[baseball7897]

Thomas played in thirty-two games and hit 12 homers last season, not the kind of numbers that are going to make a huge difference one way or the other.

 

I suppose White Sox GM Kenny Williams, manager Ozzie Guillen and most of the clubhouse that commented on the chemistry being better in the clubhouse because Thomas isn't around isn't all that important. I mean after all, it's only the GM, Manager and the players that said it.

 

I guess having players congratulate a teammate for moving a runner over shouldn't have any bearing. I mean, it's only the guys that know more about baseball and have been in the game longer than me or anyone else in this forum.

 

USSoccer, baseball is so much more of a team game than you think. Is there a pitcher-batter matchup? Yes, but the batter isn't in that alone, nor is the pitcher. Who do you think tells the pitcher what pitch to throw?? The manager tells the catcher who tells the pitcher unless the manager completely trusts his catcher. Who do you think tells the hitter what to do? The third base coach by flashing those signs that you see. He isn't rubbing his hat, belly, arms for nothing.. it's called COMMUNICATION. Who do you think tells the infield and outfield where to play in certain situations?? The manager or the bench coach.. Who do you think sets up the defense with runners on?? The third baseman or the catcher after the manager flashes a sign to tell that player how to set up the defense. To say baseball isn't a team sport is ignorance.

 

Here's the bottom line without stepping on anyone's toes or offending anyone. Fans have numbers at their disposal and for the most part you stand by those numbers because that's the only thing you have. Sadly, fans aren't allowed to go into a clubhouse, interview players, get to know them on a daily basis, etc.. like myself and the rest of the media. I believe in the "chemistry breeds winning" theory because I know first hand that it works, much like you fans know that player A is a better hitter, defender, etc.. than player B because you have numbers to back it up.

 

I admit that there is truth to numbers, much like there is truth to what I have said.

 

I know when one of my teammates moves a runner over he did his job. And when he walks into the dugout he gets high fives left and right from everyone.

 

I agree with most of things you say jaxxradio. Some people on this forum get so caught up with the numbers. Numbers dont tell you everything. Its the little things that win baseball games.

[USSoccer]

Thomas played in thirty-two games and hit 12 homers last season, not the kind of numbers that are going to make a huge difference one way or the other.

 

Hitting 12 HR's in only 32 games is a pretty good level of contribution.

 

I suppose White Sox GM Kenny Williams, manager Ozzie Guillen and most of the clubhouse that commented on the chemistry being better in the clubhouse because Thomas isn't around isn't all that important. I mean after all, it's only the GM, Manager and the players that said it.

 

How often does a front office pull out the chemistry card in order to justify a decision? Should it matter than Guillen hated Thomas from their days of playing together, and would have found a way to throw him under the bus no matter what? Ditto for Williams, who might be the most immature GM in baseball. How stunning that they would cite chemistry in a city like Chicago to justify not bringing back a HOF player.

 

Also, for all your talk about chemistry, the 2005 White Sox managed to win a World Series with Frank Thomas in their locker room, despite him being a giant jerk.

 

USSoccer, baseball is so much more of a team game than you think. Is there a pitcher-batter matchup? Yes, but the batter isn't in that alone, nor is the pitcher. Who do you think tells the pitcher what pitch to throw?? The manager tells the catcher who tells the pitcher unless the manager completely trusts his catcher. Who do you think tells the hitter what to do? The third base coach by flashing those signs that you see. He isn't rubbing his hat, belly, arms for nothing.. it's called COMMUNICATION. Who do you think tells the infield and outfield where to play in certain situations?? The manager or the bench coach.. Who do you think sets up the defense with runners on?? The third baseman or the catcher after the manager flashes a sign to tell that player how to set up the defense. To say baseball isn't a team sport is ignorance.

 

Baseball isn't as much of a team sport as the other major sports are. I'll say it over and over and over. You may think it's ignorance, but it's the truth. I don't care about the romaticism of baseball or it's myths about whatever. Whether or not you like a guy in your locker room is not going to affect your ability to call him off of a pop fly in the infield, or call for a slider low and away on a 1-2 count. If you and your coach have differing opinions on stem cell research, or if your catcher is a prima donna, you're still going to execute a pitch that's called, because you're a professional, and that's your job. Outside the lines, whatever. If Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez don't hang out, or never talk to each other outside of on the field, does that make the team worse? If Jacque Jones stands up for Sean Marshall's wedding, is he going to play harder for Marshall than he would for Zambrano? Zambrano rips his teamates all the time for bad defensive plays; does Matt Murton tank plays on Z in LF because of it? No. Why? Because professional athletes don't have to be best buddies in order to compete and win together.

