Things I learned on Opening Day '08
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 8:19 PM CDT
in Recaps
283 comments
-
Mark Buehrle is quite ordinary against good teams -- Bull Pain pointed it out in the gamethread; Buehrle has markedly worse numbers both last year and in his career against "good" teams. This is obviously true of all pitchers in general, but it seems more pronounced with respect to Buehrle.
Buehrle didn't look bad at all until the runs started coming. But when he starts to look bad, you almost have to wonder how he gets guys out at all.
A common refrain around these parts in the second half of '06 was that Buehrle really needed to slow down when he started getting hit around. It's almost as if one of his greatest assets, his quick to the plate style, starts to work against him as he pounds the zone with hittable pitch after hittable pitch. I'd like to see him take a walk around the mound a little bit during one of these blowups. If nothing else just to try something new, when nothing else seems to be working
-
Orlando Cabrera will find many different ways to cost the Sox runs -- Cabrera drew a walk and scored on Jim Thome's HR in the first, but it was all down hill after that. He got a slow read on a groundball back up the middle to start Buehrle's implosion, then failed to even pick up a routine double play ball by the next hitter. Buehrle induced another near double play from the next batter, recording one out, before the wheels came off.
Cabrera didn't just cost the Sox runs with his glove. He had a pair of gaffes in the 8th to help the Indians get out of a bases loaded, nobody out situation. I was not aware of it until I saw CSN display the stats, but Cabrera has a terrible record with the bases loaded (.209/.233/.278 entering the game). That's not something you expect from someone who is described as "a gamer" or an "adept handler of the bat."
Cabrera's grounder to short, which allowed Jhonny Peralta to throw out a clearly safe Joe Crede at home, would have been bad enough, but Cabrera immediately followed it up with another mistake that cost the Sox. His overzealous takeout slide at second resulted in a double play that erased the Sox threat in the 8th. It was a debatable call, one that I initially called brutal, but it was probably the right one, or at least it's defensible. Those two calls in the 8th might have decided the game, and certainly should have elicited more of a reaction out of Ozzie Guillen.
-
Guillen is too kind, too gentle -- Guillen vowed to be more fiery this season, but given two golden opportunities to lay into an umpire in the 8th inning, he chose to have a civil conversation instead. I know Guillen's fiery reputation is a bit undeserved, but sometimes I think he takes special care to avoid falling into the stereotype, even if the situation calls for it.
-
Jim Thome can hit lefties -- Sometime this off-season I honestly thought about suggesting Thome leadoff against lefthanders. It was only after I took a better look at the numbers (.209/.325/.344, 14 HR since 2005) that I realized he didn't even get on base enough in those situations to justify the unorthodox move.
It was a pleasant surprise to see Thome go deep twice off of a pitcher as tough as Sabathia, but I still feel like it will be the exception to the rule. It took him until July 2nd last season for him to hit his second HR of the year off a lefty.
-
Nick Masset is major league pitcher. Against Cleveland. In the first two weeks of the season -- Masset began last season with 9.2 innings of solid work against the Indians before he faced another club. He then posted an ERA over 8 in his next 29 innings before closing out his major league tour with another scoreless outing against the Indians. It's almost as if the Indians are making him look good when they have these big leads just to ensure that Masset is on the roster for the rest of the season.
In all seriousness, Masset pitched well today, allowing just 2 baserunners in 4+ innings. He helped make what could have been a disaster of a game into an exciting game with a terrible outcome.
-
Alexei Ramirez is not ready for prime time -- Ramirez was the lone Sox hitter who failed to record a hit on Monday, and struck out 3 times. Two of those strikeouts were on just three pitches. Alexei also had an interesting day in the field, bumping into Jermaine Dye on a pretty routine ball in the gap to start the bottom of the first, and making a diving play on a misread of a shallow fly ball to center later in the game.
It would be hypocritical of me to suggest that one game is enough evidence against to call for Ramirez' demotion after doing almost exactly the opposite in the previous two bullet points. But it does indeed look like Ramirez will have a significant adjustment period at the big leagues. Thankfully, if his final plate appearance against Sabathia is any indication, he does appear to be a quick study.
- You guys really have a lot to say -- We had something like 800 comments during the game even though things really got shaky after 6th inning. I know our tech team is working hard on the performance issues, and we'll be running like a well oiled machine soon. For the most part, however, the new features have made the gamethreads a whole lot better.
0 recs |
283 comments
Email
Print
Comments
i still think
alexei will be replacing uribe in july or so. and very likely leading off (whether he deserves to or not) next season, as well. but i still also think that he should be in charlotte. it's cliche, but welcome to the big leagues.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Mar 31, 2008 8:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i dont think you'd have too many
people arguing with that statement. i know i dont have very high expectations for alexei in the first month or so because of the adjustment hes going to have to make.
12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez
by The Deacon on Mar 31, 2008 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So like I said...
Damn good thing Masset made the team and that lineup looks like it's going to be cooking with gas...or actually that's the opposite of what I said. I get back from work, check the box score and it's like bizarro world in Cleveland. I also thought the Dotel signing was good and that Dye was a good candidate to fall off a cliff this year. The fact that it was one game notwithstanding, I'll turn in my prognosticator badge at the door.
The two things I take away from what I read are:
1) The Sox really should have Ramirez in AAA or at 2B and Quentin in the lineup.
2) I'll be really upset if the Sox sign Cabrera. He's a perfectly ordinary aging SS and the Sox will be lucky to get a decent 2008 out of him. I'll be interested in seeing how much of an upgrade he is over Uribe over the course of the season.
by hitlesswonder on Mar 31, 2008 9:03 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm not disputing that
And 2007 OCab with a .345 OBP and .750 OPS along with good defense would be a significant upgrade. I'm just saying I'll be interested in seeing if he can perform similarly in 2008....
by hitlesswonder on Mar 31, 2008 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
smart baserunning, too
one of the better baserunners in baseball. and showed he was smarter than cox, too.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Mar 31, 2008 9:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How was he smarter than Cox?
I feel very uninformed when there's a day game...
by hitlesswonder on Mar 31, 2008 10:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he ran through a stop sign to score
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Mar 31, 2008 10:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He ran through a stop sign and scored
I forgot about it.. But it seemed pretty obvious to me that he should score based on where the ball was hit..
When Hawk/DJ said he was running through the stop sign, I couldn't figure out why there was one in the first place.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because apparently, 3rd base coach must be the toughest job in baseball...
Our organization can't even hire a competent 3rd base coach.
I also like how Quentin and Anderson are on the bench and a guy from the Cuban league is starting and so is the Tasmanian Devil who we actually placed on waivers. Meanwhile, a guy who hit 23 homers in 373 AB's last season is in AAA.
Pretty awful.
by SSH2005 on Apr 1, 2008 7:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Told you to watch Fox
though I thought he'd be more aggressive. Perhaps his experience at Fantasy Camp has taken the edge off.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 8:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I agree the most with the Cabrera thought.
But I would also like to add that on Blake's bases-clearing double, OCab had what I thought was a perfect shot to nail Gutierrez at the plate, which he completely biffed. Ended up not mattering (as in, that wasn't the deciding run) but I still would like to see my shortstop at least come within a couple feet of the catcher from short left field. But he put that throw about 5 feet down the first base line.
And 9-8 with Crede coming up with a shot to win it would just have been that much more exciting, no matter how aful he looked on every pitch besides his double.
by parkermo on Mar 31, 2008 9:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
was it only this server that had problems?
i wouldnt be surprised if other sites had similar problems on opening day
by circles on Mar 31, 2008 9:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the old sites shared something like 10 machines...
