Sporting News Yearbook

[striker]

I don't think KC was a fluke last year. They had a great year and didn't have Beltran for most of the first month and didn't have Sweeney for 1/3 of the season. So a healthy Sweeney, Beltran and Gonzalez could put up some big numbers. I still think our pitching is better though.

[witesoxfan]

How the hell do the Twins keep on getting picked for a 1st place finish?  It's not like they ran away with the division last season, they went on a tear the 2nd half.  They've lost some important components of their team.  I'm not saying that we should be picked for first, but the Twins???  KC would be a better choice than MIN, IMHO. 

 

Oh, and another thing, I agree that we need to have an impressive couple of months to start off the season, but our first month looks like it may be a real b****.

I think they're going to win the division. Good starting still, another good pen(even with the losses of Hawkins and Guardado...I know they have Joe Nathan and Juan Rincon as their righties, JC Romero as their lefty, I believe they have Carlos Silva, Pete Munro, Grant Balfour, and then they have a stud minor leaguer too, though I can't recall his name right now...for some reason the name Crank or something like that comes to mind). Plus their defense is still the best in the league, and they're still going to be decent offensively.

 

As a matter of fact, I think the division is going to end up exactly like TSN has it. I think the two sleeper teams are the White Sox and Indians...the only team I will say has virtually no shot at winning is the Tigers.

[JoshPR]

They still have nothing in the rotation and McDougal was awful down the stretch. Their pitching is going to kill em.

Hernandez is not a bad pitcher either is Affeltt. Brian Anderson gives the Sox fits and wait until a kid named Zack Grienke gets there. Darrell May i think was a fluke

[whitesox61382]

I don't think KC was a fluke last year. They had a great year and didn't have Beltran for most of the first month and didn't have Sweeney for 1/3 of the season. So a healthy Sweeney, Beltran and Gonzalez could put up some big numbers. I still think our pitching is better though.

KC was a fluke last year and few people would disagree. If you can't see it with your own eyes, than I will show you some stats. To begin with, they had a negative 31 run differencial, which suggests that they were lucky to be above .500(won a bunch of close games). Their pyth. theorem based on their run differencial suggested that they should have won only 78 games last year. They also gave up the 6th most runs in all of the majors last year, including the worst bullpen ERA.

 

They hit an astounding .304 with runners in scoring position, which accounted for the relatively high run total. I did a little research and found out that KC was the only AL team the last 3 years to hit over .300 with runners in scoring postion(showing how rare it is), and that very rarely do teams post similar BA with runners in scoring position(which suggest that BA with runners in scoring position has a certain percentage of luck). For example, look at the Angels in 2002 and the Angels in 2003. One of the major reasons why they went from WS champs to a below .500 team was that their BA with runners in scoring position took a significant hit in 2003. The chances that KC duplicates that .304 BA with runners in scoring position is slim to none, and a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position, which is likely, will probably have a similar effect that it had on the Angels in 2003. These are just a few of the stats that suggest that they were a fluke last year.

 

Furthermore, their pitching staff is down right terrible. They could rely on as many as 3 pitchers coming off major surgery next year(rarely do pitchers coming off major surgery pitch similar to their pre-surgery selves in their 1st year back). May and Anderson are coming off of career years and will probably regress some next year. And one of their better young arms(Hernandez) is out of the season.

 

Beltran missed 2 weeks, so that isn't a huge gain. The unfortunate fact is that Sweeney might never be completely healthy again. My dad suffers from contrant back/neck problems and it cut his college football career short. Sweeney has the same problem and will probably miss large stretches of games over the coarse of the year(which is unfortunate because he is a great hitter when healthy). JuanGone is all but a guarantee to end up on the DL for some part of the season. He has failed to get 400 AB's the past 2 season, and I think it is highly unlikely that this year will be any different.

 

KC was a fluke last year, but the casual fan might not notice. The casual fan might also read too much into the minor improvements that they have made and think that this is only a sign of better things to come. They will set their expectations too high(running away with the division), and when KC struggles to reach .500 they will be let down and considered the overrated/underachieving team in 2004(taking the title from the Sox).

 

I still believe that Minnesota is the team to beat. I think people are reading too much into their loses. They did lose Hawkins and Guardado, but they did get Nathan and Silva and have a strong upper minor league system to help replace the loses. BY the way, the name of that top pitching prospect that witesoxfan was thinking of is Crain. He is suppose to be their closer of the future. I also think that Mauer will come in and post decent numbers as a rookie. Not as good as Pierzynski, but respectible numbers that will help negate the lose. Furthermore, no one mentions that they resigned Stewart who helped them drasticly during their stretch run. I really think Stewart is a solid player and that having him for a full year will improve their team. Any of the 3 teams can win it and the race might come down to the last week. I will be surprised if any of the AL Central teams win over 90 games.

[Texsox]

3rd sounds about right and with the team on the north side it will be a nightmare in Chicago next season.

 

Keep praying for a miracle.

[southsideirish]

Their rotation got it done last year, but my main point was that the Royals have done the most this offseason of all the teams in our division.

Runelvys was good in the beginning and then injured. Jose Lima was unbelievable, he is gone. Have you looked at their staff? It is not very good at all. Our line ups should match up well. If you then match up our pitching staffs I think the Sox have the advantage there. That is without a 4th or 5th starter. I can't believe people here would be more optimistic about a KC team with just as many holes than our own team. Come on people! Even though we didn't do much this offseason we are still a good team, definately just as good as KC if not better.

[Guest JimH]

The big advantage KC has going for them is chemistry, their chemistry was far superior to the White Sox's last year.

 

They've added some character guys in Sullivan and Graffanino but a key for them will be how Pena handles Juan Gonzalez.

 

I'm of the belief it'll be a three team race, with injuries and mid-season acquisitions making the difference.

 

My biggest concern is how the Sox will start vs. a team like the Royals. The Sox seem to have discounted how important the games are in April and May. That's come back and bit them in the butt the past few years.