 

I guess having players congratulate a teammate for moving a runner over shouldn't have any bearing. I mean, it's only the guys that know more about baseball and have been in the game longer than me or anyone else in this forum

 

There are enough people who contribute to this site who have been athletes at the collegiate level, or in some cases, higher than that. Collectively, they're able to form opinions based on their direct experiences as athletes. Pulling out the "They've been around the game" line is a poor argument. An out is an out. Productive outs are still outs, and being excited about advancing a runner should only happen in very limited circumstances, and even still it's not as good as not making an out.

 

Sadly, fans aren't allowed to go into a clubhouse, interview players, get to know them on a daily basis, etc.. like myself and the rest of the media. I believe in the "chemistry breeds winning" theory because I know first hand that it works

 

Please. Just because most fans don't get to go inside a clubhouse doesn't mean they aren't equally capable of evaluating a situation. That's another tired, baseball old-guard argument that seems to think you must have played or been around the game to understand it's mythos. It's wrong. I can pick 15 posters from this website that, if they were given a $95m payroll and 3 years, would have produced results better than the Chicago Cubs from 2004-2006. You don't have to have been in a clubhouse to be able to tell a productive player from a terrible player.

 

Chemistry does not breed winning. Winning creats on-field chemistry. I've been on teams that got along and were terrible, and some of the best teams I've been on featured guys who hated each other. I've seen co-captains get in fistfights on teams that won conferences and Cups. Chemistry does not begat winning no matter how romantic the notion may be.

 

[stitchface]

Stitch, I don't like statistics because they aren't the end all on how to judge a player and more importantly from a radio broadcasters perspective the majority of fans listening in to the game don't want to hear what Aramis Ramirez average is while wearing purple underwear on a Tuesday night with clear skies and a full moon (BTW, he is 4-9 in those situations this season..).

 

If you were a GM and you were given the choice between a player who puts up MVP caliber numbers but isn't a team player and a player who puts up good, but not great, numbers who is considered to be a great teammate, who would you pick? If you choose the guy who puts up MVP numbers that isn't a team player, you wouldn't be making the right decision if you want to win a championship IMO.

 

Why do you think guys like Barry Bonds and Frank Thomas haven't won a ring yet?? They both belong in the Hall of Fame and in Bonds case, he's the greatest player I have ever seen and will probably ever see in my life. So, why do you think it is that these guys haven't won a ring??

 

Why did the White Sox happen to win it all last season, the first year after Thomas left? Because the clubhouse got a whole lot better chemistry wise without that pain in the arse in the clubhouse.

 

and nobody interested in statistics would care about that number either. dusty would probably use it to make a decision though.

 

could not disagree with you more on the second point. Ever heard of Reggie Jackson? How many rings did he win? Could it be that bonds and thomas's teammates weren't good enough? The idea that the white sox won last year because thomas was gone is beyond ludicrous. wasn't AJ Pierzynski on that team? What's his reputation as a teammate like? You can't be serious in making that statement. Gary Sheffield won a ring. So did Miguel Cabrera - isn't he a bad seed too? This could go on for hours. Ernie Banks - how come he never won a championship? Was it Ron Santo's clubhouse chemistry? Come on, this argument is ridiculous.

[stitchface]

Its the little things that win baseball games

 

yes, little things like outscoring the other team.

[stitchface]

ok, so who had good at bats in this inning?

 

Mark Ellis: Strike looking, Ball, Ellis safe at first on Unknown's fielding error, Ellis to second advancing on throw.

Marco Scutaro: Ball, Foul, Foul, Scutaro grounded out to second, Ellis to third

Dan Johnson hit for Antonio Perez.

Dan Johnson: Johnson hit sacrifice fly to center, Ellis scored.

Jason Kendall: Ball, Ball, Strike looking, Kendall singled to center.

Nick Swisher: Strike looking, Strike swinging, Foul, Foul, Swisher struck out swinging.

 

 

I count Kendall and no one else. of course, it was the ninth and the A's were down two - should that matter? Are Scutaro and Johnson's ABs good since they got high fives in the dugout?

 

of course not. if the A's were down one would I think differently? Yes.

[stitchface]

I want to ask yourself a serious question. How did they get the information over the last 100 years of baseball? You can't use a regular boxscore because it doesn't have enough in depth information needed to get the numbers.