The server structure changed with the move, including utilizing amazon's S3 service, and we still were having troubles...
I'm sure it won't be an issue in the longer term future, but opening day is generally many sites busiest day, and we had 30 sites all experiencing high loads while debuting relatively untested new features... There's no way to replicate the type of loads we were collectively pulling without just opening it up and seeing what breaks.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, it shouldnt be an issue after a couple of games...by the way are you in the IT field? hehe
by circles on Mar 31, 2008 10:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kinda, but not really
I don't really have the technical knowledge base to be IT
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
anyways, this is way better than than the other site. I don't
know how anybody, except the older folks couldn't like this format better.
by circles on Mar 31, 2008 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're being too harsh on both OC and the Missile
Cabrera "cost" the Sox the run on that interference insofar as he was the victim of an arbitrary call. Considering how good we know him to be on the basepaths, I'll defer to his judgment there. I liked what I saw of Ramirez after the first two ABs; he laid off some tough sliders and curves that more than a few on our club would not. Uribe looked terrible as usual at the plate and, despite the fact that he does a nice job covering for Cabrera's deficiency (going glove side), either he or Crede need replacing. I think you could convince me that one of them should stay so our infield doesnt totally suck. Give me Josh, damnit.
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Mar 31, 2008 10:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i agree here
nicely written (the Things I Learned,,,), but sounds a lot like it's coming from generalization city. OC has been in the bigs for many years...let's give him more than 9 innings before deciding that he can't field double play balls.
by HulkSmash on Apr 1, 2008 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
um, is there an equivalent to the old
southsidesox.com/users/colintj/comments or is there some notification service available?
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Mar 31, 2008 10:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
http://www.sbnation.com/users/colintj
lists all of your recent activity across the network. It should display (1 reply) accordingly when someone has replied to a comment of yours.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it only does the last three comments, and the top one won't
render properly.
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Mar 31, 2008 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That must be an Iphone specific issue
because there's a scroll on the right hand side that shows at least your last 50 -- I bet iphone doesn't do frames.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just when I think it can't get any worse
my iPhone is such a tease.
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Apr 1, 2008 12:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Overall, Sox played well...
a few bad breaks really messed up this one game..Cabrera error, umps missing calls..I just couldnt believe they were hanging on and never giving up. If they keep playing this way this season, good things will happen. Nothing new from my post
by circles on Mar 31, 2008 10:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You learned all of that today?
I enjoy your writing, but if you can make all of those judgements after one game, then you need to go to Vegas. Cabrerra has won 2 golden gloves and you are convinced he will give up runs? The slide into 2nd Base certainly was a questionable call. Offensive/Defensively, he will be fine as his long track record shows. The same track record thing goes to the rest of your comments as well. History usually repeats itself. Buehrle is good, Thome will hit worse vs. LH, Ramirez (well I guess there is no track record there), and Masset his record - not so good. Hopefully, a win on Wed. will make us all feel warm and fuzzy.
Baseball....been...berry..berry...good...to me.
by Chico Escuela on Mar 31, 2008 10:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was talking to the Cheat who wrote the main article. This new website is cool, but it will take me awhile to master.
Baseball....been...berry..berry...good...to me.
by Chico Escuela on Mar 31, 2008 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW - I think the Ozzie is too kind thing is wrong as well. Lineup judgement, now that may be a different story. I like Ozzie so much, but he makes me cringe with some of the decisions. Again, why no Ozuna today, after saying he would start for weeks in the opener?
Baseball....been...berry..berry...good...to me.
by Chico Escuela on Mar 31, 2008 10:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you make no sense..
with the Ozzie is too kind thing
by circles on Mar 31, 2008 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You missed some of the sarcasm
Most of the headlines are toungue in cheek. And the Ramirez note is the only one that I think holds any weight...
The part about it being only one game was supposed to be implied.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeter's won gold gloves, too
I expect OCab to be an average to slightly above average defensive SS. I think most defensive metrics bear that out, FWIW. But given his age, it's certainly possible his D will decline significantly from previous years. He'll be an interesting player to watch.
by hitlesswonder on Mar 31, 2008 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I expect him to be a very good defensive SS
According to defensive win shares, Cabrera has been a top 3 AL SS each of the past three seasons (for reference El Rotundo has finished 1,4,1). Jeter is of course nowhere close to that, usually finishing around 8th in the AL. I feel an argument that Cabrera has won GGs because of popularity like Jeter does not hold weight
by 3E8 on Apr 1, 2008 8:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cheat had some stats up a while ago
that showed that OCab is much better to his left than to his right. After watching him yesterday I now see why. He can't throw, he doesn't have a good arm - he might be able to get to the ball in the hole, but there's nothing on his throw to first. Going to his left that's not as much of a negative, going to the right you can't hide the arm.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
30 scouting reports on tangotiger.net disagree with you
From last year his arm strength was rated a 67, whereas 50 is average (a 70 is top 15% in the league). Not to mention his accuracy was rated an 87. I will have to trust the data and scouting reports until I see him play more. I realize with age his skillset could deteriorate. But you are admittidly making this assumption after watching one game
by 3E8 on Apr 1, 2008 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
i think we all need to realize that pete maybe has just a touch of bias against cabrera. seems fairly obvious from his, like, fifty posts on this over the last few months.
cabrera is an average-ish SS. or, in other words, likely a massive improvement over uribe. maybe the man has dropped off the cliff. but i rather doubt it.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is that Uribe is still out there
so his bat is still in the lineup. What's the point of acquiring Cabrera if you don't get rid of Uribe? Especially when, IMO after watching one game, Uribe is the better defensive SS? We had a redundancy at 3B and that results in Fields at AAA, now he have a redundancy at SS and it results in - Uribe still starting. Cabrera's only an upgrade if the player you're upgrading is gone.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's flawed logic
what you should presuppose is that he's replacing the player or players who are gone because of this move. in essence, cabrera replaces iguchi/richar, not uribe. in evaluating, one might also take into account who is in the rotation now that garland is gone. or the likely FA compensation. or the cost difference. there's lots of ways to evaluate and i'll let others figure out how they should weigh them.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just saying GG aren't a good metric
I guess because they are significantly biased towards low error totals and popularity (and offensive performance). The win shares and tangotiger reports are much stronger arguments in favor of OCab being a very good defensive SS.
by hitlesswonder on Apr 1, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What award is a good metric?
Silver Slugger, GG, MVP, Cy young, all-star all have a relatively high level of subjectivity IMO.
by Chopper Two Hopper on Apr 1, 2008 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MVP and cy young
at the very least, tend to go to someone who is amongst the top 3 or so players in that category. gold gloves often go to players who aren't very good (see, e.g., jeter, derek) or player who barely played the position (see, e.g., palmeiro, rafael).
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends
on what "category" you are referring to.The best WHIP (for starting pitchers) and Cy Youngs don't always go hand in hand for instance.
Attached is a link of some cy young awards gone awry. I will agree that GG have given away comparatively more awards to folks that have no business winning that award than MVP/Cy Young if that is your contention.
by Chopper Two Hopper on Apr 1, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's probably as it should be
i like WHIP but i'm not sure that's completely how i would evaluate a pitcher. i'm not going to parse all of those, especially those dating back to the 60s, but my point was that they generally get it close to right. 2004, for example. sure, randy was better and deserved to win. but giving the award to clemens was not nearly as egregious as continually giving a gold glove to jeter. i'll also note that johnson had a less than usual BABIP that year - which obviously helped to suppress his hits and, hence, WHIP.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
or the 1st Heavy Metal Grammy going to
Jethro Tull
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I am an idiot. If only my post was meant to be sarcastic. My bad. Sorry Cheat. Thank goodness I know the truth now.