 

It's squarely on Guillen and the coaching staff to have these guys ready and rarin' to go in April.

[fullcollapse]

KC was a fluke last year and few people would disagree. If you can't see it with your own eyes, than I will show you some stats. To begin with, they had a negative 31 run differencial, which suggests that they were lucky to be above .500(won a bunch of close games). Their pyth. theorem based on their run differencial suggested that they should have won only 78 games last year. They also gave up the 6th most runs in all of the majors last year, including the worst bullpen ERA.

 

They hit an astounding .304 with runners in scoring position, which accounted for the relatively high run total. I did a little research and found out that KC was the only AL team the last 3 years to hit over .300 with runners in scoring postion(showing how rare it is), and that very rarely do teams post similar BA with runners in scoring position(which suggest that BA with runners in scoring position has a certain percentage of luck)

 

KC was a fluke last year, but the casual fan might not notice. The casual fan might also read too much into the minor improvements that they have made and think that this is only a sign of better things to come. They will set their expectations too high(running away with the division), and when KC struggles to reach .500 they will be let down and considered the overrated/underachieving team in 2004(taking the title from the Sox).

 

exactly... i can't see the royals finishing above .500. if they have a run diff like that this year no way do they get to 500, and the batting avg. risp was luck too. no way will they hit .300 again, regression to the mean. extremes are not repeated, that's why they are extremes, and they will fall back to average.

 

The big advantage KC has going for them is chemistry, their chemistry was far superior to the White Sox's last year.

 

but the sox still won more games. honestly i don't think chemistry has much to do with winning. i think the sox can take this divison.

[upnorthsox]

I wouldn't call KC a fluke but of the three they have by far the toughest first two months, that is what'll most likely knock them out of the race.

[southsideirish]

The big advantage KC has going for them is chemistry, their chemistry was far superior to the White Sox's last year.

 

They've added some character guys in Sullivan and Graffanino but a key for them will be how Pena handles Juan Gonzalez.

 

I'm of the belief it'll be a three team race, with injuries and mid-season acquisitions making the difference.

 

My biggest concern is how the Sox will start vs. a team like the Royals.  The Sox seem to have discounted how important the games are in April and May.  That's come back and bit them in the butt the past few years.

 

It's squarely on Guillen and the coaching staff to have these guys ready and rarin' to go in April.

Your right Jim, under Manuel they seemed to have discounted those games early in the year by calling it a marathon not a sprint. It has come to bite them in the butt in the past. I don't think Ozzie will stand for that. I think and hope he will get this team off to a better start. Manuel always gave the team a built in excuse. I don't think it will be the same under Ozzie. We will soon find out.

[witesoxfan]

People's ignorance bothers me.

 

Am I the only one who remembers when the Twins were above .500 for the first time in quite some time in 2001, but they were a fluke and were going to regress in 2002? And then how 2002 was ALSO a fluke, but they were going to regress in 2003? And now I've even seen some people who say they will not be good THIS year.

 

The Royals are in the same boat as far as I'm concerned. I'm not quite sure why people are discounting them when they've improved themselves the most BY FAR(unless you count the Tigers, and I don't, because they still won't contend).

 

Why people question the Royals starting is also beyond me. Runlevys Hernandez almost always starts out quite well, and if he can continue it over the whole year, I would not be surprised to see him win 14-17 games with an ERA of about 4.00. If Affeldt truly has fixed his blister problem, he will probably win 13-16 games with a decent ERA. Brian Anderson will have a decent year, like he always does, and will probably win 12-15 games, and Darrell May, who will be solid as well. I believe they have Kevin Appier as their #5 starter....I can tell you that he will almost undoubtedly be better then whoever is our #5 starter.

[BrandoFan]

The big advantage KC has going for them is chemistry, their chemistry was far superior to the White Sox's last year

.

 

I'll take our physics over their chemistry any damn day of the week, thankyouverymuch.

 

And don't get me started on english.

[southsider2k5]

.

 

I'll take our physics over their chemistry any damn day of the week, thankyouverymuch.

 

And don't get me started on english.

Even with Ozzie as our Mgr? That is a pretty big leap of faith

[whitesox61382]

People's ignorance bothers me.

 

Am I the only one who remembers when the Twins were above .500 for the first time in quite some time in 2001, but they were a fluke and were going to regress in 2002?  And then how 2002 was ALSO a fluke, but they were going to regress in 2003?  And now I've even seen some people who say they will not be good THIS year.

 

The Royals are in the same boat as far as I'm concerned.  I'm not quite sure why people are discounting them when they've improved themselves the most BY FAR(unless you count the Tigers, and I don't, because they still won't contend). 

 

Why people question the Royals starting is also beyond me.  Runlevys Hernandez almost always starts out quite well, and if he can continue it over the whole year, I would not be surprised to see him win 14-17 games with an ERA of about 4.00.  If Affeldt truly has fixed his blister problem, he will probably win 13-16 games with a decent ERA.  Brian Anderson will have a decent year, like he always does, and will probably win 12-15 games, and Darrell May, who will be solid as well.  I believe they have Kevin Appier as their #5 starter....I can tell you that he will almost undoubtedly be better then whoever is our #5 starter.

Its also ignorant to think that every team that improves will continue to improve. There are significant differences between the Twins of 2001 and the Royals of 2003. The only similarity is that they both came out of nowhere, but don't pretend that alone will guarantee that KC will be better in 2004, because it seems thats what you are basing your opinion on. In fact, I think there are far more similarities between the 2000 Sox team that overachieved and the 2003 Royals team. For every Twins team(2001) that builds on their strong season, there are 5 other teams that overachieve only to come back to reality the next year.

 

Differences between 2003 Royals and 2001 Twins

2003 Royals -31 run diffential

2001 Twins +5 run differntial

 

2003 Royals .304 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but down)

2003 Twins .252 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but up)

 

2003 Royals questionable starting rotation and closer with Anderson, Mays, ??????

2001 Twins proven rotation and closer with Radke, Milton, Mays, Lohse, Santana and Guardado

 

These are just some of the differences.