 

Are your other questions not serious?

 

Perhaps I exaggerated a little. 40 years of data is sufficient anyway. You might have also pointed out that the style of play in the 1910s makes that data sort of irrelevant anyway.

[stitchface]

I want to ask yourself a serious question. How did they get the information over the last 100 years of baseball? You can't use a regular boxscore because it doesn't have enough in depth information needed to get the numbers.

 

Are your other questions not serious?

 

Perhaps I exaggerated a little. 40 years of data is sufficient anyway. You might have also pointed out that the style of play in the 1910s makes that data sort of irrelevant anyway.

 

50 years worth is available here - http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/

 

lots of fun on that site if you've never been there before. You'll especially enjoy this page:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CLE/1948_sched.shtml

 

more than this one:

 

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B10260FLO1997.htm

 

How did I ever forget about that game? I always remember Cleveland losing to Atlanta . . .

[baseball7897]

ok, so who had good at bats in this inning?

 

Mark Ellis: Strike looking, Ball, Ellis safe at first on Unknown's fielding error, Ellis to second advancing on throw.

Marco Scutaro: Ball, Foul, Foul, Scutaro grounded out to second, Ellis to third

Dan Johnson hit for Antonio Perez.

Dan Johnson: Johnson hit sacrifice fly to center, Ellis scored.

Jason Kendall: Ball, Ball, Strike looking, Kendall singled to center.

Nick Swisher: Strike looking, Strike swinging, Foul, Foul, Swisher struck out swinging.

 

 

I count Kendall and no one else. of course, it was the ninth and the A's were down two - should that matter? Are Scutaro and Johnson's ABs good since they got high fives in the dugout?

 

of course not. if the A's were down one would I think differently? Yes.

 

How can you not give credit to Dan Johnson for bringing that run home?? I dont understand why you dont give credit to a guy who did his job. :?

[Mephistopheles]

In that inning:

 

+0.38 runs - Mark Ellis

+0.23 runs - Throwing Error

-0.17 runs - Marco Scutaro (even though he moved the runner up)

+0.12 runs - Dan Johnson

-0.11 runs - Nick Swisher

 

When Dan Johnson came up, the average number of runs was .98 runs.

[stitchface]

ok, so who had good at bats in this inning?

 

Mark Ellis: Strike looking, Ball, Ellis safe at first on Unknown's fielding error, Ellis to second advancing on throw.

Marco Scutaro: Ball, Foul, Foul, Scutaro grounded out to second, Ellis to third

Dan Johnson hit for Antonio Perez.

Dan Johnson: Johnson hit sacrifice fly to center, Ellis scored.

Jason Kendall: Ball, Ball, Strike looking, Kendall singled to center.

Nick Swisher: Strike looking, Strike swinging, Foul, Foul, Swisher struck out swinging.

 

 

I count Kendall and no one else. of course, it was the ninth and the A's were down two - should that matter? Are Scutaro and Johnson's ABs good since they got high fives in the dugout?

 

of course not. if the A's were down one would I think differently? Yes.

 

How can you not give credit to Dan Johnson for bringing that run home?? I dont understand why you dont give credit to a guy who did his job. :?

 

 

you're not serious are you? the A's were down two in the bottom of the ninth . . . pretty self explanatory, isn't it?

[Mephistopheles]

ooh, it was the ninth inning down by 2? Shoulda used win expectancy, it certainly would have been a negative play at the time.

[baseball7897]

ok, so who had good at bats in this inning?

 

Mark Ellis: Strike looking, Ball, Ellis safe at first on Unknown's fielding error, Ellis to second advancing on throw.

Marco Scutaro: Ball, Foul, Foul, Scutaro grounded out to second, Ellis to third

Dan Johnson hit for Antonio Perez.

Dan Johnson: Johnson hit sacrifice fly to center, Ellis scored.

Jason Kendall: Ball, Ball, Strike looking, Kendall singled to center.

Nick Swisher: Strike looking, Strike swinging, Foul, Foul, Swisher struck out swinging.

 

 

I count Kendall and no one else. of course, it was the ninth and the A's were down two - should that matter? Are Scutaro and Johnson's ABs good since they got high fives in the dugout?

 

of course not. if the A's were down one would I think differently? Yes.

 

How can you not give credit to Dan Johnson for bringing that run home?? I dont understand why you dont give credit to a guy who did his job. :?

 

 

you're not serious are you? the A's were down two in the bottom of the ninth . . . pretty self explanatory, isn't it?