Baseball....been...berry..berry...good...to me.
by Chico Escuela on Mar 31, 2008 10:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's not sarcastic, but the headlines are a bit
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't believe I just read 800
to game that I already watched.
Bring Back BA
by marco054 on Mar 31, 2008 10:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The wind...
...was definitely a factor in this game. Three of the home runs in the game - Thome's second, Dye's, and Gutierrez's - and Crede's double were all medium-deep fly balls that got pushed well back. I wasn't there, so I'm trusting this theory to the fact that Hawk didn't even implore their hits to "stretch", which he usually does if they're even close. He was genuinely surprised that Thome's and Dye's made it to the wall at all, let alone over it.
I'm not sure what this means, except that the Sox probably shouldn't have been as close to pulling this one off.
Joist
by Joist on Mar 31, 2008 11:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think you're jumping the gun
to say that Buehrle pitches abnormally worse vs. good teams. 1st of all let's clarify what we're talking about. Are we saying Buerhle pitches abnormally worse vs. good teams or good offenses? It doesn't make any sense that we should even be asking this question of teams with good pitching but mediocre hitting. So including the Angels in any discussion of someone struggling against good hitting is a complete red herring.
In the 2000's they have finished 4th, 11th, 7th, 7th, 8th, 4th, 12th, 7th in the AL in runs scored. The very definition of offensive mediocrity. Looking at Buerhle's era against them is simply not a valid test of how he does against "good" hitting.
Looking at the actual data. Last year Buerle did struggle in his one start against the yankees and in his 1 start against Boston. He posted an ERA of 4.64 vs. the 2nd highest run scoring team (Detroit). 4th highest scoring team Angels- 5.89 ERA. So he did struggle against "good hitting" last year. '06 he struggled against everybody.
'05 top offenses against Buehrle-
Boston- 6.23 ERA
Yanks- no starts against
Texas- 2.51 ERA
Cleveland- 2.46 ERA.
'04 - 3.63 overall
Boston- 6.23
Yankees- 7.20
Texas- 1.13
Cleveland -4.37
'03
Boston-2.08
Toronto- 5.68
Yankees- 2.57
KC- 3.90
My conclusion would be that since '03 he has struggled mightily against the Yankees and Boston. And he did struggle against "good hitting teams" last year. But I don't see any evidence that he has had career struggles against non Yankee RedSox teams. Were his struggles against other good hitting teams last year just a blip on the map or a new trend? I don't know, but there certainly is not enough data to make a blanket statement that he can't pitch well against good hitting teams. Although if you limited "good hitting teams" to only the Yankees and Red Sox you may have a good argument.
by bhoov on Mar 31, 2008 11:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
JRE, rhythm, or other Bay Area Sox fans
I've got a couple of tickets for the Saturday, May 17th game at AT&T park in section 109 (about even with the pitcher's mound on 1st base/White Sox dugout side). I'm sure tickets will be easy to come by, but I can't go and thought I'd offer them up here first in case you don't want to go through the hassle of getting them elsewhere.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Mar 31, 2008 11:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I would be interested in the tickets
how much are they going for?
my friend claims he is getting all three games through his work but it never hurts to explore other options.
by The Scoper on Apr 1, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
$84 for both.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 11:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'll check with friend...
and get back to you. in the meantime, no need to hold on to them waiting for me if you have another taker.
thanks :)
by The Scoper on Apr 1, 2008 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can take those off your hands
BTW, did we ever reach a consensus on when and where to have a SSS meet-up?
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on Apr 1, 2008 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think we did. And I have the tickets in hand so whenever works we should meet up. Maybe a dual purpose
SSS/ticket swap meet-up.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...sounds like a plan
Also, in the event we can't get our collective schedules to mesh, I could meet you at Cato's or any of a number of fine Oakland watering holes.
Have you been to the Uptown or to the Stork Club yet? Sweet places to check out bands. Sometimes the bands are even good! Stork club also has a few pinball machines.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on Apr 1, 2008 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i've actually not been to either.
if i'm drinking in the east bay we usually end up at cato's or mallard.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is kind of bothering me...
Where would YOU GUYS put Profundo, Cuban Missile, BA, Quentin, and JO?
I don't think the missile is quite ready. Swisher shouldn't be playing center, Quentin should be playing, JO should be on the bench. Does that leave the sox with BA as the best option right now? Hell, BA can strike out three times a game and hit a double, but at least his defense is stellar. Should the sox put Swisher in center in smaller parks, with Quentin in left; and BA in center with Swisher in left otherwise? Maybe that's the best plan.
fratdaddy.blogspot.com
by Raf on Mar 31, 2008 11:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The more popular lineups
seem to be those which would be a downgrade defensively.
I think we're all just aching for our wholesale changes that should have come last June/July... I think most of us would be happy with Uribe and Crede being gone, and Fields, Anderson/Quentin, and Ramirez/Richar picking up the at-bats.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Mar 31, 2008 11:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
From an "excitement" or "fan" point of view...
I'd like to see (taking a stick from SSH for a moment):
CF Swisher
SS Cabrera
DH Thome
1B Konerko
RF Dye
3B Fields
C Pierzynski
LF Quentin
2B Ramirez
As Cheat mentions, though, my lineup above is pretty bad defensively, and I'm not sure that I want Ramirez at second (to be quite honest, I'm not sure what I want to see the Sox do with Ramirez. Part of me wants to see him struggle and try and make adjustments up here while part of me wants to let him 'ease in' a bit more at Charlotte with more of an eye on 2009 so he can take over as the team's starting SS)
I just know that the bottom four as currently constructed -- Ramirez, Pierzynski, Crede and Uribe (was that the order they were in today) -- are most likely going to bog down the lineup. We're looking at a collective OBP that will likely be around .290.
by CWSKeith on Apr 1, 2008 12:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you'd rather cabrera 2nd and quentin 8th? if so, why?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think young guys
need a bit of time to prove they can actually get on base and deserve a spot at the top.. I'd start him near the bottom as well...For myself Fields would flop between 2 and 7 depending on pitcher handedness
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on Apr 1, 2008 12:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not gonna bother moving Cabrera out of the two hole
That won't happen in his time here -- he's been pegged as the best-est two hole hitter, a guy who handles the bat like none other (except Erstad*.... I think), so that's why I have him there.
Then again, my lineup is a hypothetical one in the first place so I probably should've just went all the way with it and went with whoever in the two spot. I guess I'd have some sort of rotation between Fields, OC and Quentin in the two spot depending on handedness of pitcher and type of pitcher (as Cheat mentioned). If I had more faith in Quentin I'd easily pencil him in at #2 but as of yet I don't.
*Speaking of Erstad, I hope some of you tuned in to the Padres/Astros game tonight to see the bevy of former White Sox players -- Blum! Erstad! (Batting back-to-back, no less.) And Iguchi was rockin' for San Diego -- 3-for-5 with a pair of doubles.
by CWSKeith on Apr 1, 2008 12:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
cabrera
is also far more likely to do things like score from first on a double than probably anyone else in that lineup. while i'm not a huge fan of him hitting second for other reasons he will make some of that back by being a better baserunner.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 9:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Baserunning is a secondary skill
That's not a reason to be batting 2nd.