 

People question the Royals rotation because of the following reasons:

 

- Hernandez is out for the year after surgery.

- Affeldt has reoccuring blisters that might not ever heal

- Anderson had a career year last season; ERA before 2003: 4.72(solid every year???), ERA in 2003: 3.78

- May had a career year last season also; ERA before 2003: 5.67, ERA in 2003: 3.77

- Appier is coming off major surgery and has been inconsistant the past couple of seasons(5.40 ERA in 2003).

- Synder is also coming off major surgery and might not be ready by ST, he has a career ERA of 5.17.

- Gobble has a grand total of 52.2 IP in the majors with mixed results

- Greinke, their top prospect, has a grand total of 53 IP in the upper minors(AA or AAA) and had mixed results(58 hits in 53 IP at AA)

- Asencio has really struggled in the majors, especially with his control(85 BB in 171.2 IP with a career ERA of 5.14).

 

Now do you understand why people question their rotation? You should probably look at the stats/facts first before making comments that have no support.

[BrandoFan]

I am going to enjoy White Sox surpring everyone and beating the s*** out of Minnesota in 2004 and beyond.

 

Will savor their every defeat, Cubs-style.

 

Menkevich getting drilled on the helmet? Is there a sweeter sound?

 

It's time for WS to atone for their gutless, selfish ways of 2002 and 2003 and actually come through.

 

Maddux? No money, no money, money....unless we can pay with

[WillieHarris2]

hey all you can do now is sit back and wait to see what happens. Hopefully whats on paper will be wrong, like it usually is. I'm hoping the Sox will be a sleeper. If only we had one more proven pitcher.

[witesoxfan]

Its also ignorant to think that every team that improves will continue to improve. There are significant differences between the Twins of 2001 and the Royals of 2003. The only similarity is that they both came out of nowhere, but don't pretend that alone will guarantee that KC will be better in 2004, because it seems thats what you are basing your opinion on. In fact, I think there are far more similarities between the 2000 Sox team that overachieved and the 2003 Royals team. For every Twins team(2001) that builds on their strong season, there are 5 other teams that overachieve only to come back to reality the next year.

 

Differences between 2003 Royals and 2001 Twins

2003 Royals -31 run diffential

2001 Twins +5 run differntial

 

2003 Royals .304 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but down)

2003 Twins .252 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but up)

 

2003 Royals questionable starting rotation and closer with Anderson, Mays, ??????

2001 Twins proven rotation and closer with Radke, Milton, Mays, Lohse, Santana and Guardado

 

These are just some of the differences.

 

People question the Royals rotation because of the following reasons:

 

- Hernandez is out for the year after surgery.

- Affeldt has reoccuring blisters that might not ever heal

- Anderson had a career year last season; ERA before 2003: 4.72(solid every year???), ERA in 2003: 3.78

- May had a career year last season also; ERA before 2003: 5.67, ERA in 2003: 3.77

- Appier is coming off major surgery and has been inconsistant the past couple of seasons(5.40 ERA in 2003).

- Synder is also coming off major surgery and might not be ready by ST, he has a career ERA of 5.17.

- Gobble has a grand total of 52.2 IP in the majors with mixed results

- Greinke, their top prospect, has a grand total of 53 IP in the upper minors(AA or AAA) and had mixed results(58 hits in 53 IP at AA)

- Asencio has really struggled in the majors, especially with his control(85 BB in 171.2 IP with a career ERA of 5.14).

 

Now do you understand why people question their rotation? You should probably look at the stats/facts first before making comments that have no support.

Look, all I'm saying is that it is ignorant to say that they will suck or that they were a fluke. Maybe it was ignorant of me to say they will be great(which I did not).

 

And sorry for not taking 20 minutes of my time analyzing the Royals team stats from 2003 when all that could change with the fact that the Royals moved their fences back(how far I am not exactly sure, I just know they moved them back). Odds are very good that their pitchers will reap benefits from this.

 

I thought immediately of the Twins of 2001 when I see everyone calling the Royals of 2003 a fluke.

 

Basically, I am saying we should assume the worst and hope for the best, which IMO is probably the best thing to do. I do not like it when people assume the best and hope the worst does not happen. It bothers me when people say the 2003 Royals were a fluke, because they were saying the exact same things about the Twins of 2001.

 

BTW, while the Royals .305 BA w/RISP will come down, you should assume that that will be cancelled out atleast a little bit with Sweeney being healthy and them adding Gonzalez(who has been one of the very best run producers of the past 10 years), along with the maturity of Ken Harvey as a hitter.

[BrandoFan]

Look, all I'm saying is that it is ignorant to say that they will suck or that they were a fluke.  Maybe it was ignorant of me to say they will be great(which I did not). 

 

And sorry for not taking 20 minutes of my time analyzing the Royals team stats from 2003 when all that could change with the fact that the Royals moved their fences back(how far I am not exactly sure, I just know they moved them back).  Odds are very good that their pitchers will reap benefits from this. 

 

I thought immediately of the Twins of 2001 when I see everyone calling the Royals of 2003 a fluke. 

 

Basically, I am saying we should assume the worst and hope for the best, which IMO is probably the best thing to do.  I do not like it when people assume the best and hope the worst does not happen.  It bothers me when people say the 2003 Royals were a fluke, because they were saying the exact same things about the Twins of 2001.

 

BTW, while the Royals .305 BA w/RISP will come down, you should assume that that will be cancelled out atleast a little bit with Sweeney being healthy and them adding Gonzalez(who has been one of the very best run producers of the past 10 years), along with the maturity of Ken Harvey as a hitter.

WITE

 

In his opus magnum, ever-so-pedantic WS61382 overrates Milton, Radke, Lohse and the rest of the '01 Twin pitching (check out their career ERAs). He also forgets to mention their then below-average offense.

