Soxsi75

Not the way to look at it. I'm talking baseball here, not WAR. It was a bad trade for the reasons I mentioned. And the Twins certainly got plenty out of Mincher and Battey considered they both helped them win a pennant, that they very well might not have won if they weren't there.

This was one of the bad trades, but it wasn't the worst. It was another one made that off-season that was worse and flat out the worst trade in franchise history. We traded Earl Battey and Don Mincher to the Twins franchise, (still Washington at this time,) for Roy Sievers. Now many people say the Sosa/Bell trade is the worst in history. But that trade at least made sense at the time. George Bell was a proven run producer and we needed one to hit behind Thomas. Sammy Sosa at this time wasn't. He later became one after hitting the drug store, and that's why people say that's the worst. But this Sievers trade made ZERO sense. Roy Sievers was a slugging, lead footed first baseman. Trouble is, we already had one of those in Ted Kluczewski. And there was no DH in 1960, so they both couldn't play. We in turn gave up a couple of future all stars in Battey and Mincher, and more importantly, gave Minnesota 1/4 of their regular lineup that won the pennant for them over us in 1965. And I agree with you, and have always agreed with you, about the regular season being more important. The test of time, every day for 6 months, is more important than getting hot for a couple of weeks.

I certainly hope you're right my friend!!!

1990 Was a personal favorite of mine too!! Fun year!! And thanks for mentioning 2000!! You're right about their entire pitching staff getting injured. I believe that is one of the most underrated White Sox teams in history. I even argued that on this board in the past!! So thank you!!

This is VERY interesting to see and thanks for sharing!!! I did not come across anything to show they rated the players for the simulated game. I'm especially interested to see that the 1954 and 1964 teams are ranked 3rd and 4th respectively. Neither of these teams obviously made the playoffs but of course things were different then on who qualified and they both certainly would have in todays format. As far as the 1954 team, the White Sox always had strong teams throughout the 50's, and in some ways the main reason they won in 1959 was the Yankees had an off year. Therefore, I've wondered and tried to look into, was the 1959 team really the best team they had in the 50's? As far as 1964, this period always also really interested me because from 1963-65, the White Sox won 94, 98, and 95 games.......but had nothing to show for it because again, only the pennant winner made the playoffs in those days. If they had todays playoff format then, who knows? We might have a statue of Gary Peters or Joel Horlen in or outside the ballpark. Instead, young White Sox fans may have never heard of those guys. On another side note to White Sox history of that time period, if not for the ridiculously horrible trades Veeck and Greenberg made prior to 1960, the White Sox DEFINITELY would have won 2 more pennants in that era, and possibly 3. Give us Norm Cash, Johnny Callison and Earl Battey in our lineup, like they should have been, and we DEFINITELY win it in 1964 and 1967. (That would make Boston's "Impossible Dream" more like the possible nothing instead!) And possibly 1965. Take Battey and Mincher out of their lineup, do the Twins still beat us out? But that's all speculative.

Recently the White Sox website had a computer game tournament in trying to determine the greatest White Sox team of all time. Where as I'm sure all of us White Sox fans will agree that the idea of The 1972 White Sox , the team that won it, being the best White Sox team of all time is ludicrous, I decided to take a shot at it myself. Here are my top 3 in DESCENDING order. 3. 2005. Where as I'm sure I'll get a lot of people disagreeing with me that I'm not putting them number 1, mainly because of their amazing postseason, I put them number 3 because the two ahead of them simply had stronger offensive teams, to go with great pitching, then this one had. But I don't want this piece on the great 2005 team to be bashing them, so I'm focusing here on what they could do. They won 99 games, the most in the league, and never spent a single day out of first place all season. They tied for the league lead in pitching and led in ERA+ when adjusted to their ballpark. They had power, as they hit 200 homers, speed, great defense, ( their infield defense of Crede, Uribe and Iguchi were outstanding, as well Rowand in center,) four outstanding starters, and a deep bullpen that actually had two great closers over the course of the season. They also had that incredible string of having a lead in the first 37 games of the season and of course won the World Series, with their amazing post season run. 2. 1994. This was the year that never was. The strike ended this season in August, but I said even then, that this was the best White Sox team I ever saw. They had won the division in 1993 with the best pitching in the AL, excellent defense, (Ventura, Guillen, Karkovice and Lance Johnson were among the best in the league at their positions,) good speed, and above average offense, mainly because of Frank Thomas, the best White Sox hitter in franchise history. But in the playoffs, Toronto's game plan was to simply not give Thomas anything to hit. He actually went 1-1 with 4 walks in Game 1. Now the sabergeeks may have been impressed with this line, but it's what Toronto wanted to do and it worked for them. So in 1994, the White Sox picked up Julio Franco, who had 100 RBI's by August, so teams couldn't pitch around Thomas like this anymore. So now they were 4th in runs scored, as compared to 7th the year before and better than the 2005 team that finished 9th in runs scored. They also led the league in pitching in 1994 again, by a wider margin, as their team ERA was more than a quarter of a run lower than the second best team! The 2005 team only tied for the league lead as stated above. Ozzie Guillen, who played for this team and managed the 2005 team, said himself that the 1994 team was more talented. The only problem this team had, was a strange June slump where closer Roberto Hernandez seemed to go through a period where he was tipping his pitches. His history says he would have corrected that by the end of the year however. As far as the postseason goes, we'll never know. But this great team shouldn't be penalized because they never got the chance. 1. 1917. This team probably doesn't get the notoriety that maybe it should because of the members of this team that were also on the 1919 team. (A year which needs no explanation.) However, if you look at the facts, this was the best team in White Sox history. To begin with, this team had 3 players who are in the Hall Of Fame who were part of the "Clean Sox." Eddie Collins, Ray Schalk and pitcher Red Faber. If you then take the players who were later banned because of what happened in 1919, "Shoeless" Joe Jackson would have unquestionably been a Hall Of Famer. Pitcher Eddie Cicotte also probably would have been. That's 5 Hall Of Famers on one team. Then throw in Buck Weaver, Happy Felsch, and another pitcher, Lefty Williams, who almost certainly would have been All-Stars if an All Star game existed then, as they all were amongst the best in the game at their positions. They were considered by some to be the best team ever assembled at the time. Now statistically, my Brother In Law correctly pointed out that it gets difficult to compare players from different eras because of the advancement of statistics of today. So the only way to compare this, is to compare how they did against their competition at the time. And this is what this team against their own competition. They won 100 games, the only White Sox team to do so, and did it in only the 154 games they played then. They lead the league in runs scored AND pitching. The only White Sox team to do so. And of course did win the World Series. After this it gets a bit more difficult. My gut reaction is to put the 1983 team fourth. They won 99 games, led the league in runs scored and was 3rd in pitching. Then comes the 1959 team fifth.