From what I saw yesterday, he looks like Erstad redux. An over the hill guy that KW had his eye on for a long time and now here he is.
It's only one game but:
In the 2nd inning, that first grounder to his left he got a really bad break and a 3-hopper got through the infield. Then the next ball went right through his wickets and he fell on his ass. Then the next batter a grounder right to him that he was slow getting out of his glove (Ok, Uribe might have been late getting to the bag) so they only got one out instead of the DP. Then he made a nice diving stop in the hole on a soft liner a couple innings later, but even after planting he had absolutely nothing on the throw to first and it took a huge hop to shoulder level and PK couldn't handle it. Then in the 8th on the relay after Blake's double he had nothing on the throw from the cut of the grass on the IF and threw another weak one-hopper offline to home plate.
Batting he had bases loaded none out in a critical situation and swung through 2 hittable fastballs before dribbling to SS. Peralta should have had an easy force out on Crede, but made a horrible throw to make it a close play. Then he's on first on the fielder's choice, and makes a really bush league play trying to tackle the SS and gets called out on interference.
It's only one game, but it just looks like we have another "real ballplayer" past his prime. He didn't look like a very good SS yesterday, his arm is of great concern. He doesn't look particularly quick at SS either, so he can't compensate. I'd cut him some slack , but after shooting him off his mouth this spring that he's the new clubhouse boss and the new sheriff in town, he better start backing it up real fast and up his game. He's the Fucking New Guy with the big mouth, and if he has a few more games like this he's going to lose respect in the clubhouse and that will not be a good situation. I also noticed that Gonzalez said in his article this morning the our field general snuck out of the locker room after the game - pretty low class, take some responsibility Mr. Field General. Your blunders led to a 7-run inning, at least Buehrle was man enough to fall on the grenade and take the blame for that fiasco.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other than that, how...
did you like the play Mrs. Lincoln?
Pete in mid-season form!
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I mention I hated that trade?
Garland was our chance to get someone young and good like a Milledge. Instead, this is what we're stuck with. Brace yourself for the contract extension.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, i'm aware it's a secondary skill
but with cabrera it's a secondary skill that's worth about five or six runs a year. or not an insubstantial amount.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's good for 5 or 6 runs a year?
Let's see, his defense cost 7 runs in the 2nd inning and his baserunning innaference cost 1 run in the 8th, and his weak throw to home cost another - that's 9 runs to the minus yesterday. Not an insubstantial amount.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you can't be serious
don't engage me in discussion.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am serious
His defense cost 7 runs in the inning - three consecutive balls to him that he should have handled easily, the inning should've been 3 up 3 down. But Buehrle got charged with 7 earned runs, which is a joke. And MB is the standup guy after the game and takes the fall for it, while the field general scurries out of the locker room like a weasel before the reporters can talk to him. And this guy is your self-appointed team leader.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
what is this, joe morgan math? spare me.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who's your math tutor, Phil Rogers?
You pulled the "his running is worth 5 to 6 runs" out of somewhere. That sounds awfully precise, how'd you come up with that? My math is laid out on the table.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
could it be baserunning metrics?
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i had thought you were a BP subscriber
considering you frequently cite their stats.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am
So I'm aware that this fiery 33yr old bat handler and field general has a career stat line of .273/.321/.402 and is probably on the decline. But we had to have him, and we're begging him top sign an extension.
And based on visual evidence it looks like his defense has deteriorated to the point where he's an average at best SS.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
your pessimism sure seems excessive for a game
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Apr 1, 2008 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pessimist?
Perhaps, but I think that throwing a multiyear contract extension at a very average 33yr old SS is excessive. He's not the Second Coming.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think the risk of an extension
has materially dropped since the signing and fluffing of ramirez. he is the second coming.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's nothing to indicate
that anything more than the usual "Sure we'd love to keep him" rhetoric has been thrown out. and i agree with larry that a team as cost conscious as ours that has a guy like The Missile locked up for 4 years at not even 2 per will do their damndest to get him at either short or center.
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on Apr 2, 2008 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing to indicate?
Uh, maybe. I don't think KW just throws those comments out to reporters just to make conversation. If he says (said - he hasn't mentioned it in a while) he wants to sign him to an extension, then I believe there has to be some substance to it. If he just throws that out there to reporters while simultaneously telling the player/agent that "nah, I'm just bullshitting the press" - uh, I don't think that will go over very well.
Cabrera himself confirmed that KW had approached him/his agent re and extension. The topic has been broached, and it's Cabrera who's been holding off on it, not KW - at least, as of a few months ago. As you guys mentioned, Ramirez might have altered the calculus. Let's hope that commie punk plays well. I think everyone agrees that one way or another this team has to get younger, not older. Letting Cabrera walk and get two draft picks would be awesome. Signing him to an extension would suck big time.
Seeing him play and seeing with my own eyes that he's a mere mortal really puts me vehemently into the, "Please, do NOT sign him!" camp.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 2, 2008 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
of course he's throwing it out there for a reason
to cut off the obvious question of "are you going to extend x whose contract is up this year." he touched on the issue, he made initial contact with his agent, and ocab (thankfully) said they'll discuss it later on in the season. that's why no one's heard anything in months on it. if a reporter asks about it, he'll get the "are you dumb or something" look from KW.
i don't buy the whole ramirez in center thing, at least long term. and richar wasn't acquired by KW for shits and giggles. ramirez is the unknown commodity. his natural position just so happens to be SS. he's already made a favorable impression on the sox so if he can hit well enough...
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 2, 2008 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have no doubt that neither richar nor quentin were acquired for shits and giggles at the time of the trades,
but is there a chance that it may end up that way in practice?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 2, 2008 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's always a chance, toon
i'm not a huge richar fan so it could be that he just sucks and KW decides to cut bait. but we all know KW doesn't like to cut bait. and i don't buy any of this "he's in ozzie's doghouse" stuff, either. as for quentin, i have little doubt that he'll be just fine. assuming things go to plan (sometimes a large assumption), i don't see a place for cabrera on this team past july, let alone next season. it's highly debatable whether he'd get traded but i put it at "unlikely" at this point that he's here next year.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 2, 2008 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
poorly worded question on my part.
i understand the difficult position kenny is in vis a vis being able to work under the radar and also defending moves to an ever demanding fan base. it just frustrates me when he says the whole we didn't want a player like carlos quentin, but actually carlos quentin, and then nothing that comes after indicates that the guy kw just had to have was going to be given every chance to succeed. at this point, swisher and dye are playing the outfield nearly every day barring injury. that leaves owens, ramirez, anderson, and quentin. thus far, it seems clear that at least ozzie is going to give owens rope and believes the missile can play an everyday CF. hell, even anderson, who has been much maligned, may end up on the 25 man instead of quentin when JO returns.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 2, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think
immediately forcing a player coming off his injury into an everyday role would be reckless. while i had hopes he would be ready immediately, it was fairly obvious this spring that he was not. i think how they're handling him up to this point is giving him every chance to succeed. i think they watched how arizona forced the issue last year and got BA-esque numbers for that decision. i'm not going to read anything into this situation as of yet.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 2, 2008 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would guess Ozzie
wanted Alexei in the lineup and because of injuryu has aced Q out. If in fact Alexei flames out quickly Q will be moved in and Swish will move over.