 

But he does get something right: Royal rotation is pure garbage and their bullpen is frankly overrated-- Sullivan and McDougal are not that scary and Grimsley is old. It's the best BP in ALC, but nothing remotely dominant about it.

 

I happen to think Sox win win the ALC rather easily, but that's because I am clairvoyant. A case could certainly be made for Twins being serious contenders if Santana can recover from that surgery, Maur progresses fast and Stewart's hamstrings hold.

[whitesox61382]

Look, all I'm saying is that it is ignorant to say that they will suck or that they were a fluke.  Maybe it was ignorant of me to say they will be great(which I did not). 

 

And sorry for not taking 20 minutes of my time analyzing the Royals team stats from 2003 when all that could change with the fact that the Royals moved their fences back(how far I am not exactly sure, I just know they moved them back).  Odds are very good that their pitchers will reap benefits from this. 

 

I thought immediately of the Twins of 2001 when I see everyone calling the Royals of 2003 a fluke. 

 

Basically, I am saying we should assume the worst and hope for the best, which IMO is probably the best thing to do.  I do not like it when people assume the best and hope the worst does not happen.  It bothers me when people say the 2003 Royals were a fluke, because they were saying the exact same things about the Twins of 2001.

 

BTW, while the Royals .305 BA w/RISP will come down, you should assume that that will be cancelled out atleast a little bit with Sweeney being healthy and them adding Gonzalez(who has been one of the very best run producers of the past 10 years), along with the maturity of Ken Harvey as a hitter.

I am not saying that they will suck next year. I expect them to win about 82-84 games, and back-back winning seasons for an organization like the Royals is a nice accomplishment and step in the right direction. Furthermore, in the near future(with some luck in 2004) they could win the Central, but when the casual fan sees that the Royals won 83 games last year, are young and should improve, made some nice minor additions, and the 2 main competitors lost some key players they assume that this team is going to run away with the Central. In this case I think they are setting themselves up for a letdown. I think it will be a 3 team race(with any of the 3 winning the division), and at this point I don't see a clear favorite(although I give a slight edge to the Twins).

 

20 minutes??? Try 20 seconds. Its very easy to get/understand a stat if you have half a brain. If they move the fences back, than wouldn't that have a negate affect on the hitters? I don't see the point that you are trying to make with the fence arguements. It might help the pitchers, but it will hurt the hitters, so its not going to make the Royals a better team.

 

I hope that you don't live your life by this "assume the worse and hope for the best" statement, because that is a sad way to live and not a good word of advice for baseball or life. How pathetic would the world be if everyone assumed the worse? If this is how you truely view baseball(and more importantly life), than you need to get some help.

 

I think you misunderstand how drastic an affect that a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position would have. Lets assume that it falls to about .285, which is still well above average. A decrease of that much would result in 5-10% fewer runs scored. Over the course of a season that is a drastic change that can't be negated by 1 individual player. Furthermore, you assume that Sweeney is going to be healthy, but take it from someone who has seen their dad deal with back/neck problems their entire life(cut his college football career short), Sweeney's injuries really can't be cured and is reoccuring. The fact is(unfortunately) that Sweeney might not ever play a full season of baseball again(his AB's have gone down each of the last 3 years). JuanGone is also unlikely to stay healthy. The guy hasn't had over 400 AB's the past 2 years. Furthermore, you assume(incorrectly) that JuanGone's production is added to last year production, but you neglect the fact that he has to make up for the loses of Ibanez, Tucker, and White. Those 3 combined to post the following stats:

 

.286 BA 169 runs 59 2B 11 3B 35 HR 166 RBI 16 SB

 

JuanGone will be lucky to put up half of those numbers. Harvey??? Have you seen Harvey play? The guy is terrible, including one of the ugliest swings I have seen. The Royals think so highly of Harvey that they brought in Stairs to platoon with him. The fact is that KC really hasn't improved their offensive talent, and that a possible 5-10% decrease in runs scored due to a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position is going to have a significant affect like the Angels from 2002 to 2003 or the Sox from 2000 to 2001(which is why I think the 2003 Royals are more similar to the 2000 White Sox than the 2001 Twins),

 

2002 Angels .290 BA with runners in scoring position(851 total runs scored)

2003 Angels .269 BA with runners in scoring position(736 total runs scored)

 

2000 Sox .301 BA with runners in scoring position(978 total runs scored)

2001 Sox .281 BA with runners in scoring position(798 total runs scored)

 

Sure there were other factors besides a decrease in BA with runners in scoring posiition that lead to a significant drop off in runs scored, but that was probably the main reason and shows how much of an affect it can truely have.

 

The Twins pitching staff was better and more stable then the Royals current staff. That was the only point that I was trying to make, although Radke, Milton, and Lohse are all solid middle of the rotation starters. Below average offense? Me thinks that Brando should check the stats first. The Twins had a very underrated offense that didn't get a lot of attention because it had no starts.

 

6 regulars with a .275+ BA, including 2 with a .300+ BA

8 players with 10+ HR's, including 2 with 25+ HR's

9 players with 47+ RBI's, including 3 with 74+ RBI's

 

Overall

8th in runs scored

4th in BA

9th in HR

7th in OPS

4th in SB

 

They had an average, but underrated offense.

 

KC has the best bullpen in the Central??? You do realize that they had the worst bullpen in the majors last year. Sure the addition of Sullivan and Leskanic(for a full season) will help, but they certainly won't have the best bullpen in the Central.

[BrandoFan]

I hope that you don't live your life by this "assume the worse and hope for the best" statement, because that is a sad way to live and not a good word of advice for baseball or life. How pathetic would the world be if everyone assumed the worse? If this is how you truely view baseball(and more importantly life), than you need to get some help

 

Big Santayana fan?

[BrandoFan]

8th in runs scored

 

Technnically, that's below average.

