whitesox61382 Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 ....playing 7 games against, say, the Yankees and Red Sox is QUITE different from playing 19 games against each. Considering how much trouble their rotaton was in for most of the season, it would have fallen apart if had to face Toronto, Boston and NY offense 57 times, with hardly a breather. Had Twins fallen 5 games under .500 at the BREAK (liek they did in ALC), playing in ALW, ALE, NLE, they would have beenat least 20 games behind and never would have even dreamed of getting Stewart because there would be no point losing Kielty and finishing 3rd instead of 4th. And so on....In your world variables are set and are uniform; in reality, they're not. But hey, if you choose to believe Twins would've finished ahead of Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, As, Mariners, Phillies, Marlins, go ahead. I considering they had great difficulty with the Sox up until late September, I doubt they would've hung around with Expos, Blue Jays and healthy Angels, small-sample head to head matches notwithstanding. Hard stats? When they say stats lie (ie can easily be misinterpreted), Twins being a playoffs team coming out of a NON-Central team is EXACTLY what they mean. By the same token, Loaiza would have been just as dominannt pitching the whole year against Toronto, NY and Boston offensive jaggernauts just because he succeeded in his starts against them in 2003....In reality, his ERA would have been half a point to a point higher most likely. RH rightfully deferved Cy Young. The big thing that you are missing is that there are weak links in both the AL East and AL West. You say that they would have to play 19 games against the Yankees, Red Sox, Athletics, M's but they also get to play 19 games against teams like Toronto(who has a good offense, but a terrible pitching staff), Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Anaheim, and Texas. That is why they have a record above .500 versus both divisions. Why do you believe that they would continue to have a record above .500 against both divisions if they played each team 19 times? The stats simply are arguing against you. The fact that they have an above .500 record against each division is a hard stat. They might not have been a playoff team, but they would still be above .500 and a very good team, which was the orignal point of the arguement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 BTW I am NOT saying Twins were a bad or even mediocre team. They were a solid, fundamental team. They were what Expos would probably have been had they had Guerrero all year and played in our division. They just weren't "very good". There is a reason why Twins couldn't do ANYTHING when they had to face a REAL team like 2001 Indians all year long. And by then Indians weren't a dominant team by any stretch of imagination. Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Anaheim, and Texas You know what? I'll take Texas, Baltimore and even injury-plagued Anaheim over INDIANS and TIGERS any damn day of the week. Most resonable people would. So again, playing 76 games against NY, Boston, Toronto, TampaBay (or Braves, Marlins, Phhillies and Expos..........Giants, Dodgers, D-Backs, Rockies, Padres.....As, Mariners, Angels, Rangers for that matter) is WHOLE a lot HARDER than doing so against such powerhouses as Sox, Royals, Tribe and Kitties......Or are White Sox all of the sidden better than Yankees because they were 4-2 against them and could have easily been 5-1 if it weren't for Neil Cotts? Please, don't make me laugh. The "5 games under .500 at the ASB" comment was just one example of how the whole complexion and dynamic changes with different level of competition. At 20-25 (as opposed to only 9) games out of 1st place, Twins would have simply given up the same way Oriols, Expos and Angels gave up around June. (BTW, SS2k4 was off in his Ponson remaks NOT because competition doesn't affect production, but because there really wasn't a conspiracy.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox61382 Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 I will agree that playing in the AL East or AL West would be tougher, but based on their overall record against each division I would argue that that they would have still won 84-88 games. I guess it is just a matter of opinion between being good or very good. I will hold by my orignal arguement that they are a very good team, and we can agree to disagree. In regards to the Ponson arguement, I really don't like to show people up and make personal attacks, although it might seem like it at times. I believe that everyone is welcome to their opinion, however, in the case of southsider's agruement about Ponson, he made up some theory that the coaches attempted to make Ponson look better by pitching him against weak opponents(both teams and opposing pitchers), but he didn't bother to check the stats and I simply showed him the stats that proved that wasn't the case. I think the fact that he neglected to reply shows that he realized his theory was BS. I still believe that Ponson would be a nice addition to this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 It's just that winning 85-86 games wouldn't have nearly enough to win any other division other than NL and AL centrals. Even 90 games for that matter. And you're right about there being a lot of speculative and subjective stuff involved; we will never REALLY know which one of us is right. I still believe that Ponson would be a nice addition to this team. At 5 Mill per? Absolutely At 8+? f*** no, we have no money. I don;t knwo what KW was thinking offering 12 mill to Colon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Showtime Posted November 15, 2003 Share Posted November 15, 2003 I don;t knwo what KW was thinking offering 12 mill to Colon. It wasn't 12 million per year, alot of the money was to be deffered. I think the Sox plan was if they resign Colon, then they turn around and deal Maggs or Paul. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Lopez Ghost (old) Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 To everyone who is burying Minnesota...it's like burying Dracula. Until I see the White Sox, oh, I dunno, actually beat the Twins consistently, or even FINISH AHEAD OF THEM, I'm not downplaying the Twins' chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 Until I see the White Sox, oh, I dunno, actually beat the Twins consistently, or even FINISH AHEAD OF THEM, I'm not downplaying the Twins' chances My bashing the overrated Twins has very little to do with my being a Sox fan. I am angry if not disgusted with what had transpired on the South Side in the last 2 years. In a very disappointing 2001, we lost so many key players early on, getting off to a 14-29 start, that, in retrospect, we had very little chance of catching that Indian powerhouse team that had Robbie in his prime, Lofton, healthy Vizquel, One Gone, Thome, Burks, Sabathia, Colon, etc. 2002-2003? Absolutely no excuse. Simply and utterly pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 16, 2003 Share Posted November 16, 2003 just wondering, didnt they have Manny to?? No-no, Manny was playing for either the Red Sox or Globertrotters by then. Probably the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.