IF we can insure that Jesse gets hit by a bus.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 2, 2008 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pardon me
It was Downey in the Tribune, not Gonzalez. Gonzalez doesn't have the balls to make a crack like this, just Cowley:
And then there was Cabrera, whose first official day with the club was filled with adventure.
First time up, he stole a base and scored a run.
First chance in the field, a hot shot ate him up at shortstop and led to a seven-run inning.
Next time on base, he ignored a coach's stop sign and slid home with the game's tying run, shaking his fist.
To which a mellow Guillen said, "He's the type of player who doesn't need a coach."
Cabrera capped his day by killing a Sox rally. He hooked a fielder with his hand on purpose, unnecessarily trying to disrupt a double play. He was out and was responsible for Thome, who hit the ball, being called out as well.
No beef from Guillen, who took the ump's side. No comment from Cabrera, who was nowhere to be found after his first ... uh, Sox occurrence?
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Relax, man.
I don't even think larry's that high on Cabrera. Nobody here is, to be frank. He's a pretty mediocre ballplayer. But we're used to (or we should be) having a mediocre player at shortstop.
Am I worried that Ken Williams thinks Cabrera's an All-Star and will treat him accordingly? Sure. Is he blocking someone better? No.
For 2008 alone, I don't mind having Cabrera around.
Now, if/when they announce the three-year contract extension, I'll be howling right alongside you.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish him well
What annoys me is all this pre-season fluffing of him, the same treatment Erstad got. And he's a mediocre player at best, and he cost us Jon fucking Garland - the only trading chit we had this offseason.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i must have missed this inordinate preseason fluffling
try getting away from the tunnel vision, pete. you tend to get a teensy bit fixated on things to the detriment of adequate perspective.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
IMO, he's precisely the symptom
of what's gone wrong with the direction this team has gone. That's what bugs me about him. If he didn't embody this grindier-than-thou is the way to go philosophy I'd probably like him.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what, finding a way to improve?
who cares what ozzie or hawk or whoever says. this isn't an erstad situation, where a player who arguably shouldn't be anywhere near a 25 man roster, let alone starting, is clearly getting adulation which translates into playing time. there is absolutely nothing wrong with cabrera as a starter. what is said about him is irrelevant. you're letting your annoyance get in the way of dispassionate analysis.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is it necessary that we be dispassionate in our analysis though? I mean, we are fans of this team right? That implies a certain degree of emotional investment. Granted, people can choose to be a fan and maintain cool and calm demeanor, but for all we are, we are not detached analysts. We're fans of the team, and that ought to allow for a great deal of passion when evaluating said team.
I say get annoyed. Save the dispassionate analysis for the people getting paid to watch.
I'll bring the awesome.
by Hazymania on Apr 1, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just don't expect your arguments to be taken seriously then
if you're like that. biased analysis is generally useless analysis.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the end
Isn't all of this analysis, "useless analysis"?
I really enjoy reading the comments on this board, but if I had but one gripe to make, it would be how seriously some people take their own analysis.
It remains a game my friends. Some choose to show their passion with clenching fists and grinding teeth others with crunching of numbers and snide remarks.
I've been posting here for about a year now and I see things now in games that I never saw before, thanks to what I've learned following some of the threads here. This board has opened my eyes to a whole side of the game I never even bothered to think about, hell I can't listen to sports radio or watch espn without scoffing half the time now. With all of that being said, I can never imagine losing my passion for the game, regardless of how I choose to express it.
Besides Larry, I never once expected anything I write here to be taken seriously. I prefer to express my opinions with bratwursts and miller lites.
I'll bring the awesome.
by Hazymania on Apr 1, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
then those people shouldn't argue or engage in discussion
with those who do take these things seriously enough to want to get them right, or as close to it as possible. there are plenty of people on here who it's fairly obvious are not interested in a lot of this analysis. that's fine. those people certainly have a place. but i don't think it's appropriate for a site like to have people spewing unsupported idiocy like a single player costing a team seven runs without expecting a challenge.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't get your panties in a bunch Larry
You don't have to resort to name calling because I blew up your argument. My I refer you to .
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i didn't call anyone any names pete
i can call an argument idiotic without calling the person an idiot. there's a difference there. perhaps you're too touchy to see the difference but that's your problem not mine.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Try again
That's a fine line you draw
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you say so
if you associate yourself so closely with your arguments that criticizing one somehow impugns your character.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you're so dispassionate
why'd you get so wound up when I scoffed at his 5/6 extra runs for "runs around real good"?
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i didn't get wound up
this is a toneless vacuum, pete. you were getting wound up so you probably assumed i was. or you just assumed i was for whatever reason. that was a bemused reply on my part because i thought you read BP and were well aware of this stat. in addition, i know i've brought it up on here before and i guessed you were either part of that exchange or may have read it then, if not on BP.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well maybe you were wrong
in assuming I was wound up, you ever think of that? This is a toneless vacuum after all.
All I said was his boneheaded defense gave them 3 extra outs and led to 7 runs scored. That's a simple fact.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
which is why i said
"for whatever reason" after that. i think of everything, pete.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever
I call a truce, we're getting scrunched anyway.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's never any hard feeling on my side, pete
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good
I was afraid you'd threaten to not play with me anymore like the last time you got mad at me.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't get mad, pete
i get fatigued of it.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wuss
When has running out of space stopped any exchange of ideas on this board?
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 2:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fuck
There goes my shot at the Pulitzer I guess.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think...
that Garland was worth as much as you seem to think he was. Garland was an average pitcher, signed for one season, at market rates. They got back another player who was signed for one season. That's about right.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's a 200/yr innings eater
There's not that many of those around, he had value.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Pete...
You don't like Cabrera?
"You might be impressed with your analysis, but I am not. Stop wasting my time." - Chris De Luca
by BoKnows on Apr 1, 2008 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not for one year.
The Twins didn't get much for Johan F. Santana, the Sox weren't going to get much for Jon Garland.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Milledge was on the table
He went to the Nationals for next to nothing. But he wasn't grindy enough for the White Sox, he's a bad seed.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not for Garland.
The Mets wanted a starting catcher with defensive value, not a starting pitcher signed for one year. The Sox didn't have what Minaya wanted there.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
C'mon Jer
They were dying for starting pitching.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you're kidding, right?
even without santana, they had a very good rotation.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you must be kidding
Last year they had:
An injured Pedro, who's still on the DL
El Duque, enuff said
Glavine, enuff said
They had to replace 3 guys in their rotation, they were starved for pitching.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And they were dying for Santana
not Garland. You might argue if they had signed Garland it might've cost them Santana becuase their financial flexibility would not have been as great.
PS The 2 guys that played for the Twinks last night that they received in the trade looked good.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They couldn't count on getting Santana
No way they could have expected winning a bidding war vs. Yankees & Boston. They needed pitching, and Garland was a bird in hand. But it's moot, we'll never know.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They were paying up, and I'd bet
everyone knew it. Boston didn't need to spend the $. And if the Yanks could keep up, why didn't they? They needed established pitching almost as much as the Mets.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're fooling yourself.
Garland does not equal Church and Snyder. They might have taken Garland, but not for Milledge.
The Mets did indeed want a starter, and they got one - someone a lot better than Garland.
I don't like Cabrera very much, but Garland's contract status meant that he wasn't worth very much in trade.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you keep repeating this?