 

Unless you think Twin rookies are gonna pull a 2002 and blow people away, and unless you see Politte and Koch have really good seasons.....KC does have the best BP in ALC, almost by default. Until proven otherwise.

 

When you look at RISP BA, you ALSO have to look at RISP Slug as well as at the RO OPS. There is no way Royals duplicate the .304 avg, you're correct.....BUT, if Sweeney and Gonzo stay healthy and Stairs continues to MURDER RHP, when you couple them with improving Beltran, solid rook Guiel and ROY Berroa....you might.just.have. an overall jump in OPS , including with Runners On, to cover up for the likely BA RISP drop-off.

 

Meanwhile.....Twinkies have Stewart's hamstrings and Mauer's head to worry about. With Baltimore and Anaheim taking a step up, Minny might only have a very AVERAGE offense in 2004. I have them ranked below the Sox and Mariners as well, but that's 'cuz I am in the optimistic mood.

 

Regardless, Twins will have an average rotation if Santana is anything but 100% healthy after that late surgery; their offense is not gonna carry them and their BP has its lost TWO studs-- imagine us losing Gordon AND Marte.

 

If Sox play an inspired (read: of the 2000 kind when players picked each other up during slumps, used the whole field, cut down on swings with RISP, hit Sac flies, avoid GIDP, bunt people over, run bases and play tighter Defense), selfless brand of ball and manage to stay a little healthier than either the Royals or the Twins......while JR makes Everett-type acquisitions at the ASB if we're close.....I don't see why we couldn't pull off an upset and win the ALC.

 

In 2003, we were giving games away left and ritght and up the middle. So many examples of jaw-dropping ineptitude that left even Hawk Harrelson shaking his noggin'. Hell partna, our 11-8 record against 119-loss kitties stings like Gary Busey in the ol' hive.

 

Of course I can't wait until we swing Konerko for Perez as you promised and use the saved dough to fill in at least one hole.

[witesoxfan]

I am not saying that they will suck next year. I expect them to win about 82-84 games, and back-back winning seasons for an organization like the Royals is a nice accomplishment and step in the right direction. Furthermore, in the near future(with some luck in 2004) they could win the Central, but when the casual fan sees that the Royals won 83 games last year, are young and should improve, made some nice minor additions, and the 2 main competitors lost some key players they assume that this team is going to run away with the Central. In this case I think they are setting themselves up for a letdown. I think it will be a 3 team race(with any of the 3 winning the division), and at this point I don't see a clear favorite(although I give a slight edge to the Twins).

 

 

 

I hope that you don't live your life by this "assume the worse and hope for the best" statement, because that is a sad way to live and not a good word of advice for baseball or life. How pathetic would the world be if everyone assumed the worse? If this is how you truely view baseball(and more importantly life), than you need to get some help.

 

I think you misunderstand how drastic an affect that a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position would have. Lets assume that it falls to about .285, which is still well above average. A decrease of that much would result in 5-10% fewer runs scored. Over the course of a season that is a drastic change that can't be negated by 1 individual player. Furthermore, you assume that Sweeney is going to be healthy, but take it from someone who has seen their dad deal with back/neck problems their entire life(cut his college football career short), Sweeney's injuries really can't be cured and is reoccuring. The fact is(unfortunately) that Sweeney might not ever play a full season of baseball again(his AB's have gone down each of the last 3 years). JuanGone is also unlikely to stay healthy. The guy hasn't had over 400 AB's the past 2 years. Furthermore, you assume(incorrectly) that JuanGone's production is added to last year production, but you neglect the fact that he has to make up for the loses of Ibanez, Tucker, and White. Those 3 combined to post the following stats:

 

.286 BA 169 runs 59 2B 11 3B 35 HR 166 RBI 16 SB

 

JuanGone will be lucky to put up half of those numbers. Harvey??? Have you seen Harvey play? The guy is terrible, including one of the ugliest swings I have seen. The Royals think so highly of Harvey that they brought in Stairs to platoon with him. The fact is that KC really hasn't improved their offensive talent, and that a possible 5-10% decrease in runs scored due to a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position is going to have a significant affect like the Angels from 2002 to 2003 or the Sox from 2000 to 2001(which is why I think the 2003 Royals are more similar to the 2000 White Sox than the 2001 Twins),

 

2002 Angels .290 BA with runners in scoring position(851 total runs scored)

2003 Angels .269 BA with runners in scoring position(736 total runs scored)

 

2000 Sox .301 BA with runners in scoring position(978 total runs scored)

2001 Sox .281 BA with runners in scoring position(798 total runs scored)

 

Sure there were other factors besides a decrease in BA with runners in scoring posiition that lead to a significant drop off in runs scored, but that was probably the main reason and shows how much of an affect it can truely have.

 

The Twins pitching staff was better and more stable then the Royals current staff. That was the only point that I was trying to make, although Radke, Milton, and Lohse are all solid middle of the rotation starters. Below average offense? Me thinks that Brando should check the stats first. The Twins had a very underrated offense that didn't get a lot of attention because it had no starts.

 

6 regulars with a .275+ BA, including 2 with a .300+ BA

8 players with 10+ HR's, including 2 with 25+ HR's

9 players with 47+ RBI's, including 3 with 74+ RBI's

 

Overall

8th in runs scored

4th in BA

9th in HR

7th in OPS

4th in SB

 

They had an average, but underrated offense.

 

KC has the best bullpen in the Central??? You do realize that they had the worst bullpen in the majors last year. Sure the addition of Sullivan and Leskanic(for a full season) will help, but they certainly won't have the best bullpen in the Central.

Well that's good. Atleast we agree on that.

 

20 minutes??? Try 20 seconds. Its very easy to get/understand a stat if you have half a brain.

 

It may not take 20 minutes, but it sure as hell doesn't take 20 seconds, and I can tell you that for sure. I've looked at stats before and have done so on the board, and it can be a time consuming process...which is why I said I don't have 20 minutes. I was being a smart-ass. Maybe it takes 5-10 minutes.