 

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

[Balsa]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

[CubColtPacer]

ok, so who had good at bats in this inning?

 

Mark Ellis: Strike looking, Ball, Ellis safe at first on Unknown's fielding error, Ellis to second advancing on throw.

Marco Scutaro: Ball, Foul, Foul, Scutaro grounded out to second, Ellis to third

Dan Johnson hit for Antonio Perez.

Dan Johnson: Johnson hit sacrifice fly to center, Ellis scored.

Jason Kendall: Ball, Ball, Strike looking, Kendall singled to center.

Nick Swisher: Strike looking, Strike swinging, Foul, Foul, Swisher struck out swinging.

 

 

I count Kendall and no one else. of course, it was the ninth and the A's were down two - should that matter? Are Scutaro and Johnson's ABs good since they got high fives in the dugout?

 

of course not. if the A's were down one would I think differently? Yes.

 

How can you not give credit to Dan Johnson for bringing that run home?? I dont understand why you dont give credit to a guy who did his job. :?

 

 

you're not serious are you? the A's were down two in the bottom of the ninth . . . pretty self explanatory, isn't it?

 

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

 

As a fan of productive outs, that runner at 3rd base versus that runner at home down by 2 in the ninth makes absolutely no difference at all-Johnson's job is to get on base there, not trade an out for a run that doesn't matter in that context (another hit is needed to score a run anyway-and that hit would have brought the runner home). If they had been down by only 1, Johnson's out would have been incredibly important. If it had been the 8th inning down by 2, then it's an ok out to make to trade for the run, although not ideal. In the 9th down by 2 though, hitting a sac fly is not a batter's job.

[UBlink]

How can you not give credit to Dan Johnson for bringing that run home?? I dont understand why you dont give credit to a guy who did his job. :?

 

 

you're not serious are you? the A's were down two in the bottom of the ninth . . . pretty self explanatory, isn't it?

 

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

 

As a fan of productive outs, that runner at 3rd base versus that runner at home down by 2 in the ninth makes absolutely no difference at all-Johnson's job is to get on base there, not trade an out for a run that doesn't matter in that context (another hit is needed to score a run anyway-and that hit would have brought the runner home). If they had been down by only 1, Johnson's out would have been incredibly important. If it had been the 8th inning down by 2, then it's an ok out to make to trade for the run, although not ideal. In the 9th down by 2 though, hitting a sac fly is not a batter's job.

 

And if his teammates gave him high 5's for a sac fly in that situation, that's more proof that there's a shortage of rocket scientists in the dugout.

[baseball7897]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

[USSoccer]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

 

And his point is that Johnson's AB should only be considered a "Good AB" or "Doing His Job" in the context of a completely different game situation. In THAT particular game situation, it was a failed AB. His out is worth more than that 1 run in a 2 run game. His point has nothing to do with "stats".

 

Getting on base is not a "stat". It's being smart about a game situation and recognizing that, in Johnson's case, a sac fly is worthless. Losing by 1 is still losing. He should have done everything possible to get on base. His making an out is letting his team down.

[Warpticon]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

 

...And that's exactly what you're doing. Not paying attention to the other details, such as that you needed a hit, not an out, because you only have three outs to get two runs in. That the one run doesn't matter at all if you can't get the second in, and with the out, you just made it a lot more difficult to score that second run.

 

And I really wish people who don't understand what the word "subjective" means would stop throwing it around.

[Balsa]

Statistics are the very antithesis of subjective.

[stitchface]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

 

:shock: I stand corrected raisin.

[baseball7897]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

 

:shock: I stand corrected raisin.

 

What is that supposed to mean?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Haha.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Yeah it's pretty self explanatory. Not giving credit to a guy who did his job is crazy. If you're going to make a out, make it productive. That is exactly what Dan Johnson did. I would rather have Dan Johnson bringing home that run on a sac fly, rather than not bringing home that run at all.

I'm pretty sure you're missing the point completely.

 

No im not missing the point. He said he thought Kendall's Ab was the only good one in the inning. Which is completely false. Not everyting has to be about stats. Stats aren't useless, but stats are so subjective that one must really pay extreme attention to other details of the game that stats don't record.

 

So in that situation, would you rather Johnson drive in the run with a sac fly, or walk/get hit by a pitch/hit a pop up that gets dropped/etc.?

[baseball7897]

Haha.

 

:roll:

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Haha.

 

:roll:

 

Wow...I had that same reaction a few pages back!