Pete you just make stuff up man.
by Tdogg on Apr 1, 2008 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
duh
Which is why we got a GG SS who swings the bat as well as 2 draft picks if he leaves. Garland would have just left. It was a good deal
by Rockraines on Apr 1, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quentin
He probably had me to most excited for this upcoming season. I've never seen him play but have heard all kinds of good things then his shoulder acts up, JO becomes a starter then gets hurt and now we have Alexei. I'm also excited about Alexei but would rather see Quentin out there
Bring Back BA
by marco054 on Apr 1, 2008 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think right now, I may go with...
LF Swisher
SS Cabrera
DH Thome
1B Konerko
RF Dye
C Pierzynski
SS Uribe
CF Anderson
3B Crede
I want that defense for our pitching. This is probably the best defensive lineup. Profundo, BA, and Crede do not have good OBPs, but Crede is a tad better in that department and I think I would like someone in front of Swisher. He will still hit 30 HRs this year. If Uribe is going to swin at everything, he might as well drive a couple of more runs from the 7 spot.
I don't know, it's out there. Maybe this would be terrible.
fratdaddy.blogspot.com
by Raf on Apr 1, 2008 2:10 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
You have Uribe and Cabrera at SS.
So, if you really wanted to go DF, I would take Uribe at SS and Cabrera at 2B. Also, without any stat checking, i think their offensive values would translate better to those positions; or, at least, Uribe would be less of a negative with his bat.
by parkermo on Apr 1, 2008 3:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant Urbie at 2B.
What I'm really shooting for is having someone who can get on base before Swisher comes up. This is the thing to do in the NL now, since many teems are batting their pitchers 8th.
fratdaddy.blogspot.com
by Raf on Apr 1, 2008 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Things I learned...
1. The best defense should ALWAYS play behind MB.
I think I learned here, perhaps elsewhere, that MB is among the league leaders in URA. If he has problems after errors are made, it only makes sense that he'd give up runs by "shakey" defense, errors or not. The problem yesterday though, is that OC IS our best defensive SS, so what to do there? At least the OF D could be improved...
2. Thome, Dye, and Konerko all showed hitting SKILL yesterday. I know, small sample size, but all 3 went the other way for hits or almost hits. Most encouraging.
3. Who knew we had a conservative 3B coach? He was advertised as the opposite, but when Cabrera has to run through a stop sign to score, and when Crede is held at 3rd on a double (when he likely should've been sent home), will we end up missing Windmill Joey/Razor?
Anyway, I actually enjoyed yesterday and it seems most of the players did too (DeLuca). I'd almost forgotten what "runs" look like.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 8:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I would have enjoyed a win more...
And doing absolutely nothing with the bases loaded and no outs reminded me a lot of last season.
Also, since Uribe is at 2B now I sure wish we could have Iguchi back.
Iguchi will earn $3.85 million for this season.
Uribe will earn $4.5 million for this season.
Ughhh...
by SSH2005 on Apr 1, 2008 8:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
OC IS our best defensive SS
is he? I thought Profundo is better at the defensive side
by The Wizard on Apr 1, 2008 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm very excited about Thome's
324 HR season in 2008, but I'm obviously a little disppointed about the Sox 0-162 season record. It's one game, guys (and an exciting game at that). Realx. No matter how good the Sox were suppose to be this year, I would have predicted a loss against the Indians in Cleveland on Opening Day facing the Cy Young Award winner.
Ramirez could have been 3-4 yesterday, and he would have been no better or worse prepared for the major leagues. Let's give the guy a little time. Perhaps Ramirez isn't ready for the bigs, but of all the players on the field yesterday, isn't it safe to say that this young man from Cuba might have had the most butterflies? He'll hit a HR on Wednesday, and then we'll all proclaim him Rookie of the Year.
by palehose67 on Apr 1, 2008 8:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
ANYWAY
how about the value of having a long reliever instead of a bunch of situational guys?
by Rockraines on Apr 1, 2008 9:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yay, and we still lost...
but I guess Masset did save a few innings from two of our other relievers.
by SSH2005 on Apr 1, 2008 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
totally needed that with the off day
if our other starters like MB often need to be pulled so soon, who we have in the bullpen is the least of the sox' concerns.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
how so?
If he kept the team in the game with a chance to win, it definately matters. There are going to be games like that, and luckily out guy kept us in it, as we picked away at THEIR pen. Its very valuable and im glad it showed up in the first game of the season.
by Rockraines on Apr 1, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the point was that if the starters make a habit out of lasting less than two innings,
the bullpen isn't going to be your biggest concern...it will be the starters.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Duh
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure that out, but its still valuable to have that guy who can eat those innings and hopefully keep the team in the game. If we didnt have Masset we would have had Wass for 1 inning, MacD for one, Booner for maybe 2, etc etc. If it was back to back games those guys may have been unavailable for a close contest the next day, which is why a long man is an important part of then pen.
by Rockraines on Apr 1, 2008 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
who was the long man in the sox '05 pen?
or the cardinals world series winner in '06?
or the red sox world series winner in '07?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
let's see
didn't really have one because of lack of need. probably hancock. tavarez but they didn't really need one, either.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
if you check tavarez's game log from last year, it sure doesn't look like he was a long man much. he pitched in 11 games out of the pen. two were for three innings and one for for between two and three innings.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But...
he could have gone longer if they needed him to. Dustin Hermanson is another example - he was perfectly capable of being a long reliever, but they used him as a short man instead, because they didn't need a long reliever.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but that's why i think it's bs
to say that a long man is such an important part of a bullpen if you mean to a bullpen on a team that has a chance to win. winning teams have starters who go deep and six men pens who don't blow.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
it is nice to have someone in the bullpen who can work multiple innings if they need to. Necessary? Not if the rotation is good, but nice to have.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree.
but the statement was that masset's performance yesterday was somewhate indicative of "why a long man is an important part of then pen." my point was that winning teams don't necessarily have a need in their pen for a guy to go 4-5 innings. isn't that the only defense for masset being on the roster, after all, that he can go multiple innings?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really
If we need to count on Nick Masset throwing 4+ innings of scoreless ball to stay in a game, we've got major problems. For all intents and purposes that game should've been a huge blowout yesterday, Sox were extremely lucky to make it a game.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sin Cabrera's miscues,
a blowout for the Sox.
by ballyb on Apr 1, 2008 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you did not just do that.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
'06 cards...
wainwright threw more than 2 innings in 3 out of 61 appearances.
hancock 5 out of 62.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And look what happened to him
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
zing!
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The White Sox...
didn't have one in '05, but they really got tremendous performances out of their starting pitchers - way more than one would expect.
The "long man" at the start of the season was actually supposed to be Dustin Hermanson.
The 2006 Cardinals had Josh Hancock and Adam Wainwright.
The 2007 Red Sox had Julian Tavarez.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn. Beaten again.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't look it up
you lose time.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had to look up those Cardinals relievers.
They tend to blur together for me.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
baseball is back
I was really excited during the comeback and the possible 8th inning runs (followed by frustration) and then the possibility of coming back in the 9th. I only listened to it on the radio, but it was great hearing Stone.
by shaftr on Apr 1, 2008 10:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I saw it in a full bar
Emotional rollcoaster! Didnt somebody want Thome benched?
by Tdogg on Apr 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thome had his one good game against lefties...
