3E8 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Isn't the most Buehrle's ever made in one year for the Sox $3.5 million? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 QUOTE(3E8 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 05:26 PM) Isn't the most Buehrle's ever made in one year for the Sox $3.5 million? Until this year, Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 04:26 PM) Until this year, Yes. Then I think the author is way off base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Has anyone even read the Ray Druham/Iguchi comment in there yet? He has completly lost his mind. Since Durham last had his healthy season when he was 30, this must mean Iguchi is injury prone? Is that what I am getting from this? Why are the 2 even comparable? :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 01:24 PM) I think I just read the most absurd comment of my entire life. 1) Buehrle get's paid like an ace? 2) Buehrle is a mid rotation starter Joe Sheehan you are a f***ing dips*** moron. I started reading the sports page in 1957, so I guess that makes me a fossil. The quality of all forms of journalism is not what it once was. The quality of sports journalism has fallen off of a cliff. I have a nickname that applies to the modern sportscaster/journalist. Blow dried assholes. Great suits and hairstyles, nothing much between the ears. Welcome to the club Joe Sheehan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 10:46 PM) If you really want to get an answer back, or at least get listend to, calling a guy a toolbox is not the way to do it. As well as saying "get your nose out of Bill James' ass". It seems every offseason move that doesn't have the Sox being picked one gets ripped, but that should be expected. Overall, though, I must say I'm dissappointed in his assessment. Saying we'll finish third is one thing, but things like "Mark Buehrle is a middle-of-the-rotation guy" and other dumb s*** is pretty stupid... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 :banghead :banghead :banghead QUIT f***IN WORRYING ABOUT WHAT PUBLICATIONS SAY ABOUT THE WHITE SOX Jesus tap dancin Christ. The Sox made no sexy moves, their team OPS went down, their team average went down, the 3 and 4 spots in the rotation are held by Cubans who are very questionable(El Duque being injury prone, Contreras just having never been good in the majors as a starter), the bullpen has a junkballer...do I have to go through this again? I want to ask everyone on the board one favor - that being, do not read or watch another AL Central prediction for the rest of ST anywhere...not ESPN, not BP, not TSN, not the Tribune, not the Herald...no where. And just let them play. This s*** is going to work...we have a full (6) man rotation, a very deep bullpen, a lineup with essentially no holes, a deep bench, and a guy who will start the year on the DL that will be back in probably mid May who will put up a .950 OPS or close to it for 3 and a half months. Put it this way...when the fewest amount of wins you will probably get from your rotation is still in double digits, you have a good chance...and when the worst OPS in your starting lineup could be like .700(either Pods or Crede), and the worst average will probably be around .250(probably Crede), you will be in for a good season. I can give a hundred reasons why I think the White Sox will win the division, and even a couple as to why I think they could be a World Series team...but that is pointless, because writes and analysts everywhere could give me hundreds of reasons as to why the White Sox will not be a .500 team...and half the reasons will probably be the same reasons I have for them winning the division. Now, having vented a little on that, I will say Sheehan is a little off-base in his reasons. MB is a #3 pitcher.....on the Yankees. Freddy Garcia is a #3 pitcher.......on the Red Sox(maybe). Carlos Lee did not turn into Scott Podsednik...Carlos Lee turned into Scott Podsednik, Luis Vizcaino, Duque, AJP, and Iguchi. Most 2005 projections I have seen for Aaron Rowand project him to hit around 30 homers and to hit in the .300 range. There is no need for Joe Crede to bust out and have a huge year...he can put up .250 20 60 .700 and we would be fine. Iguchi is not injury prone because the last good 2Bman we had was Durham, who, at 29, had his last full healthy year(that is probably the worst argument I have ever heard). And since when is $9 mill a year getting paid like an ace? Kris Benson got paid $7 mill a year, so he must be getting paid like a #2 starter...or no. And Buehrle getting $5.75 is nothing compared to the $7 mill or so Eric Milton is getting. And he can't say the White Sox offense will be bad. I mean, they are still likely going to hit 200 homers, and will still probably score 750-800 runs...so that doesn't seem too bad to me. The fact that they are going to try and score runs in more ways then 1 just tells me they are trying to become a more versatile offense, thus making it more dangerous. So instead of losing games 3-2 and winning games 11-5, they will win both close games and blowouts, and they will lose the same way. Nothing wrong with that...kind of seems similar to what the Twins are doing. In general...Sheehan has to be a Cubs fan...or a Twins fan...or he just has to hate Kenny Williams. I'm not sure which. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 05:44 PM) Jesus tap dancin Christ. I must say that was pretty original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Over at WSI, a guy posted one of his articles from 2001, and, in describing the Mariners -- he called Ichiro a "glorified Triple-A hitter"... I found that a little funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Well that turned out well. I can't remember the last time a glorified Triple-A hitter set the ML record for hits in a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 That's just what I mean. Today's sports journalists are so full of themselves, and most of them don't know s***. If one of them makes a whopper of a mistake like calling Ichiro a "glorified AAA hitter" you never find them owning up to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 (edited) Also where the f*** does the correlation between Ray Ray and Tadahito come from? I guess since Prior is injury prone than Rich Harden is injury prone??? I'm not seeing the relationship? Since when does Ray Durham being injury prone at age 29 make all 2B over the age 29 injury prone? Edited March 26, 2005 by WHarris1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 06:05 PM) Also where the f*** does the correlation between Ray Ray and Tadahito come from? I guess since Prior is injury prone than Rich Harden is injury prone??? I'm not seeing the relationship? Since when does Ray Durham being injury prone at age 29 make all 2B over the age 29 injury prone? You are wrong. Harden would have to be traded to the Cubs for that to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 06:48 PM) Over at WSI, a guy posted one of his articles from 2001, and, in describing the Mariners -- he called Ichiro a "glorified Triple-A hitter"... I found that a little funny. Yep, and that Mariners team won 116 games. They