CWSGuy406 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 05:49 AM) How many World Series have Billy Beane built team played in? What are his teams' record in the postseason? Therefore, does Oakland fit the definition of "World Series Caliber" team? A GM has to build his team for the 162 game season. You can't build a team for the playoffs, because there is never a guarantee you'll make it that far. The postseason is all about who happens to be playing right at the right time. Oakland hasn't played well at the right times. But, I certainly don't think you should just discredit his accomplishments as you are... BTW -- In your opinion, were the 2002 Oakland A's a "World Series Caliber Team"? Why or why not, and don't just say, "Well, they didn't make the World Series, so they aren't World Series Caliber". Edited August 31, 2005 by CWSGuy406 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 11:49 PM) How many World Series have Billy Beane built team played in? What are his teams' record in the postseason? Therefore, does Oakland fit the definition of "World Series Caliber" team? You can win with a small payroll, you just need an able gm. I forgot who it was but someone gave an example of how the pirates didn't protect chris shelton, a guy who just absolutely tore up the minors, that move costs nothing and they could have had a star on their hands but now they just don't have him. Is it easier to build a world series winner with a high payroll...hell yeah, is it possible to win the series with a smaller payroll...you better believe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(wsox08 @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 11:54 PM) This post is just so f***ed up.. I reall ydoesn't seem like you are TRYING at all to stay positive.. The Yankees have showed you that money doesn't always buy you a championship.. Arizona, Florida, Anaheim and a bunch of runner up teams can show you that as evidence.. David Eckstein.. who ever heard of him before the World Series? :headshake For the last time...Arizona had a high payroll in 2001, 8th highest payroll in MLB at $85 million, and it would've been higher if it weren't for players taking deferrred salaries. Over the last 10 World Series, how many of the winners were top 8 in payroll? I'm gonna guess 8. Edit: sorry, slightly off. Edited August 31, 2005 by Greg Hibbard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 11:55 PM) BTW -- In your opinion, were the 2002 Oakland A's a "World Series Caliber Team"? Why or why not, and don't just say, "Well, they didn't make the World Series, so they aren't World Series Caliber". The way they've always constructed their lineup...they have never been a world series caliber team in my opinion. They play station to station ball, don't take nearly enough walks and those weaknesses always get exposed in the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 12:08 AM) don't take nearly enough walks Uhh....??? Everyone here already knows how I feel about Oakland in the playoffs but cmon now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 12:10 AM) Uhh....??? Everyone here already knows how I feel about Oakland in the playoffs but cmon now.... well, they are better than I figured as a team I guess but still, Chavez and Tejada were never the most patient hitters....they consistently average only about 50-55 walks per season, not exactly stellar numbers for guys expected to lead a team offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wsox08 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 12:02 AM) For the last time...Arizona had a high payroll in 2001, 8th highest payroll in MLB at $85 million, and it would've been higher if it weren't for players taking deferrred salaries. Over the last 10 World Series, how many of the winners were top 8 in payroll? I'm gonna guess 8. Edit: sorry, slightly off. What do you consider to be a low payroll? and it really depends on what kind of hearts the players play with and how hard they play... Come on.. money isn't everything.. If you don't believe the Sox will get anywhere then why are you here? to watch us fail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 I will say it again. Chicago is the smallest US market with 2 baseball teams in it. Plus, the White Sox are second to the Cubs in overall revenue. Unfortunately, we don't have a urine-soaked beer garden to draw the drunkards into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(wsox08 @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 12:27 AM) What do you consider to be a low payroll? and it really depends on what kind of hearts the players play with and how hard they play... Come on.. money isn't everything.. If you don't believe the Sox will get anywhere then why are you here? to watch us fail? I certainly don't believe this ownership group is doing nearly enough to get us there in a major market. How is this my responsibility? Are you actually apologizing for this ownership group's strategy? Again, 8 of the last 10 world series winners have been top 8 in payroll. In a non-salary cap environment, you need to spend to win. Many owners like Colangelo are willing to do whatever it takes, including sending their team far into debt to get their world championship. The Sox ownership group is not willing to do that. I'm not sure why you're questioning my fandom. Sports 101: fans of franchises don't switch allegiances because of wins and losses. Let's stay on topic, please... this ownership group is not spending like they want to win a world series, so no matter how over their heads a White Sox team plays, they'll never have enough pieces to do it in the long haul under this current scheme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(knightni @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 12:28 AM) I will say it again. Chicago is the smallest US market with 2 baseball teams in it. Plus, the White Sox are second to the Cubs in overall revenue. Unfortunately, we don't have a urine-soaked beer garden to draw the drunkards into. Again, this smacks of being an apologist for the owners not doing enough. Why do we need to justify this s***? Why is this acceptable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxrd5 Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 08:42 AM) Again, this smacks of being an apologist for the owners not doing enough. Why do we need to justify this s***? Why is this acceptable? Why are you freaking out? Why now instead of during the offseason? Your rant stinks of being an irrational fan who instead of focusing on what is going on in the field your stuck in the front office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 09:01 AM) Why are you freaking out? Why now instead of during the offseason? Your rant stinks of being an irrational fan who instead of focusing on what is going on in the field your stuck in the front office. I believe that the talent on the field that was provided by the general manager is not good enough to compete with the very best teams in this league, as it turns out. Are they still a good team? Sure. Are they a great team? Hell no. You can only ask players to play within their capabilities, and I'm not sure who you think isn't doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(knightni @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 06:48 PM) It occurs to me that the Marlins recently did it. It occurs to me that WHEN they did it, this guy didnt know a single player on that team. WS Champs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 by the way, that Griffeytalk banner is f***ing brilliant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossarian Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(JoshPR @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 10:09 PM) WHY?? Good scouting and development of the farm that why. The Sox haven't been let's say.. Hmmm that good at it lately. After Buehrle and Rowand who else has been developed? No one. Very good post IMO. You can adopt the frugal strategy of the Sox if you have a strong farm system and great scouting. The Sox have neither. What you are looking at then is trying to catch lightning in a bottle every once in a while. Like the first half of both 2000 and 2005. The Sox don't have a viable strategy to be successful in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hibbard Posted August 31, 2005 Author Share Posted August 31, 2005 The bottom line is that the Sox have not landed much in the way of marquee free agents in the last 7-8 years, and that is an extremely important part of a winning team. Far too important to outright ignore just because Al freakin' Belle didn't pan out the way we thought it would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 10:11 AM) by the way, that Griffeytalk banner is f***ing brilliant i cant take credit for making it, but I WILL take credit for showcasing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(JoshPR @ Aug 30, 2005 -> 11:09 PM) After Buehrle and Rowand who else has been developed? No one. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Carlos Lee, Magglio, Mike Cameron, Kip Wells, Ray Durham, and Chad Bradford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 10:11 AM) by the way, that Griffeytalk banner is f***ing brilliant <{POST_SNAPBACK}> With the exception that it should be "formerly," not "formally." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 11:30 AM) i cant take credit for making it, but I WILL take credit for showcasing it. I know who CAN take credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 11:39 AM) With the exception that it should be "formerly," not "formally." it works either way, but I didnt make it, so I will place blame on not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 11:39 AM) With the exception that it should be "formerly," not "formally." You have to realize who made it. The king of misspelled words... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 31, 2005 -> 11:41 AM) You have to realize who made it. The king of misspelled words... I prefer "the czar of misspelled words" but yeah, extremely true. At least there were no real grammar errors for once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 done, nice work. 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.