I still want to see him benched against lefties. Look at the numbers.
by SSH2005 on Apr 1, 2008 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dye at DH and Quentin in RF versus lefties makes too much damn sense...
and that's why I don't see Ozzie doing it.
by SSH2005 on Apr 1, 2008 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yep. and I apologized in the GT.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm unapologetic
I still think Thome should sit versus LHP and that Masset isn't very good at pitching. Perhaps the rest of the will prove me wrong. That would be a good thing
by hitlesswonder on Apr 1, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I must say...
that I'm actually feeling a bit better about the team after yesterday's game. Buehrle will be fine, the defensive deficiencies I was already aware of, and the offense did a lot better against Sabathia than I thought it would.
And win or lose, baseball's back. That's nice.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 11:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Holy Crap!
Did the Xanax kick in, or are you "faking it 'till it's real"?
That is probably the most positive post you've ever contributed. I'm stunned.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey...
the team overcame a five-run deficit. Did they ever do that last year?
This team still isn't making the playoffs, but I'm starting to think they won't lose ninety games, as I feared they might.
Now, if I can stay focused on 2008, and ignore the team's prospects down the road, then I can stay somewhat positive.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, against the twins
and they actually won that game.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buehrle gave up 7 runs in one inning,
right, and still won the game?
So get back on the ledge where you belong, JRE.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah...
I already jumped off that ledge. It's too late to really fix the mess the team's made of things in the medium and long-term, and the team is undoubtedly better than it was last year. I'll just enjoy the product that's on the field now.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally agreed
Game threads now are amazing, which is why there were probably so many comments.
Thome salivates when he sees a lefty, for sure!
I really like Alexei even though he struggled. You gotta learn to live his early mistakes. All rooks go through em.
I also think Mark needs time to get settled in. He usually does. Plus, he really never does good against C.C. even though he had a tough outing as well.
I love the never give up style they were in too against a really good team on THEIR opening day
by Option27 on Apr 1, 2008 11:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What is this
he never does good against C.C. business? It's like saying Brett Favre never did well against Troy Aikman. In both cases, when one is on the field, the other isn't.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kinda meant it like this
C.C. gets the wins and Mark gets the losses.
Shoulda worded it differently
by Option27 on Apr 1, 2008 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was just giving you a hard time.
it does matter that sabathia is pitching because usually that means less margin for error. i just checked out mark's career when facing the indians when sabathia starts. 0-5 with 4 ND. he did pitch really well in at least two of the losses and one of the ND games, however.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As mentioned previously,
it was no a surprise we didn't win yesterday. The surprise was how we we aquitted ourselves.
Back to work so soon?
;)
(Your "bwahahaha" had me laughing for 10 minutes last night.)
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i know, i know
sometimes my amazing ability to multi-task and perform my job at the level i do while yukking it up on here astounds even me.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, not you!!! I imagine everything you accomplish
is expected.
Oh, I'm sorry, this isn't larry...
So what perps walked yesterday so you could amuse us/me?
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't tell you. All appellate work for me, my friend.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a closer look.
overall, buehrle has taken quite a beating againt the indians in those games that sabathia starts (hell, he might have a hard time with the indians all of the time, but i do actually have to get some work done today).
9 starts
50.2 innings
66 hits
35 ER
15 BB
33 K
6.22 ERA
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1.60 WHIP
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Verducci on the Torpedo Boat
"He has more than 3,000 career at-bats with an on-base percentage worse than .300. Only two other players still have a job after being that bad for that long: Alex Gonzalez and Corey Patterson."
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 12:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was shocked to see that Corey had that many ABs
Wasn't he only recently a prospect of the Cubs? The one before Pie?
Sheesh.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was drafted in '98.
He's already 28 years old.
He joins the long tradition of "Cubs saviors" that didn't work out, like Jerome Walton, Gary Scott, Turk Wendell, Mike Harkey, Derrick May, "Tuffy" Rhodes, Steve Trachsel, Kevin Orie, Kerry Wood, Mark Prior, Kyle Farnsworth, Bobby Hill, and Hee Seop Choi.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you into the bay area music scene at all, jre?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really.
I haven't listened to much music over the past couple of years.
Why?
by The Jerry Royster Experience on Apr 1, 2008 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
just wondered.
it's such a hotbed. living in chicago i thought i had it made, but already in six months here i see how wrong i was.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You did have it made
Chicago is a great place for music, but so is the "Gay" Area.
Have you been mostly to shows in SF or Oakland?
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on Apr 1, 2008 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mostly sf...bimbo's, fillmore, warfield, great american
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hee Seop Choi
My favorite Cub prospect flameout:
He's the one that half-assed a pop foul that allowed AJ one more swing of the bat. Grand Salami next pitch. Turning point of the '05 season (to me).
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
whatchu talkin about, willis?
aj hit one homer off the cubs in '05, it wasn't a grand slam, and it was in a 12-2 sox win. are you thinking of the three-run homer in '06?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that can't be it either because choi wasn't in that game.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choi
Didn't he successfully slam his skull to the ground at Wrigley while playing the Yankees? I recall they had to open the right field gate to allow an ambulance in to pick up his carcass.
Share the passion, show the swagger, pray for the bullpen.
by tailgater on Apr 1, 2008 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you just april fooling me?
choi was never on the cubs when aj was on the sox.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choi was with the Dodgers
you could look it up.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry. my bad, even if your memory has suffered a little big fish syndrome...2 run shot. ;-)
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, it wasn't a granny:
Rowand worked Brazoban to a full count before hitting a bouncer up the middle that scored Harris and tied the game at 3.
"We've been in that situation before quite a few times, in the late innings with the game on the line," Rowand said. "When you have that repetition, you tend not to get nervous."
That brought up Pierzynski, who was mired in a 1-for-20 slump.
"Pierzynski was crying like a little baby before he got that hit," manager Ozzie Guillen said. "This kid's got a tendency to get down on himself. Every time he [doesn't] get a hit, he's moaning and moping and crying. I said, 'Quit crying and just hit the ball.'"
Pierzynski also worked Brazoban to a full count, and it looked as if the game might be headed to extra innings when he popped up near first base. But the ball was just out of Hee Seop Choi's reach, giving Pierzynski another chance.
He didn't disappoint, homering to left-center for his 10th of the year. His teammates poured out of the dugout to mob him at home plate while the crowd of 36,067 gave him a standing ovation.
"It was one hit," he said, "but it was a big hit."
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
peavy, penny, zambrano, sheets, harden...and masset?
sixth highest VORP amongst pitchers at 2.6. nice cushion - i wonder how fast he can blow it.
and talking about digging yourself a hole: -6.3 for MB, last amongst all players by a substantial margin.
obviously this is after a minimal amount of games and is for amusement purposes only.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
do they calculate for relievers? if so, how does flash gordon stand?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
second to last
-4.4 i believe.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I'm repeating anything...
but I was just thrilled to see the actual fight the Sox put up after being down that far. As I am guessing will be the case all year, we'll have great sticks and questionable pitching.
As far as O Cab is concerned, I'd like to start the season by looking at the glass half-full and attribute to his bonehead gaffs to a zealous desire to win, as opposed to being a hot dog. Personally, I was pumped to see the guy blow through a stop sign, go flying into home and get up shaking a fist...good for him.
161-1...still a possibility!
Share the passion, show the swagger, pray for the bullpen.
by tailgater on Apr 1, 2008 1:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and for you draft watchers
from goldstein's chat
rikter (Orange County): Yo KG tear apart this potential top 5 for the upcoming draft. 1. Rays - Aaron Crow 2. Pirates - Brian Matusz 3. Royals - Tim Beckham 4. Orioles - Pedro Alvarez 5. Giants - Tanner Scheppers You have the top two college arms, the best high school bat, the best bat that will fall due to bonus demands and injury, and finally a pitcher that I feel sits just behind the top two and just in front of the next group of college arms. Let me have it!