 

And I do have (atleast) half a brain, so I think I understand statstics.

 

Or is that the other way around? Anyways...

 

If they move the fences back, than wouldn't that have a negate affect on the hitters? I don't see the point that you are trying to make with the fence arguements. It might help the pitchers, but it will hurt the hitters, so its not going to make the Royals a better team.

 

It probably will not affect the hitters as much as one would think. They were 7th in the league in homers with 162, and while that stat may or may not drop(remember, as I said before, they could have Sweeney and Gonzalez all year, and if so, I would bet their homers increase solely because of that, however, if either or both get hurt, that number will probably drop), they rely much more on singles, doubles, stealing, bunting, and the like. They were 4th in the league in hits, among the top 3 in singles, and tied for 3rd in triples, while they were not quite as high on the doubles list. I can't honestly tell you how it will affect them.

 

But for the rest, I have no comment, other then you ahve done more research then me and I have nothing else to say. Well said.

 

BTW, I do not live by the assume the worst, hope for the best....that is only in baseball, or more generally, in sports that I do that. If someone did that in real life, their life would probably be s***ty. I do that in baseball so that way if the White Sox do falter and struggle as they have the past two years, the fall does not hurt nearly as much. They say the higher you up, the further the fall, and I tend to agree. Also, part of that is you assume the worst for things you cannot control. If I was on the White Sox(dream ends there ), and we are in a divisional race down the stretch, you assume the worst will happen of things you cannot control(the team closest to you in the standings will win out), and so you have to control what you can and you have to win out(which is the part I did not write). The hoping for the best would be when the team closest to you loses a game. That's where I got the theory from originally, and instead of just applying it to baseball in September, I am applying it throughout the whole year.

[whitesox61382]

Technnically, that's below average. 

 

Unless you think Twin rookies are gonna pull a 2002 and blow people away, and unless you see Politte and Koch have really good seasons.....KC does have the best BP in ALC, almost by default. Until proven otherwise. 

 

When you look at RISP BA, you ALSO have to look at RISP Slug  as well as at the RO OPS.    There is no way Royals duplicate the .304 avg, you're correct.....BUT, if Sweeney and Gonzo stay healthy and Stairs continues to MURDER RHP, when you couple them with improving Beltran, solid rook Guiel and ROY Berroa....you might.just.have. an overall jump in OPS , including with Runners On, to cover up for the likely BA RISP drop-off.

 

Meanwhile.....Twinkies have Stewart's hamstrings and Mauer's head to worry about. With Baltimore and Anaheim taking a step up, Minny might only have a very AVERAGE offense in 2004.  I have them ranked below the Sox and Mariners as well, but that's 'cuz I am in the optimistic mood. 

 

Regardless,  Twins will have an average rotation if Santana is anything but 100% healthy after that late surgery;  their offense is not gonna carry them and their BP has its lost TWO studs--  imagine us losing Gordon AND Marte.

 

If Sox play an inspired (read: of the 2000 kind when players picked each other up during slumps, used the whole field, cut down on swings with RISP, hit Sac flies,  avoid GIDP, bunt people over, run bases and play tighter Defense), selfless brand of ball and manage to stay a little healthier than either the Royals or the Twins......while JR makes Everett-type acquisitions at the ASB if we're close.....I don't see why we couldn't pull off an upset and win the ALC.   

 

In 2003, we were giving games away left and ritght and up the middle. So many examples of jaw-dropping ineptitude that left even Hawk Harrelson shaking his noggin'. Hell partna,  our 11-8 record against 119-loss kitties stings like Gary Busey in the ol' hive.

 

Of course I can't wait until we swing Konerko for Perez as you promised and use the saved dough to fill in at least one hole.     

I don't know if I have seen as many IF's in one post. Your whole arguement is IF this, this, and this happen, THAN this could happen. That doesn't make for a strong arguement, and isn't going to convince me to change my opinion(which is possible).

 

KC has the best bullpen by default??? Are you crazy??? Have you even looked at the stats??? Do you realize that KC had the worst bullpen, by far(2nd worst bullpen ERA in AL was 4.84), in the majors last year?

 

- KC 2003 bullpen ERA 5.55

 

Key Additions

Sullivan(Cincy/Sox) 64 IP 3.66 ERA 0 SV

Leskanic(full year) 52.2 IP 2.22 ERA 2 SV with KC: 26 IP 1.73 ERA 2 SV

Cerda(Mets) 32.1 IP 5.85 ERA 0 SV

 

Key Subtractions

Levine 21.1 IP 2.53 ERA 1 SV

 

Analysis - The Royals bullpen should be better, if for no other reason because it can't get much worse. They have made some decent personal improvements. Adding Sullivan will give them a solid right handed set up pitcher. They also get a full year out of Leskanic, however those two alone won't make the majors worst bullpen into the strongest in the AL Central. If I had to make a prediction, than I would guess their bullpen will have an ERA in the high 4's, with the best case scenerio being the mid 4's.

 

- Sox 2003 bullpen ERA 4.13

 

Key Additions

Takatsu(Japan)

Politte(Toronto) 49.1 IP 5.66 ERA 12 SV

Santiago(Cleveland) 31.2 IP 2.84 ERA 0 SV

Person/Jackson/Varensbourg

 

Key Subtractions

Gordon 74 IP 3.16 ERA 12 SV

Sullivan 14.1 IP 3.77 ERA 0 SV

Glover 35.2 IP 4.54 ERA 0 SV

White 47.2 IP 6.61 ERA 1 SV

 

Analysis - The lose of Gordon will hurt, but I have a feeling that Takatsu and Politte will do a decent job replacing him. Furthermore, I expect Koch to be better next year and the back end of the bullpen to be strong with more depth and talent(no more White posting a 6.61 ERA for 47.2 IP). I expect the bullpen to be similar to last year and post an ERA in the low 4's, worst case scenerio is that they post an ERA in the mid 4's.

