Greg Hibbard

Here's the other thing I frankly don't f***ing get - Nieves last night was on the score saying "you NEED to give guys rest. They NEED the days off." Really? Don't the elite players just play 155-160 games every year? In the old days, didn't people just f***ing play every day? This whole "scheduled days off" thing that Ozzie started has really brainwashed people close to the Sox into thinking that these guys NEED the days off. Sure, it seems like it works sometimes....some days it really seems like it doesn't.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 16, 2010 -> 10:21 AM) That's a minimum of six bullpen letdowns in the span of a month. And that's all the more reason to think that this stretch is probably more of an anomaly than true form.

We are 3-7 in the last 10. Prior to that stretch, we had gone 38-13 over the previous 51. I realize the past two weeks have been tough to swallow, but every team has a 3-7 stretch in the last two months of the season. So many things went wrong over the last ten games. I'd say the book is still out on whether this is a real august-september fade or just a tough ten games. If we can somehow win the series in minnesota, the season still has life. If we lose two out of three, we're probably out of it, but have a chance if the Twins fade a bit after playing us. If we get swept, we're definitely out of it.

Liriano has never won at the cell.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 12, 2010 -> 09:03 AM) Those numbers are going to be dominated by the post-Tommy-John, still-not-recovered Liriano of 2007-2009. In 2005, 6IP, 4ER, 5H, 3BB, 6.00ERA, 1.33WHIP. In 2010, 6IP, 3ER, 4H, 5BB, 4.50ERA, 1.50WHIP.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 10:14 PM) Won't be easy against Liriano. 0-3, 7.50 ERA, 1.83 WHIP career at the cell.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 11, 2010 -> 11:53 AM) Well put. I'll never understand the love for that franchise: they've been a joke since WWII ended, their ballpark is an absolute pile of s*** that's not easy to get to if you're a suburbanite, there is a much better option for a team not even 10 miles away, and the Cubs have largely embraced their failure for self-promotion while still managing to be arrogant about what they think they mean. How can anybody like that crap? And you're right about civic responsibility too, because those clowns make all of us with Chicago roots look bad (like losers), even those of us smart enough to not buy the crap they sell. It's incredible how blind that fanbase can be.

In contrast, since the beginning of the 1984 season (and really, if we go back and compare 83s, obviously the Sox are even better in comparison), the White Sox are 2184-2066, 101 games better than the Cubs, a winning percentage of .514, with 4 division titles, 1 pennant and 1 world series, translating to an average season of 83-79, playing in a way more difficult league.

Here's some interesting fuel for the fire. Through their most recent World Series in 1945, the Cubs were 5593-4256, 1300 over .500, and at a .568 winning percentage through basically their first 10,000 games. In a 162 game season, that would be an average season of 92-70. They were quite literally the Yankees of the NL, although they lost a boatload of WS in the 30s. Since 1945, the Cubs are 4621-5410 through their next 10,000, 800 games under .500, a winning percentage of .461, which translates to an average season of 74-88. And for those Cubs fans that think things have been better since 1984, with the Cubs winning the division 5 times and making the WC once since then....not really. Since 1984 the Cubs still have a sub-500 record at 2083-2167, a .490 winning percentage. That's an average season of 79-83. Really, in terms of civic responsibility, this organization needs to be folded. It is THE most embarrassing organization ever run over the last 55 years. I don't care who you have to compare it to...it doesn't come close, taking into account the payroll.

Oh I guess it was just 1-0 in the first last night. Totally forgot the sequence of scoring there. When is Ozzie going to get it through his head that it's ok to play for a goddamned 3 run homer in our park though

here's the silliest thing about running Rios (or anyone) with two outs and Konerko up: In the case of a homer, triple ,double or walk, it doesn't matter whether Rios is on second base or 1st base. The only time it matters is if Paul singles. Konerko has a combined 2518 hits+walks. He has 1402 total homers, triples and doubles, and walks combined. He has 1116 singles. In other words, there's around a 60% chance if Paul reaches that it doesn't matter whether Alex is on first base or second base, and that's before you even factor in CS percentage. Secondly, why the f*** are you playing for 1 run, down 5? Dumb, dumb, dumb. If Konerko kept that first inning going longer, who knows what happens last night.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 12:19 PM) The Mariners? The same Mariners who beat the mighty Yankees two outta three in a series at the end of June/beginning of July? Those Mariners? Gosh, that outcome must have sunk the Yankees season right there and then, I mean, losing a series to the lowly Mariners like that. I'll have to go check to see how they are doing, but I'm sure it's not good. They lost "a" series to a crappy team - end of season!! I see what you're doing here, and I agree with the principle, but to be fair those Mariners had Cliff Lee, and these do not.