picked them to finish in 3rd place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 26, 2005 Author Share Posted March 26, 2005 If you really want to get an answer back, or at least get listend to, calling a guy a toolbox is not the way to do it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Do you think I really care to get a response back from this guy? He's a hack and has probably never even seen Buehrle pitch. He probably sits around and makes player assessments with a calculator. :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 To play devil's advocate here -- Any sports writer who isn't egregiously wrong at least a few times in his career is guaranteed to produce the most boring columns on the planet. (Phil Rogers once said that Sammy was more likely than Bonds to pass Aaron. How's that looking?) Having to produce something interesting hundreds of times every year means you have to go out on a limb and be provocative. I'm sure a lot of these guys, if they were giving you their true beliefs, would admit a lot of uncertainty. (Heck, the stats people may even give you confidence intervals.) But of course that doesn't sell. Or get people so worked up that they go berserk on a message board. Just take it with a grain of salt. I think this board is generally too sanguine about our chances, but I still found this a little out there. Mostly for the reasons already mentioned. In a worst case scenario, I guess I can see the Sox having a season like this. But projecting it as a most-likely scenario -- that's hard to fathom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 12:16 AM) Do you think I really care to get a response back from this guy? He's a hack and has probably never even seen Buehrle pitch. He probably sits around and makes player assessments with a calculator. :rolly What, because he's pro-sabermetrics? I love the stereotypes of people who are pro-sabermetric -- that they don't watch the games and just look at stats, and plug in numbers. I agree that he's totally wrong on his assessment of Buehrle, but that doesn't mean he's a freak who sits around and plugs numbers into a calculator... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 25, 2005 -> 06:22 PM) To play devil's advocate here -- Any sports writer who isn't egregiously wrong at least a few times in his career is guaranteed to produce the most boring columns on the planet. (Phil Rogers once said that Sammy was more likely than Bonds to pass Aaron. How's that looking?) Having to produce something interesting hundreds of times every year means you have to go out on a limb and be provocative. I'm sure a lot of these guys, if they were giving you their true beliefs, would admit a lot of uncertainty. (Heck, the stats people may even give you confidence intervals.) But of course that doesn't sell. Or get people so worked up that they go berserk on a message board. Just take it with a grain of salt. I think this board is generally too sanguine about our chances, but I still found this a little out there. Mostly for the reasons already mentioned. In a worst case scenario, I guess I can see the Sox having a season like this. But projecting it as a most-likely scenario -- that's hard to fathom. Good post. For the most part I agree. Still many sports analysts today smugly shoot from the hip and are guilty of a lot of sloppy research. Like the guy linked in another thread who said the Sox had "Sconeweis" in the pen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 26, 2005 Author Share Posted March 26, 2005 What, because he's pro-sabermetrics? I love the stereotypes of people who are pro-sabermetric -- that they don't watch the games and just look at stats, and plug in numbers. I agree that he's totally wrong on his assessment of Buehrle, but that doesn't mean he's a freak who sits around and plugs numbers into a calculator... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why else would he think Buehrle is a middle-of-the-rotation pitcher? Sheehan obviously has never seen him pitch if he would make such an ignorant statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 12:54 AM) Why else would he think Buehrle is a middle-of-the-rotation pitcher? Sheehan obviously has never seen him pitch if he would make such an ignorant statement. Let me be clear -- I'm not pro-Sheehan on this. But I think it's an understandable position. There aren't many aces who rack up fewer strike outs than Mark, at least before last season. I think Mark looks good enough to be a #1. But if someone really believes (from stats or experience) that a frontline starter needs to be a high-k pitcher, then they may still be uncomfortable w/ Buehrle as a #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 01:58 AM) Let me be clear -- I'm not pro-Sheehan on this. But I think it's an understandable position. There aren't many aces who rack up fewer strike outs than Mark, at least before last season. I think Mark looks good enough to be a #1. But if someone really believes (from stats or experience) that a frontline starter needs to be a high-k pitcher, then they may still be uncomfortable w/ Buehrle as a #1. And, DIPS isn't really that high on Buehrle -- though they haven't been for the past three years, and (I could be wrong) doesn't BP really like DIPS as far as judging pitchers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 01:59 AM) And, DIPS isn't really that high on Buehrle -- though they haven't been for the past three years, and (I could be wrong) doesn't BP really like DIPS as far as judging pitchers? You're probably right, I don't really know how much they rely on DIPS, and I'm sure they are in fact looking at the stats quite a bit. I was just trying to give a 'non-stats' justification, something one can see just being out at the game every day. Edit: Also, just off the top of my head, I'd think the 2 are related. B/c you rely on your defense the least when you strike someone out, and DIPS is the defense indep pitching stat, I'd guess that someone who strikes out fewer people will get a big penalty in terms of DIPS. But someone who knows the construction of these stats better than I do could correct/clarify that. Edited March 26, 2005 by jackie hayes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxDaFox005 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Hey just wanted to let you guys and girls know, that there is a trade in the works! It should be completed (if agreed upon) by opening day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 QUOTE(SoxDaFox005 @ Mar 26, 2005 -> 02:23 AM) Hey just wanted to let you guys and girls know, that there is a trade in the works! It should be completed (if agreed upon) by opening day. Details and source? This is sort of, out of the blue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted March 26, 2005 Author Share Posted March 26, 2005 Hey just wanted to let you guys and girls know, that there is a trade in the works! It should be completed (if agreed upon) by opening day. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What? Are you the guy who goes around to various Sox message boards making up BS signing and trade rumors? 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.