Orlando Hudson can be accountable

Orlando Hudson can be accountable
Something doesn't look right // José M. Osorio, Chicago Tribune

From JJ:

"I f***ed it up," Hudson snapped after going 0-4 with a key error as the Sox lost 2-1 to the Cubs Tuesday at U.S. Cellular Field. "I lost the game for [Peavy], that’s it. The man threw a hell of a game, I lost it for him. Point blank. Case closed. We lost. My bad. That’s it."

Orlando Hudson is nothing if not admirable in his willingness to fall on the sword, but it would be better if his self-flagellation was less appropriate.  His lollipop throw to 1st put the deciding run on base in a 2-1 game Tuesday night, his 0 for 4 night at the plate couldn't hide from key situations in the 9-hole, and since Jake Peavy vaguely hinted that it was Hudson's fault, it made it less awkward for him to admit it.

Hudson was switched in a hurry to 3rd, so there should be some sympathy for his poor reactions and instincts at the hot corner.  He also was cut by the Padres for his lack of offense, so expectations for him to hit that much better than the .167/.253/.282 line he's put up in Chicago probably weren't too realistic.

But those two concessions shave his margin for error down to pretty much nothing.  No one wants to see mental lapses from the guy who's only starting due to exigent circumstances.

Those circumstances are worth remembering too.  Hudson wasn't brought on to start for the rest of the season, he came on when Brent Morel was just sitting out to rest his back a bit, not shut down till after the All-Star break.  He was only supposed to provide better emergency coverage than Brent Lillibridge and Eduardo Escobar, which speaks to the low standards for his performance but also the lack of commitment to be showed to him.

Hudson isn't truly the most pressing problem--the Sox offense is still solidly in the top third of the AL while the pitching staff is in a more perilous state--but he's the easiest to amend and improve upon.

Orlando is not Adam Dunn, nor Alex Rios; there's no financial commitment that necessitates waiting for him to play his way out of it.  And he's performing at a level where questions on how much worse career 1st basemen Dan Johnson (.289/.427/.561 in AAA)  could really be than Hudson are at least hypotheticals worth pondering.

Finding an improvement  should be easy, but not in this farm system, where a minor league 1st basemen is the most inspired choice.  Even Kevin Youkilis--while falling apart--represents a clear upgrade, but now that a significant market has built up for him, the Sox may have spent their best chance mulling over whether they could afford the salary commitment that would have to be the centerpiece of their offer.

Ultimately, replacing Hudson doesn't have to be any bigger of an ordeal than replacing Morel was, which is the beauty of sub-replacement players.  When the performance is this bad, anything seems like a worthwhile flyer...even taking a rapidly declining veteran 2nd basemen and trying him at 3rd for a month.

 

Follow White Sox Observer on Twitter @ JRFegan and on Facebook

Comments

Leave a comment
  • You finally got to the point. This isn't about holding Hudson accountable, but whether there is any other third baseman available, in the Sox farm system or elsewhere. The emphasis at this point in the season is "any."

    The Sox could do better throwing Robin back in there. Maybe even Beckham if it didn't screw him up again.

    Speaking of Robin: if there is a player-manager, does that limit the number of times that person can visit the mound before pulling the pitcher?

  • In reply to jack:

    Hahaha, considering I kept it under 600 words, this is more concise than I usually am. Hudson was brought in under the principle of "well, anyone would be better than injured Brent Morel", his replacement has the same standard. Dan Johnson would probably be a better bat (he had a wrist injury all last season), but his defense would be awful. Well, how awful?

    I was actively thinking during Hudson's game-ending at-bat, "Man, I bet Robin could at least step in, take a walk, and keep the game going."

    He'd probably have a limit on mound visits, but could easily work around that by taking a few steps in from 3rd and shouting at the pitcher.

  • In reply to James Fegan:

    But then the batter would hear "You'll get him out if you throw inside," which is what Stone claims most of the conversations are.

  • In reply to jack:

    Time for everyone to learn pig latin

  • In reply to James Fegan:

    ixnay on the gipay tinlay. Especially if "everyone" includes the batter.

  • In reply to James Fegan:

    Of course, I could have added that a certain percentage of players, including Ozzie, no comprende Inglis. So, maybe that advantage could be used 33% of the tiempo.

  • Sox need a fix at third and pick up Hudson. Cubs need a fix at third and pick up Valbuena. What gives?

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    Perfectly emblematic of the two team's different approach. Cubs get a Quad-A type of guy in his mid-20's who tears it up in the minors but failed in all of the brief big league shots he got. Sox get proven veteran on the decline.

Leave a comment