Kevin Goldstein: I think you have the first four guys right talent wise, but I don't think you have the order right -- remember, it's only April 1, and MUCH will still change. As far as #5 goes, Sheppers seems like a BIT of a reach, but only a bit. Right now, people seem to be in agreement on those first four guys being the first four guys, but ask 10 people who No. 5 is and you get 10 different answers.
the point he's making is a point i've been making on here to all those who think the sox should have tanked or something to get to #5. after the first few picks (this year it's looking like four but, as he says, that can change) you tend to get some bunching. the difference between 5 and 8, especially in looking how things are shaping up this year, is pretty much nothing.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
they just needed to tank a little sooner. i had forgotten that they were only 6 more losses from a top 2 pick.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
6 is kind of a lot
and considering who they were playing for a lot of the year, i'd say, whether intended or not, they were tanking for quite a while.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but 15-12 in september, including 7 wins against the indians, tigers, and angels, is just irresponsible. ;-)
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
on whose part, though?
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm being facetious. i don't even want a team to undertake any personnel or lineup decisions
with the primary purpose to lose a game for a better draft slot. if it just so happens that it makes sense to shut a guy down when you're out of the running, so be it. and it goes without saying nobody on the field should ever do it.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, i got that
i do read posts before i reply. i was too.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i do, too. just not WU's.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, yeah
that's implied.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really. He keeps repeating himself.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
which also reminds me...
is anybody here upset that the sox couldn't get a ball out of the infield with the bases loaded and nobody out?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nope
but that orlando cabrera sure gets my panties in a bundle.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm not alluding to my panties, hugh
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the idea of your panties still give me a really sick feeling. just avoid in the future. other topics to be avoided include hillary clinton, the "Major League" movies, and david aardsma
and the freaking second that uribe is off the team, he'll be on that list, too
by hugh on Apr 1, 2008 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nope
"panties" - along with knickers, undies, and skivvies - form an essential part of my repertoire. i can no more refrain from using it than johan santana can refrain from throwing a changeup.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
i would much prefer one of the synonyms that you listed. knickers, undies, and skivvies all sound better than panties.
a fair compromise would be to stick to one of those.
by hugh on Apr 1, 2008 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Larry wears "Depends"?
Me too! The bathroom lines at The Cell can be brutal.
Share the passion, show the swagger, pray for the bullpen.
by tailgater on Apr 1, 2008 2:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
fair to you
i don't really care what your reaction is. at any rate, considering my rate of panties usage is probably an order of magnitude higher today than it's even been, largely because of your response, i'd recommend simply ignoring it in the future.
panties.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your rate of panties usage, Larry?
I'm sorry. I just walked into the middle of this discussion.
by palehose67 on Apr 1, 2008 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that was deliberate, of course
one of the funner exchanges i've had in a while.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know.
But I actually started at the bottom (so to speak) on that string of comments.
by palehose67 on Apr 1, 2008 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bottom, panties, and string in the same thought.
I'm getting flush all of a sudden. Oh, my.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
larry
if you give WU a heart attack, i'm going to move to have you banned.
by hugh on Apr 1, 2008 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Had the requisite exam last week
BP 98/60. Okey dokey - but thanks for the concern.
Nice to see a day off has sharpened our focus.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Say it ain't so
O Cab is playing for the other team? Metaphorically, of course.
Hmmm...I always wondered about Jose Valentin...with the Freddy Mercury overbite and all.
Share the passion, show the swagger, pray for the bullpen.
by tailgater on Apr 1, 2008 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he means ChicagoPeter...
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah. Cuz balls out of the infield
loaded them in the first place.
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you know I attended WS Fantasy Camp?
And drink an occasional cask of Pinot Noir?
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. Maybe a diary is in order?
;-)
Next time, Bhoov, do some research.
by Chiburb on Apr 1, 2008 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
mmm...cask.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
re
to all those who think the sox should have tanked or something to get to #5
the sox didn't need to tank to get to #5, they needed just 2 more Ls
I don't see how 2 more Ls is 'tanking it'
by The Wizard on Apr 1, 2008 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and how were they supposed to get there, then?
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
forfeit!
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought by 'tanking it'
you meant for the entire time
by The Wizard on Apr 1, 2008 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
as far as the 'how'
by having used mcdougal and heath more!
by The Wizard on Apr 1, 2008 7:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1.8% of the schedule
doesn't seem like a lot. Especially when they sucked all year. A little foresight goes a long way.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 1:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
which is why seems is often deceiving
six wins is a whole lot.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wonder what would have happened if Wasserman
was in there, instead of Dotel! I think we haveto be patient with Ramirez.. He had alot on his plate yesterday. Never seen a pitcher that looks so dominant one game and then look so pathetic the next. A real Jekyll and Hyde!
by SoxfaninAZ on Apr 1, 2008 1:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
are you sure wasserman would have been in the game over dotel?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
offseason moves
i'm glad that one of the main objectives of the offseason was to shore up the relief situation and then promptly blow the first game on one of our main pickups
by The Scoper on Apr 1, 2008 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, your right!
He probably would'nt have been. Just frustrated from another one of Kenny Williams great off season aquasitions!
by SoxfaninAZ on Apr 1, 2008 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i totally wonder what would have happened if chrisy mathewson had strided out of the bullpen instead
that would have totally fucked up the indians.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that would have blown ALL of our minds.
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, Three Finger Brown would've done it
Christy pitched in relief in 1904, so I would not have been surprised. He's flexible that way.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
we always need to be careful with absolute statements
especially considering WU is really, really old.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't you mean we "more often than not" need to be careful with absolute statements?
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nope
you know there are always exceptions.
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buckley III is in full throttle today
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
He's got the exact number of camels on the pinhead down pat today.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Err, angels dancing?
Cames go through the eye don't they?
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and vidal III isn't in full throttle
the law of conservation of masset: no matter how much masset you use up, there is always masset in your system.
by larry on Apr 1, 2008 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now you're just piling on
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think of you as gore vidal III at all...vidal sassoon II, maybe...
Well, Kenny, I have to hand it to you. It's the best mindfuck yet.
by Toonderstrook on Apr 1, 2008 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe Buck was referring to Pete
Are you peering through my blinds at night? My hair isn't THAT good.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They didn't let Sassoon through customs either didn't they?
In England, Horsley is widely seen as a fairly harmless eccentric, and hardly a danger to society. His rejection struck many as using a bazooka to kill a fly.
"It wasn't like he came in with a syringe sticking out of his arm and a drink in his hand," said Carrie Kania, of Harper Perennial, the U.S. publisher of Horsley's book.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you're going to stick me with a moniker
I prefer Sebastian Horsley thank you very much.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you consider yourself a "dandy"?
That is one entertaining guy! What marvelous parents!
I wonder if they had something to do with Northern Rock, the bank that was nationalised this year (when a Bear Stearns-like run on it forced the govt. to bail it out). Wealth is a mother.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love this guy!
This is some of the most fascinating shit I've read in ages, you can't make this up - I love the part where he had special pockets sewn into his Saville Row bespoke suits to hold his syringes.
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was a little knocked out
with the voluntary crucifixion. Keeehrist.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on Apr 1, 2008 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My favorite part
was when his female editor was suggesting some harsh cuts to his prose, and he threatened to shove her head in the loo and sodomize her - the beast!
by ChicagoPete on Apr 1, 2008 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs