Contreras to DL; Ozzie disappointed

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 4:30 PM CDT in News Comment 106 comments

Jose Contreras was placed on the 15-day disabled list prior to Sunday's series finale against the Royals, and Ozzie Guillen was not a happy man.

The White Sox manager certainly didn't find a problem with Contreras being temporarily shelved -- a move made retroactive to July 18 -- due to right elbow tendinitis. Instead, Guillen seemed bothered by Contreras' attempt to pitch through the injury without informing the club.

"I don't want to say upset, but I was a little disappointed when one of my players is hiding this stuff from us for no reason," Guillen said. "I don't want any of my players to go out there and be in any kind of pain and try to be a hero, then all of a sudden I don't have them."

... "The way he talked to me, I don't believe what he said," Guillen said. "I said, 'We have a meeting before and you told me [you were] fine and ready to go,' and then three hours later, he can't pitch.

"I want my players to be honest with me. If you go out there and you are hurt, you're not going to produce the way you should be producing. I think when you fight through something you can't, that's not helping anybody.

"That's why he was handling it the wrong way," added Guillen. "If he's not healthy, nobody is that good. I don't mind players playing with pain, soreness. When you're hurt, you have to be careful about what you're doing out there."

Any idea when will he be back?

Contreras would be eligible to pitch again next Sunday against Detroit, but manager Ozzie Guillen said that "he's not going to come off Sunday just because. If he's not ready to pitch, he's going to stay there until he's ready to perform."

"I wasn't too pleased the way he handled the situation," Guillen said. "He didn’t let [trainer] Herm Schneider know, myself or [pitching coach Don] Cooper know and he continued to pitch that way. When you're hurt, you're not helping the ballclub. I don't want any of my players to go out with pain and try to be a hero. I was -– I don't want to say upset -– a little disappointed when one of my players is hiding stuff for no reason."

0 recs | Comment 106 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

A trade for a starter would be nice...

Sox starters are losing their steam and the Twins are set to get Liriano back.

I am all for a Duchscherer trade. He was really good today against the Yankees.

by SSH2005 on Jul 20, 2008 4:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think the Sox have enough to get him

What would it take? Fields, Poreda, Ramirez, and…nope. The Sox don’t have enough stuff.

And, honestly, I don’t think the Sox can hold off the Twins anyway so I’d just as soon not see a trade. Just play it out and see what happens.

Announcer: [A fan] from Frederick, Maryland, wants to know why you don't go out and get some more team speed.

Weaver: Team speed, for Chrissake, you get BLEEP god damn little fleas on the bases getting picked off trying to steal, getting thrown out, taking runs away from you. You get them big BLEEP who can hit the BLEEP ball out of the BLEEP ballpark and you can't make any god damn mistakes.

by hitlesswonder on Jul 20, 2008 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

waving the white flag, eh?

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 4:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Waving the white flag while still in 1st place

Nice!

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the logic behind the uberpessimists on this site is entertaining.

good teams never lose to bad teams and bad pitchers never win games.
we know that the sox have lost to good teams and bad pitchers.
therefore, the sox are not a good team but nevertheless are in first place.
the only logical conclusion then is that there are no good teams, at least not in the al central.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not to speak for hitless...

but I don’t think he’s necessarily being pessimistic. The combination of uncertainty about Duch (among other things, that .208 BAPIP is a problem, although colin went more in depth and that subject doesn’t need to be debated here) and the amount of players the Sox would have to give up is just too risky. In any case, I think he’s just saying that either these guys the Sox have will win the Central or they won’t. Outside of adding another bullpen arm I don’t think there’s a lot the Sox could do to really solidify themselves. Heck, even the trade scenario that’s been brought up that I like a lot (trading for Daniel Cabrera) really doesn’t provide much more certainty down the stretch than just sticking with Contreras and Floyd.

Ahh, I see AJ Burnett was mentioned below… and to me that’s more of the same. You’d probably have to give up too much to get him and even so, he’s likely to opt out of his contract at year’s end. Then again, Burnett is like Vazquez in that his FIP is always better than his ERA, and I think that’s the type of pitcher Kenny is fond of (even if he may not come right out and say it).