I'm not saying Cease was perfect. He was too wild. But again he's young. Plus, don't a lot of 4th starters do the same thing and are the same way? We shouldn't be happy with a 4th starter having a 4.01 ERA? For that we should think about junking him? I even heard one foolish comment on here that with him in the rotation we're going to miss Mat Latos!! But we're supposed to give Vaughn a blind chance?

Plus, I've read on here on another post that someone said Cease was "horrible" last year. No. He wasn't. His last two starts of the year were horrible and that caused Renteria to lose confidence in him for the playoffs. But those last two starts only brought his ERA to 4.01. Before that it was 3.20. Which is just fine for a young pitcher pitching his first full season, (well, it would have been,) in the majors and for your 4th starter. For all the people arguing to give Vaughn a chance as a reason not to sign Cruz, why aren't you allowing Cease the same opportunity? He's at least proven he is capable of getting major league hitters out, yet people want to junk him. Vaughn has proven absolutely, positively NOTHING at the major league level, and people are saying we don't need a guy who's hit 40 homers the last couple of years and to just give Vaughn a chance.

Huge grain of salt is a very nice way of saying. A more directly way is, it is @#$%^&* worthless.

Yeah, good point, that continued to cement it. Maybe a better way to put it was 1969 was when it began. You have to admit, the White Sox leaving WGN all to the Cubs certainly started it.

This problem actually stemmed back a bit further. It started when the two divisional realignment went into a effect in 1969. The White Sox wanted to be in the East with New York, Boston, Cleveland, Detroit. But instead they were placed in the West with a couple of relocated franchises, Oakland who had been in KC and Minnesota who was the original Washington Senators, and two expansion teams, Kansas City and the Seattle Pilots, before they became the Brewers. So all their original rivals were gone, and with Oakland, Seattle and the California Angels, they now would have a ton of late night West coast games, on a weak television network as they stupidly decided to leave WGN all to the Cubs. Didn't help either that the White Sox at this time had a poor club where as the Cubs then had a good exciting club. These were the reasons and how Chicago became a Cubs town. This era and for these reasons.

You could be right about the steroid police with Cruz.....but the difference I do see between him and EE is EE really appeared to have lost his bat speed. Cruz hasn't. If he hasn't because of steroids......time will answer that question. I hope I'm underestimating Vaughn. What makes me more skeptical is the very fact the only thing we are going off of is that alternate site you mentioned. That truly was nothing more than a simulation no matter how we look at it, and no matter how competitive they tried to make it, it cannot be the same thing as playing an actual game with actual live pitchers trying to get you out in real live game situations. Have to agree to disagree with Collins. Like I said, I'm not impressed with his drawing walks in the minors, which impressed the sabergeeks. You're right in your thinking that knowledge of the strike zone is very important and your comparison to Thomas having that is true. But of course you would agree that Thomas had more than that. What's important is can Collins HIT major league pitching and he hasn't proven that at all, where as Thomas did right away. I would love to be wrong and for you to throw that one back in my face some day on here. And I know Cruz is 41. I never said I'd want to sign him long term.

I certainly hope you're right. But we have nothing to go off of. Vaughn has never faced major league pitching. If Cruz were here, we could have worked him along slower. Now he doesn't have that luxury. He has to produce now. We can't have the "well, it's his rookie year, he needs time to adjust" scenario. I agree, I like this team too. And it's why I feel this way. I really felt that we had our foot on Minnesota's throat and if we could have signed Cruz and taken him away from them as well, we would have stomped our foot on their throats even harder. Now I feel like we let them off the hook by taking a "this'll be good enough" attitude. And because I like this team, I definitely feel that nothing short of winning the division is acceptable. If Minnesota wins the division and Cruz has another monster year to contribute to it, we should all be very angry. Don't really care about having that "money is reserve" if it doesn't help us win.

A bit surprised you didn't respond when I responded to your quote. I fully appreciate your optimism, and I thought we were starting a pretty good baseball conversation and I really want your opinion. Two simple questions. Is our lineup better this year with Cruz in it or with Vaughn in it everyday? And is Minnesota's lineup right now better than ours?

You're right about just about all you said. Except the line you said that we shouldn't be upset that "we didn't go after some other teams garbage." Nelson Cruz isn't garbage. That was my argument of what they should have gone after to be stronger for THIS year.

I agree with nearly all that you said. My one objection, is what made me start this. Should we have signed Cruz and then give Vaughn 150-200 At bats? That's still giving Vaughn a chance for us to see what he can do. But with less pressure. Now he has to produce. What you are saying about Cruz being a cheater.....that's more personal and I see your point. But what I really care about is the White Sox winning. And it comes down then to a couple of very simple questions. Is our lineup better this year with Cruz in it or with Vaughn in it everyday? If Vaughn can produce exactly as much as Cruz, then I'm OK with it. And second, and probably more importantly, is Minnesota's lineup right now better than ours? If anyone answers yes, then it has to be at least partly because of Cruz being in it, and that makes my point for me. And the other part I disagree with you on is Collins. We've seen what he can do and I truly think nothing of him. The sabergeeks like him because he could draw the occasional walk in the minors, but he hasn't shown he can hit major league pitching enough to warrant playing every day.

I agree with nearly all that you said. My one objection, is what made me start this. Should we have signed Cruz and then give Vaughn 150-200 At bats? That's still giving Vaughn a chance for us to see what he can do. But with less pressure. Now he has to produce. What you are saying about Cruz being a cheater.....that's more personal and I see your point. But what I really care about is the White Sox winning. And it comes down then to a couple of very simple questions. Is our lineup better this year with Cruz in it or with Vaughn in it everyday? If Vaughn can produce exactly as much as Cruz, then I'm OK with it. And second, and probably more importantly, is Minnesota's lineup right now better than ours? If anyone answers yes, then it has to be at least partly because of Cruz being in it, and that makes my point for me. And the other part I disagree with you on is Collins. We've seen what he can do and I truly think nothing of him. The sabergeeks like him because he could draw the occasional walk in the minors, but he hasn't shown he can hit major league pitching enough to warrant playing every day.

I think that's the perfect way to describe it. Couldn't have put that better myself.

I already expressed my unhappiness about that in a different post because they resigned that piece of $%^% Rodon. Renteria gets fired because of the way he handled the pitching staff the last week of the season and the playoff series, and part of that was because he used that guy. And now we resign him to give him the ball every 5 days? So maybe the full question is, did management do EVERYTHING and I mean EVERYTHING to win this year? Because like I said. Finishing second to Minnesota will be completely and utterly unacceptable.

What do you guys think? Personally, I'm disappointed we didn't put more of an effort to sign Cruz. Yeah, he's old, but he hasn't lost his bat speed. And it wouldn't be a long term deal. With him here, we could allow Vaughn to get his feet wet with say 150-200 at bats. Now we are expecting Vaughn to have 500+ at bats and he has to produce. Because there is no "playing for the future" anymore. Finishing second to Minnesota this year will not only be a disappointment it will be a failure. We can't make the "he needs time to develop at the major league level" excuse for him. He needs to produce now. If anyone says he might not be ready to, then that means we should have signed a veteran bat. And maybe he will. He's just untested. What does everyone else think?

Well put

Of course I "know" that. But that makes it OK to resign that waste of space? All 5th starters are poor so make sure we fill that void with as poor of one as possible? Is that your point? But I guess we can still hit. So on days that major league imposter takes the mound we can hope to win 11-9.

Then let's hope for a rainy spring. A rainout every 5 days through April and May.

Why is Kopech out of the picture? After being touted as a future ace a couple of years ago, to then having Tj surgery and then opting out last year because of COVID, has he really fallen so far now as he can't get beat out a worthless piece of dog %^&$ like Rodon for the 5th spot?

I think he is. You thinking he won't be?