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 11:17 AM) That series vs the Twinkies after the ASB was also a doozy... While I don't want to exagerate, losing 3 of 4 was bad, don't give a crap if they got a new manager, you simply don't lose to the worst team in MLB if you want to go deep in the playoffs IMO. Twins fans are chomping at the bit, saying stuff like "this guys aren't so good, if we get anything from our starters, we should win the series"...nice. I think the Orioles right now are better than the Mariners, and certainly better than at least 4 National League teams.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 10:33 AM) Yeah, we survive on the road because of our pitching. We thrive at home because of our pitching combined with the ballpark making our offense look better. That is why the Baltimore series shocked me though. They suck, they can't pitch, and their ballpark is good for hitters. Seems like a situation we'd thrive in based on how this season has gone, but I really wonder if some of our players got caught looking ahead to the Minnesota series. I certainly hope not, but regardless, losing 3 of 4 to teams like Baltimore is how you end up 2 or 3 games back at the end of the season and wondering where it went wrong. I wonder if there's something about that Ballpark's dimension and the stuff of their starters that threw us off. Millwood has a career 3.14 ERA against us. Guthrie has a career 3.83 ERA against us. I guess in retrospect, it's really not surprising that those two guys would do well against us, considering that.

The only positive that I take away from this series is that by losing 3 of 4, there's no danger in the team being unfocused and overconfident and lacadaisical going into this series with the Twins. I think we'll see the best from everybody. Let's hope it's enough.

Don't stop now boys

I like the way Hawk is calling every fly ball a hang whiff em That lillibridge one wasn't exactly a line shot

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 9, 2010 -> 06:36 PM) Matusz is left handed. And yet AJ is still in there with his .195 average against LHP

man, is this a split squad game? Jones, Viciedo and Lillibridge?

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5449480

Ok guys, some (hugely crude, probably mathematically wonky) analysis: Tampa Bay went 30-11 to start the season (.732), against teams with a weighted winning percentage of .476 (as of August 9th) The Rays then went 37-33 (.529) over their next 70 games against teams with a weighted winning percentage of .521 The final 51 games the Rays play are against teams with a weighted winning percentage of .490. This is largely due to 9 of those games vs. Baltimore. .476...... .490 ....... .521 .732...... (x) .......... .529 x would be equivalent to an "expected" winning percentage of .663 in their final 51 games (.490 is 31% of the way between .476 and .521, discounting 31% of the distance between 732 and .529 from .732 would be .663) Therefore, we can expect the Rays to go 34-17 the rest of the way, and win 101 total games.

It's not a nice .500 record, though. It's a nice .568 record. Big difference. I wouldn't be happy with a nice .500 record, even with the way we started at 24-33, because I had us penciled in for at least 12-6 in interleague against s*** NL teams, and a few more over as the season went along and we had home series against the likes of Sea and Oak and Bal and KC. I think I would have been happy with 85-87 wins, which I felt would have allowed us to compete for this division with what we had all expected earlier in the year...again, even with the way we started at 24-33. 83-84 wins I would have shrugged my shoulders at. 81-81 is and would have been a real disappointment. This team, even with a 24-33 start, is currently on pace to win 92 games. That's an unreal number of wins, to me. If we were to win 92 games, and if the Twins were to win 93 games, and if we didn't get to the postseason via the WC, yes, I ABSOLUTELY tip my cap. 92 wins is a great season, especially given the Peavy injury and how thin our DH has been. It would be disappointing to have the Twins edge us out again, but I just don't know how we can look at the winning percentage this team currently has as anything but a real positive.

I think greg775 chose a poor way of wording that. Because of the unusual circumstances surrounding this particular season, with the expectations not being high and the relatively poor start, unlike many other years (2001, 2003, 2004, 2006 come to mind) this second half has engendered a much more patient sentiment towards the team from me than in years past. Every late-season loss in 2003 and 2006 in particular was like nails on a chalkboard for me. This season, I was relatively exasperated until about June 15th, with no clue where we would even start organizationally to compete for 2011, and to suddenly feel like we have a legit shot at the division and maybe further, within just 20 days, really IS textbook schizophrenia.

Literally every great team, and every world series winning team, with the exception of a very small handful, has 10-15 or so "bad" losses a year. This year: 1) Texas lost 4 at home vs. Baltimore just before the break. They lost 5 of 6 in their season series with Toronto, who is a decent team, but not THAT good. They just went 4-5 on a west coast road trip to the three worst AL west teams. In a perfect world, they would have probably went 12-7 in those nineteen games, and instead they went 5-14. 2) The yanks lose 2 of 3 at home vs. Seattle, and go just 8-7 in Interleague. Toronto has also given them fits, as they've won just 4 of 9 games against them. You'd expect them to probably go 17-10 over those 27 games, and they went 13-14. 3) Tampa went 7-11 in interleague. 4) The Twins were 8-10 in interleague. I know we've had a lot of "bad" losses early in the season (probably 6-8 games we should have won) but that doesn't mean we can't lose ANY games we're not supposed to win. If you go by the team-by-team grid, I'd say we were "supposed" to be 1 game better vs baltimore so far, 4 games better vs. cleveland, 1 game better vs. tb, 2 games better vs. min, 1 game better vs. oakland, 1 game better vs. toronto. That's a total of 10 games. Conversely, we beat Seattle 9 out of 10, and went 15-3 in interleague, which in my opinion made up for some of that.

This isn't the exact same thread as yesterday, if you're referring to my other post-loss thread. My other thread was referring to overreacting after 1 road loss This thread is referring to the general tone of the board