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wasn't equating hitless with the people i referred to as uberpessimists at all. you know who i was referring to.

but regardless, he opined that the sox can’t hold off the twins even with the addition of others. hence my playful white flag remark.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If I didn't think the price would be absurdly high

Huston Street is just about the only name mentioned that perked my ears.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

A team that is trying to win a division with another team biting at their heels...

can’t afford to lose two of three to the lowly Royals. Meanwhile, the heel-biters took two of three from a team that just beat the Sox in a series. Is anyone excited about the Sox facing the Rangers again?

by SSH2005 on Jul 20, 2008 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh, yes?

by larry on Jul 21, 2008 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If not, pack it in now

You don’t think we can beat the Rangers? You ARE pessimistic.

The Butkus year - time to knock everyone on their ass.

by winningugly on Jul 21, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They just lost 2 of 3 to the Royals...

and now they face the best offense in baseball in a hitter’s park when their pitchers are struggling. Not sure how that is pessimism.

by SSH2005 on Jul 21, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

omfg!

the small sample size squaker strikes again!

maybe it’s just me, but i tend to like to face mediocre to horseshit baseball teams, like, whenever humanly possible.

by larry on Jul 21, 2008 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

NEWSFLASH!!!

the mighty texas rangers, when playing in the cozy confines of their home bandbox, are 25-21. the only obvious conclusion is that every game they have lost has been pitched by a number one or number two starter completely on top of his game.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 21, 2008 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK, then I take it that you two expect the Sox to win two of three?

Anything less would be a disappointment, right?

by SSH2005 on Jul 21, 2008 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

In a 3 game seires the difference of one game is .333, right?

Hence the small sample size issue. How many did we win in a row vs. KC before KC took the last 2? 7? So are we .000 WP or .778? Depends on your sample size.

We’ve been blown out of one game recently – otherwise we’ve been maddeningly close. 64 games left in the season. It’s hot. Relax.

The Butkus year - time to knock everyone on their ass.

by winningugly on Jul 21, 2008 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

no, clearly anything less would be just downright pathetic.

by larry on Jul 21, 2008 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and, to answer your question, yes that's what i would expect. that's what i always expect in a three game series at home. however, i understand that sometimes a team will win 3. or 1. or none.

so long as they win about .615 over the course of the season i’m not going to give a huge shit what they do in a particular series or homestand or month.

by larry on Jul 21, 2008 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

by SSH2005 on Jul 21, 2008 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

if the sox lose 2 of 3 or get swept, go ahead, be negative nancy. but why do it before they even play the games?

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 21, 2008 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

go for roberts and cabrera

i don’t want to see any more of this tomfoolery on this guestbook. and get off my motherfucking lawn.---good ole larry

by furby2056 on Jul 20, 2008 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Sox are in shambles right now.

Maybe I’m not thinking clearly , but will we be able to hold off the Royals?!

are you trying to use stats around here? what the fuck do you think this is? - MM

by colintj on Jul 20, 2008 5:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

assuming the sox finish 0-65, it is unlikely.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

lol!

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heard a rumor

that KW was pursuing A. J. Burnett. Anybody else here this? Thoughts? Would we have anything to offer to get him?

As far as pessimism, it’s a long season and teams go through ups and downs. Sox should have won today, but it’s not going to break the season. They won two in KC that they shouldn’t have won, so these things even out. Sox remain in first and should proceed as though they are committed to winning it.

by VAChisox on Jul 20, 2008 5:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't expect a big trade

Not because I don’t think this team could be improved, but the Sox really don’t have the pieces to pull off such a trade.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and aj burnett = blah

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Would we have anything to offer to get him?

jerry owens will be enough

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some stats

rather than panic.

