That's the problem--he will. He's making the wrong choices right off the bat.

I've seen this song and dance before so has everyone else. If you choose not to recognize it, fine. I'll be right next to you in a month complaining when it wasn't, in fact "just one game, relax."

But dude, Ozzie shuffles ...like...lineups all the...like...time.

Anyway, it's just opening day...like...what reason...like...do you have to think Ramirez is the STARTING CF

No reason! quit jumping to conclusions!

2005!!!!

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 07:03 PM
Does anyone know how many games Ramirez played at each position during spring? Where can I look that up?

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:04 PM
Does anyone know how many games Ramirez played at each position during spring? Where can I look that up?

www.whitesox.com

NardiWasHere
03-30-2008, 07:07 PM
But dude, Ozzie shuffles ...like...lineups all the...like...time.

Anyway, it's just opening day...like...what reason...like...do you have to think Ramirez is the STARTING CF

No reason! quit jumping to conclusions!

2005!!!!

1. Doesn't he?

2. It is just opening day

3. Aren't you jumping to conclusions by saying that he'll play no matter the results?

4. Who said anything about 2005?

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 07:08 PM
But dude, Ozzie shuffles ...like...lineups all the...like...time.

Anyway, it's just opening day...like...what reason...like...do you have to think Ramirez is the STARTING CF

No reason! quit jumping to conclusions!

2005!!!!

[2006'd]Brian Anderson is the starting centerfielder on Opening Day! Woohoo! Brian Anderson is finally getting a chance to play everyday and show what he can do![/2006'd]

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:11 PM
[2006'd]Brian Anderson is the starting centerfielder on Opening Day! Woohoo! Brian Anderson is finally getting a chance to play everyday and show what he can do![/2006'd]

Why the **** is Mackowiak playing CF today? He is a .290 hitter in favorable matchups but can't run the bases to save his life. Oh **** he's costing us yet another game with his lousy CF defense in a year when we'll miss the playoffs by like 2 games. Wonderful

That was fun! Let's do it again in 08!

fquaye149
03-30-2008, 07:14 PM
1. Doesn't he?

Sure. The time to debut your "sunday lineup" is not opening day, though.

So if Ramirez is just a "once in a while" CF, I wonder why the **** he's in the lineup opening day...

leading me to...


2. It is just opening day

Sure, opening day's JUST OPENING DAY but it's also OPENING DAY. There's a reason why the best pitcher usually starts opening day. It's also the reason most managers put their regular starting lineup on the field opening day


3. Aren't you jumping to conclusions by saying that he'll play no matter the results?

No. I'm not making that conclusion.

The only conclusion I'm making is that Ramirez is too ****ty in CF to ever warrant starting A SINGLE GAME in CF.

I SUSPECT Ramirez will play no matter the results because Ozzie has done that time and time again throughout his career when he finds a player he likes. But I'm not concluding that's the way it's going to be.


4. Who said anything about 2005?

The only possible reason anyone would support Ozzie's continued moronic decisions is that they are hung up on 2005.

So even when you don't explicitly say it, I can't help reading posts defending Ozzie's continual idiocy without hearing "2005....2005....2005" in the back of my head.

Forgive me. It's a personality tic.

Jjav829
03-30-2008, 07:19 PM
Why the **** is Mackowiak playing CF today? He is a .290 hitter in favorable matchups but can't run the bases to save his life. Oh **** he's costing us yet another game with his lousy CF defense in a year when we'll miss the playoffs by like 2 games. Wonderful

That was fun! Let's do it again in 08!

Totally. I can't believe Ramirez....has like....started every game since March 31st in center and has been a butcher out there, yet Ozzie still hasn't pulled him. Oh wells...

#1swisher
03-30-2008, 07:21 PM
They need to trade Dye, Uribe, and Crede ASAP.

Outfield should be Swisher-Owens/Anderson--Quentin
Infield should be Fields--Cabrera--Ramirez--Konerko

based on this I would also trade Konerko and Thome