 

- Twins 2003 bullpen ERA 3.84

 

Key Additions

Nathan(SF) 79 IP 2.96 ERA 0 SV

Silva(Philly) 87.1 IP 4.43 ERA 1 SV

Fultz(Texas) 67.1 IP 5.21 ERA 0 SV

Crain(top prospect AAA) 26 IP 3.12 ERA 10 SV

 

Key Subtractions

Hawkins 77.1 IP 1.86 ERA 2 SV

Guardado 65.1 IP 2.89 ERA 41 SV

Fiore 36 IP 5.50 ERA 0 SV

 

Analysis - The Twins bullpen did take a hit with the lose of Hawkins and Guardado, however, people are quick to overlook the fact that they brought in 3 decent arms in Nathan, Silva, and Fultz to help counter the lose. They also have top closer prospect Crain ready to contribute as well. The Twins bullpen will probably be a little worse, but I expect them to post an ERA in the low 4's, worse case scenerio the mid 4's.

 

Do you honestly believe that Sullivan and a full season of Leskanic will make up the 1.50 ERA difference between the Royals and the Sox/Twins? The fact is that despite the minor improvements, the Sox and Twins still have the best bullpens in the Central. I suggest that you look at the stats before you make a statement that has no backing.

 

IF Sweeney and JuanGone can stay healthy. Here are some numbers. Lets see if you can guess what they are?

 

00' 618

01' 559

02' 471

03' 392

 

Give up? Those are Sweeney's AB's the past 4 years. Notice a trend? The fact is that a back/neck injury can never be truely cured, and that Sweeney will probably have that problem for the rest of his life. I highly doubt that he plays a full season again.

 

JuanGone hasn't had over 350 AB's the past 2 seasons, has a history of injury problems, and at 34 is no spring chicken. If the Royals get 400+ AB's out of him, than they should be very happy.

 

IF Beltran improves, if Stairs continue to hit righties, if Berroa and Guiel continue to improve. You sound like a 3rd grader. Can make a list of IF's as well, but I like to stick to the facts and make a strong arguement. However, what IF Beltran regresses after posting career highs across the board, what IF Stairs struggles against righties, what IF Berroa falls into that dreaded sophmore slump, what IF Guiel plays like plays like the 31 year old career minor leaguer that he is? It goes both ways. The point is that in reality it will probably be somewhere in between, in which case the Royals will still see a dropoff in both BA and OPS with runners in scoring position, especially since BA and OPS are closely related.

 

I love how you downplay injury prone, 30+ year old players like JuanGone and Sweeney, but are quick to point out possible injuries to players that have no history of injuries and are in their prime(health wise). It's things like this that make your arguement weak/elementary. If you took the time to compare the Sox and Twins offense, than you would see that they are relatively similar.

 

The point is that any of the 3 teams could win the Central if they get some breaks/luck. On paper, I think the Twins have a razor thin advantage and that KC is overrated to some extent. It should be a good race and I can't wait for spring training to get started.

[BrandoFan]

I don't know if I have seen as many IF's in one post. Your whole arguement is IF this, this, and this happen, THAN this could happen. That doesn't make for a strong arguement, and isn't going to convince me to change my opinion(which is possible).

 

KC has the best bullpen by default??? Are you crazy??? Have you even looked at the stats??? Do you realize that KC had the worst bullpen, by far(2nd worst bullpen ERA in AL was 4.84), in the majors last year?

 

- KC 2003 bullpen ERA 5.55

 

Key Additions

Sullivan(Cincy/Sox) 64 IP 3.66 ERA 0 SV

Leskanic(full year) 52.2 IP 2.22 ERA 2 SV with KC: 26 IP 1.73 ERA 2 SV

Cerda(Mets) 32.1 IP 5.85 ERA 0 SV

 

Key Subtractions

Levine 21.1 IP 2.53 ERA 1 SV

 

Analysis - The Royals bullpen should be better, if for no other reason because it can't get much worse. They have made some decent personal improvements. Adding Sullivan will give them a solid right handed set up pitcher. They also get a full year out of Leskanic, however those two alone won't make the majors worst bullpen into the strongest in the AL Central. If I had to make a prediction, than I would guess their bullpen will have an ERA in the high 4's, with the best case scenerio being the mid 4's.

 

- Sox 2003 bullpen ERA 4.13

 

Key Additions

Takatsu(Japan)

Politte(Toronto) 49.1 IP 5.66 ERA 12 SV

Santiago(Cleveland)  31.2 IP 2.84 ERA 0 SV

Person/Jackson/Varensbourg

 

Key Subtractions

Gordon 74 IP 3.16 ERA 12 SV

Sullivan 14.1 IP 3.77 ERA 0 SV

Glover 35.2 IP 4.54 ERA 0 SV

White 47.2 IP 6.61 ERA 1 SV

 

Analysis - The lose of Gordon will hurt, but I have a feeling that Takatsu and Politte will do a decent job replacing him. Furthermore, I expect Koch to be better next year and the back end of the bullpen to be strong with more depth and talent(no more White posting a 6.61 ERA for 47.2 IP). I expect the bullpen to be similar to last year and post an ERA in the low 4's, worst case scenerio is that they post an ERA in the mid 4's.

 

- Twins 2003 bullpen ERA 3.84

 

Key Additions

Nathan(SF) 79 IP 2.96 ERA 0 SV

Silva(Philly)  87.1 IP 4.43 ERA 1 SV

Fultz(Texas) 67.1 IP 5.21 ERA 0 SV

Crain(top prospect AAA) 26 IP 3.12 ERA 10 SV

 

Key Subtractions

Hawkins 77.1 IP 1.86 ERA 2 SV

Guardado 65.1 IP 2.89 ERA 41 SV

Fiore 36 IP 5.50 ERA 0 SV

 

Analysis - The Twins bullpen did take a hit with the lose of Hawkins and Guardado, however, people are quick to overlook the fact that they brought in 3 decent arms in Nathan, Silva, and Fultz to help counter the lose. They also have top closer prospect Crain ready to contribute as well. The Twins bullpen will probably be a little worse, but I expect them to post an ERA in the low 4's, worse case scenerio the mid 4's.

 

Do you honestly believe that Sullivan and a full season of Leskanic will make up the 1.50 ERA difference between the Royals and the Sox/Twins? The fact is that despite the minor improvements, the Sox and Twins still have the best bullpens in the Central. I suggest that you look at the stats before you make a statement that has no backing.

 

IF Sweeney and JuanGone can stay healthy. Here are some numbers. Lets see if you can guess what they are?

 

00' 618

01' 559

02' 471

03' 392

 

Give up? Those are Sweeney's AB's the past 4 years. Notice a trend? The fact is that a back/neck injury can never be truely cured, and that Sweeney will probably have that problem for the rest of his life. I highly doubt that he plays a full season again.

 

JuanGone hasn't had over 350 AB's the past 2 seasons, has a history of injury problems, and at 34 is no spring chicken. If the Royals get 400+ AB's out of him, than they should be very happy.

 

IF Beltran improves, if Stairs continue to hit righties, if Berroa and Guiel continue to improve. You sound like a 3rd grader. Can make a list of IF's as well, but I like to stick to the facts and make a strong arguement. However, what IF Beltran regresses after posting career highs across the board, what IF Stairs struggles against righties, what IF Berroa falls into that dreaded sophmore slump, what IF Guiel plays like plays like the 31 year old career minor leaguer that he is? It goes both ways. The point is that in reality it will probably be somewhere in between, in which case the Royals will still see a dropoff in both BA and OPS with runners in scoring position, especially since BA and OPS are closely related.

 

I love how you downplay injury prone, 30+ year old players like JuanGone and Sweeney, but are quick to point out possible injuries to players that have no history of injuries and are in their prime(health wise). It's things like this that make your arguement weak/elementary. If you took the time to compare the Sox and Twins offense, than you would see that they are relatively similar.

 

The point is that any of the 3 teams could win the Central if they get some breaks/luck. On paper, I think the Twins have a razor thin advantage and that KC is overrated to some extent. It should be a good race and I can't wait for spring training to get started.

I also think less of Nathan, Silva and Crane than you do, we all know how "well" most rookies perform when given a closer's job....and much more of Hawkins, Santana and Guaradado that have been staples of the Twinkie BP for the most part of 2003, taking pressure off of Romero and Co. Guess what? Now we will find out how Nathan, Silva, Balfour, Crane, Romero fend for themselevs.

 

You have but written Sweeney and Gonzo off. Good for you.

 

You apparently think that a 26yo Beltran and a 25yo Berroa will not be as good as last year, especially now with Stairs, Sweeney, Santiago, Guiel and Gonzo (and a LHP-killing Graffanino platooning with RHP-hitting Relaford....as well as a healthy Randa) backing them up and forcing opposing pitchers to challenge them with fastballs, thus making them more dangerous by default.......I disagree. To an extent, anyway.

 

 

You want to play the "IF" game?

 

--I will bring up Rowand's only average defense, low OBP and inability to hit RHP.

--I will bring up Uribe's OBP and point Coors-ward.

--I will bring up everything Harris.

--I will bring up Olivo's total lack of stick.

--I will bring up Konerko's flaws nobody but me talks about and his freakish 2003 meltdown that may always haunt him, the balding perfectionist that he is.

--I will bring up Valentin's age and a beyond-idiotic insistence on hitting RH.

--I will bring up Magglio's very human (for a supposed MVP player) career 890 OPS .

--I will bring up Garland's career ERA and lack of good secondary pitches.

--I will bring up Loaiza's career ERA as well as Burhle's disturbing 2-year downward trend that every expert under the sun mentioned already.

--I will bring up the fact that we have NO #4 or #5 pitchers, unless you think Shoenweiss and Rauch have more chance at succeeding than younger Affeldt, Ascenio and Gobble do.

--I will be merciless toward Danny Wright and will pick apart Billy Koch's lack of control and unbelivale loss of velocity, which you DON'T just buy back at the flea market. Big health question marks both of em.

--And Shingo's age and slipping numbers even against INFERIOR Japanese hitters....

--I will bring up Politte's last year

--Of course how could I not mention the fact that Kelly Wunsht, ostensibly our second best reliever, has thrown HOW MANY innings and allowed how many inherited runners to score in the last 3 years?

--Did Joe Crede or did he not have a sub-740 OPS in his first full season?

--Then there is Frank Thomas who will be 36 AND who weighs almost 300 pounds....Talk about high health risks....he is the poster boy. And don't you dare point to Bonds and Edgar....

--Finally, we have a rookie MANAGER who may be a total disaster-- unlike Tony Pena-- he's already shown all the discretion and judgement of an intoxicated seagull slamming into a papier-mache light tower.

 

Unless Appier pulls a Loaiza, there is very little chance Royals will have as good (or rather as overrated) a starting rotation as us, BUT will better on the pads, will have a pretty close bullpen AND might just out-hit us BADLY if they stay healthy....and I've never been one to stoop as low as to actually COUNT on serious injuries befalling other teams' key players in order to pad my point.

 

But we both agree that ultimately this s***ty division is UP FOR GRABS and that's something. I optimistically see Sox winning 92 games and a 1st plce. BUT, I can certainly make a case for both Twins and Royals embarassing us 2002-2003 style.

 

We shall see. I hope you're right about de Royales.

[WillieHarris2]

All we need is a fast start. Last couple years we've gotten off to a slow start when we played the royals.Then at the end of the season were scrapping to get into first place. I think with Ozzie at the helm he will bring much needed energy to this team. Theres a lot of ifs involved but i think it can be done.