The offense is not the problem:

Last 7 days, .913 OPS. Last 14 days, .805 OPS. Last 28 days, .781 OPS

The pitching has had troubles lately:

Last 7 days, 7.27. Last 14 days 5.82 ERA. Last 28 days, 4.21 ERA

But then think about exactly who has been on the DL for the Sox or (as is obvious now) pitching through injury. Linebrink has been out for a week and ineffective for the last 2 due to “sleepy arm”. Jenks went on the DL. Contreras was pitching through pain/injury.

With those guys out/ineffective, its no surprise the ERA goes up as everyone shifts around in the bullpen, with guys pitching high leverage innings who should not be.

Meanwhile we knew Floyd was likely to regress, same with Masset .

I guess I would put myself at concerned, but not panicked. But I know no manner of reason will assuage the chicken littles, and I’m not sure why I even try.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 5:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

reason : chicken littles :: oil : water

the truth is that nobody should be shocked at these developments. there was nothing in the first ~95 games to indicate the sox had been transformed into a great team: they had offset miserable offensive performances with surprising ones, benefited from great pitching all-around, including floyd, masset, and contreras for a stretch, and avoided key injuries.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

This year, Herm = superhero

are you trying to use stats around here? what the fuck do you think this is? - MM

by colintj on Jul 20, 2008 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

for a bit at least.

but not even his super duper magical abilities can erase the names of the last month: konerko, jenks, linebrink, contreras, (hopefully for a day) dye

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speaking of Dye...

any word on the injury? I was at the game—did he take it off the inner thigh or closer to the knee?

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

kneecap apparently, x-rays negative.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Toonder = emulsifier (or surfactant, if you so desire)

Research is almost as useless as stats - OG

by rhythm on Jul 21, 2008 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the longer we stay in first then we

don’t need to worry about fucking Minnesota, bollocks to them. We’ll be ok, Kansas have been playing well they have jesus and he is the league leader in something or other. So they will take games off the Twins i bet

regards

Sox fan from England, marching on together

by hoodlight on Jul 20, 2008 6:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Reading on Soxtalk that Clayton Richard has been called up and jack-of-all-trades Adam Russell is down

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 7:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

http://www.wlfi.com/Global/story.asp?S=8704847&nav=menu591_5

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

wonder who gets dropped from the 40

could put somebody on the 60 day.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

when are his team usa games?

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Aug 1-4

Team USA plays an exhibition series against Canada. I would assume he’ll be unavailable from then on. But I’m not sure if he has to report before that.

I think we ought to call Thome and Konerko the "Cholesterol Brothers" because of the way they clog the bases.

by bhoov on Jul 20, 2008 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

he's not on the team anymore

team needs to be finalized by tuesday and he’ll be on a major league roster so he’s out.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Guess I was right after all

Richard for at least 1 start.

I think we ought to call Thome and Konerko the "Cholesterol Brothers" because of the way they clog the bases.

by bhoov on Jul 20, 2008 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

indeed. everyone was right.

or wrong. or something.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

should I frontpage this or wait for something more official?

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

front page it as unconfirmed.

any move wouldn’t likely to be officially announced until tomorrow anyway.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Any thoughts on Richard?

is there enough about him (and would it be worth it to other folks besides myself - I admittedly may not have been paying close enough attention) for Colin (or whoever) to do a pitcher ‘breakdown’? I knew he was having a good year but I didn’t realize just how good - WHIP well under 1.00, only four homers, great control…

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

low babip...

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah...

That did cross my mind when I saw he’s only allowed 90 hits in 120 innings. At the very least, it’d be fair to say that Richard isn’t at all out-of-place as a 6th starter/depth guy, yes?

by CWSKeith on Jul 20, 2008 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

if you like the Gary Huckaby theory on pitchers, now is as good a time as any

and I do, especially for someone with his background. northern, former four star quarterback recruit to Michigan…that will impede development and set back the point at which you’ll expect possible MLB quality performance. get him up with coop, see if he can maintain this level and if not, then Contreras will be ready to come back. besides, it’s better to find out about this now than in august or september.

are you trying to use stats around here? what the fuck do you think this is? - MM

by colintj on Jul 20, 2008 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

joe sheehan second half preview; he's taking the tigers

The interesting case is the Twins, who have ridden a staff that doesn’t walk people and an offense that has overperformed with runners in scoring position, to just shy of first place. As much as any team, they can upgrade over the next two weeks because they have so many massive holes in the lineup. It has never been the Twins’ personality to do so, so while they probably will improve the rotation—by swapping out Livan Hernandez for Francisco Liriano—it won’t be enough to make up for the decline in their offense down the stretch. They’re the most imminent threat to the Sox, but not the most dangerous one unless they make a surprising trade.
The White Sox have a 7½-game lead on the Tigers with 66 games to play. The Playoff Odds Report gives the Sox a 71.6 percent shot at the postseason, the Tigers 6.1 percent. I think that overstates the case, but in the face of that, it’s hard to pick the Tigers to make a run and steal this thing. So I’m going to do it anyway, not because I hate the White Sox—frankly, Kenny Williams has become a top-six GM or so, and I think Ozzie Guillen is easily a top-ten manager—but because of the regression I see them having from some key performers. A two-week stretch starting Friday, in which they play the Tigers six times and the Twins four, will set the tone for the rest of the year.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7830

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get Sheehan's reasoning

“Look for the White Sox to take steps back, allowing more runs and scoring fewer.”

I get the allowing more runs, but the scoring fewer—who exactly is playing so much above their heads offensively that they will regress? Certainly not Konerko. Crede and Thome are having OK seasons. AJ is right at his career norms. Swish is still down a little, no?

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

quentin and dye?

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

click the link.

actually, that won’t help you. if you want my two cents on such an opinion, it’s the oft repeated line that the sox are an old team that won’t hold up and has got nothing in the cupboard to replace/trade. and it’s a salient point.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I read the article.

He doesn’t address his reasons for the offensive regression at all.

Besides, the Sox are an old team and therefore won’t hold up, but the Tigers are an old team and therefore will kick it into gear? That-does-not-make-sense.

On the pitching I think he’s right (we’re already seeing it), but I don’t think he made the case on the offensive side.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 7:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

dissecting these things grow tiresome. it's an opinion and one he says is based on gut, too. settle down.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I will not settle down.

Sheehan is my least favorite author on BP precisely because he makes unsupported assertions all the time.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I hear he murders puppies too

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's not a difficult task to look at the preseason pecota and where guys on the sox are now and do this thing called a comparison and guess that there will be regression.

dye, quentin, aj, crede. the sox have more starters underperforming than overperforming.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

flip that last one.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

why is quentin underperforming though?

I understand it’s not your article, just curious for your thoughts

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

overperforming.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 7:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

he is overperforming. i don't think he's a .900+ OPS guy for the rest of the year, either. love to be wrong, though.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 7:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

trending?

march/april ops: 1.052
may: .899
june: .849
july: .802

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

perhaps.

i’m more inclined to just say that he’s an .855 guy or something and it’s just variance around that.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

his babip has also gone down every month, from .290 in march/april to .233 in july.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

right. which is why i'm inclined to say the latter numbers are more a product of that than something else.

he’s probably a .280 babip guy (or thereabouts).

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

also, i think he's drawing more attention from other teams. lineup position will do that, too.

he’s somewhat allergic to lefties (welcome to the sox, right?). and they’re bringing more in to face him.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

here's to hoping he ends up around .280 babip at the end of the season.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

after his day off last month (6/16)

928 OPS

take it easy toonder!

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 8:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

last 28 days .838 + july .802 = first few days after his day off must have pretty huge.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

DFA the bum!

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

but a quick look at B-R shows a .940 minor league OPS

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

right.

can be helpful in predicting. of course, a lot of that was down in hitter friendly leagues.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's not that simple

PECOTA really produces a probability distribution, not a single number projection for a player. That number they produce is just a weighted mean of the probability distribution.

The point being, if you’ve got so many PAs for a player in a season, its not just a matter of assuming the player will regress to the weighted mean for the rest of the season – you have more data about what actually happened and can project based on that data. Basically, you know for half the season’s PAs, what percentile he fell into and that helps you make a better prediction for the rest of the PAs that season.

Nate Silver (my favorite author on BP) went into detail about this in an article about Chipper Jones’ chase for .400 a month ago. Here’s the link.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks. i know that. i was oversimplifying just like you were.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I forgot, you know everything larry.

Thanks for patronizing me, oh great one.

Coffee is for closers.

by vince_ on Jul 20, 2008 8:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm not patronizing you.

i just get amused at the dissection people do of the stuff i’m posting from bp these days. gets a little tiresome to be attacking every blessed thing these guys write. i think i’m done posting these.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

maybe a disclaimer would help

like, um, just because i’m linking to this doesn’t mean i necessarily agree with every word of it.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

isn't that SOP?

if it isn’t, I’m fucked…

The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.

by The Wizard on Jul 20, 2008 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you would think so.

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

it wasn't regarding what i posted on a thread earlier today about the twins.

ssh wanted me to “counterpoint” the response to a bp article by john perrotto. just for everyone’s information, i’m not john perotto.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

are you nate silver or joe sheehan?

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wish i was nate silver?

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does he pull down mad trim?

if so, I want to be him as well.

Research is almost as useless as stats - OG

by rhythm on Jul 21, 2008 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

maybe.

also, maybe “you should be reading everything these guys write to gain a context.” or just “don’t post stupid shit in response. thanks.”

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why do you get surprised?

Any publication that believes their shit don’t stank will get attacked on the interwebs, shit, it’s what the interwebs is for.

by madvillian on Jul 20, 2008 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i just wish people would do it slightly better. perhaps meeting the research and intelligence of the content you're criticizing?

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

or at least realizing that there is research and intelligence behind what is written?

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i do especially find fascinating the response that goes...

“i don’t agree with what [insert name of bp guy or gal here] said, but i don’t know why. defend it.”

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

fair enough

I think their is some perception (probably unfair) that BP is anti-Sox. This creates a bit of us vs them mentality.

It’s funny in that article that he praises KW as “top 6” (seriously, that is kinda ripe for deconstruction) and Ozzie as “top 10”, yet most people ignored that.

by madvillian on Jul 20, 2008 8:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

is it just an extension of the typical "we never get any respect" thing

some people latch onto, whether it’s because of the cubs or yankees/red sox east coast stuff?

"fortunately, i'm adhering to a pretty strict, uh, drug, uh, regimen to keep my mind, you know, uh, limber."

by Toonderstrook on Jul 20, 2008 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think the response to this particular article may have been informed, at least in part, by that.

especially the picking the tigers.

it’s also, i think, that people in general have a difficult time understanding/respecting the opinions of others, especially when they disagree. thus, when sheehan (or whoever) gasp forgets to cite a reason for what he thinks (notwithstanding, of course, the particular disclaimer included with this article), it’s absolutely scandalous and means that because he didn’t support it and i don’t agree with it, ergo it’s wrong and unsupportable. and then i feel like because i posted it i have to defend a position i may not necessarily agree with. gets tiresome. especially when the reasons for his positions are not all that difficult to figure out with a few moments of thought.

by larry on Jul 20, 2008 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the true talent of Quentin is what at this point?

He’s now a career .819 OPS and he’s under 27 and he’s ~.900 this year. I’d take the over on, say .865 for the rest of the season as well as

Thome: .865
Dye: .840
Konerko: .820

That’s almost totally offhand, but that’s a decent guess and makes for solid offensive output, no? The pitching’s the thing whereby we’ll win the ‘ship.

are you trying to use stats around here? what the fuck do you think this is? - MM

by colintj on Jul 20, 2008 8:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The homer in me says

Q will finish above 900 OPS, dude just looks like a great hitter. Has a great approach, seems to usually be ahead in the count, and doesn’t miss mistakes.

Go Q!

by madvillian on Jul 20, 2008 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs