ESPN "Expert" Picks

[ZoomSlowik]

Here is where I think you're very much wrong.  Their Pitching was good last year, not great.  Their bullpen was great.  But their starting pitching has almost certainly taken a step backwards this year with the loss of Millwood and Elarton, and it's hard for me to say that the guys they got as replacements (Johnson from Detroit, who we kill IIRC, and old crafty vet Paul Byrd) simply aren't at the same level.  On top of that, they lost Howry from their bullpen, and don't have an obvious contender to back up Wickman if his health issues, which held him to 66 appearances in 2002, 2003, and 2004 combined crop back up.  The Indians Pitching staff will only take a step forward if everyone does the same as they did last year, but Lee and Sabathia take big steps forwards, and that looks very doubtful to me.

 

I agree with everything you said there. Besides injury concerns with Wickman, there's the fact that he just isn't all that good. He's been a pretty mediocre reliever for most of his career, and his last healthy season before last year wasn't very good (ERA over 4). Plus, he allowed a fairly high number of baserunners despite a low ERA. He's not exactly a dependable option.

 

Plus while their offense is good, it's not quite elite. I wouldn't even say that it was as good as the Sox's offense for most of this decade back when we had Maggs, C Lee, and a healthy Frank. Considering that their starting pitching isn't much better than ours was (arguably it's worse), that's not a good thing. Their pen is a bit better, but if Wickman goes down or sucks, that's a serious problem for them.

Edited March 28, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[Balta1701]

Plus while their offense is good, it's not quite elite. I wouldn't even say that it was as good as the Sox's offense for most of this decade back when we had Maggs, C Lee, and a healthy Frank. Considering that their starting pitching isn't much better than ours was (arguably it's worse), that's not a good thing. Their pen is a bit better, but if Wickman goes down or sucks, that's a serious problem for them.

On the other hand, I half agree with you here.

 

The Indians offense isn't quite elite yet, but it certainly has the potential to be elite. It was the #4 offense in the AL Last year, but was only like 60 runs or so ahead of us (a healthy Thome replacing Everett would more than have done that for us last year.)

 

Running up and down the list you have a ton of left handed power in Hafner (who should hit 40 this year), Martinez who gives you good production from the catcher's spot, you've got Sizemore in the outfield, Peralta in the infield...all of whom give good production at spots that are sometimes less productive.

 

A couple of their key guys struggled out of the gate last year (Martinez, Boone). If Sizemore, Peralta, and Hafner keep improving, and they're able to bring up either Garko or Marte and get good production out of them whenever they do show up...that team could really be raking.

[KevHead0881]

For those of you who seem to lose sleep over "expert" predictions, this ought to make you feel better. From Tom Verducci at SI...

 

2006 Predictions

 

Has us beating the Cards in the World Series. Hopefully this doesn't qualify for the "SI curse".

[Balta1701]

Has us beating the Cards in the World Series.  Hopefully this doesn't qualify for the "SI curse".

Pujols should be on the cover of that one.

 

I don't think that the SI Curse is strong enough to even bring that ball he hit off of Lidge back to earth, let alone slowing him down for an entire season.

[KevHead0881]

Actually, it appears that they are using Verducci's predictions as the "official" SI predictions...

 

SI 2006 Preview

 

Between SI predicting us to win the World Series again, and this mornings Mariotti arcticle saying not to worry about the Sox, we are officially screwed!

[ZoomSlowik]

On the other hand, I half agree with you here.

 

The Indians offense isn't quite elite yet, but it certainly has the potential to be elite.  It was the #4 offense in the AL Last year, but was only like 60 runs or so ahead of us (a healthy Thome replacing Everett would more than have done that for us last year.)

 

Running up and down the list you have a ton of left handed power in Hafner (who should hit 40 this year), Martinez who gives you good production from the catcher's spot, you've got Sizemore in the outfield, Peralta in the infield...all of whom give good production at spots that are sometimes less productive.

 

A couple of their key guys struggled out of the gate last year (Martinez, Boone).  If Sizemore, Peralta, and Hafner keep improving, and they're able to bring up either Garko or Marte and get good production out of them whenever they do show up...that team could really be raking.

 

I never said they didn't have some guys that can hit. Things went really well for most of their lineup last year though, and I'm not sure how much better some of those guys can get. Hafner and Sizemore can definitely get better, but I'm not sold on Peralta yet, and I don't think Martinez can do that much better. His slow start is countered a bit by his incredibly good second half. I'd be very surprised if he hits much over .300 or 20 homers. Belliard and Michaels are their only other decent hitters, and I think I'm being a bit generous on the latter since he hasn't really proven anything. Blake, Broussard, and Boone don't really impress me, their numbers are an awful lot like Joe Crede's numbers. I wouldn't count on them getting too much help from the minors either, their guys probably need a little more polish. I'd personally rather have our Frank-Mags-Paulie-Carlos group.

 

I don't think it'll be much better than our offense, if it's even that good.

Edited March 28, 2006 by ZoomSlowik

[WCSox]

The Angels have one of the best pitching staffs in baseball.

 

They certainly did last year before Colon went down. One could argue that they were THE best. But losing Washburn and Byrd will hurt. Weaver is no better than a #4.

[Jordan4life_2007]

They certainly did last year before Colon went down.  One could argue that they were THE best.  But losing Washburn and Byrd will hurt.  Weaver is no better than a #4.

 

Neither are Washburn or Byrd. Colon, Lackey, Weaver, Santana and Escobar is a top 5 rotation in the AL IMO.

[KevHead0881]

Neither are Washburn or Byrd.  Colon,  Lackey,  Weaver,  Santana and Escobar is a top 5 rotation in the AL IMO.

 

Meh. Colon and Lackey are damn good, but the last three are a crapshoot. I like Santana, but he's still young and inconsistant.

 

If there is anything makes me think they have any shot at getting to the world series, its that their bullpen is among the best in baseball. I'd certainly take it over ours at the moment.

[WCSox]

Neither are Washburn or Byrd. 

 

Washburn wasn't that great in '03 and '04, but his '00-02 and '05 numbers are pretty impressive. He's been a little inconsistent, but I think he'd make a good #3 on most teams. Agreed that Byrd is closer to Weaver's level.

 

Colon,  Lackey,  Weaver,  Santana and Escobar is a top 5 rotation in the AL IMO.

 

Probably. But I don't like Weaver as a #3. Escobar's a solid back-of-the-rotation guy and Santana has promise, but it may take him another year or two to develop.

 

Last year was the best they've been since '02 and their offense just blew it in the ALCS. Their odds of success are significantly lower now.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Meh.  Colon and Lackey are damn good, but the last three are a crapshoot.  I like Santana, but he's still young and inconsistant.

 

If there is anything makes me think they have any shot at getting to the world series, its that their bullpen is among the best in baseball.  I'd certainly take it over ours at the moment.

 

Weaver is a decent #3. He's a good bet to win anywhere from 12-15 games. I also think he'll benefit with that stellar Angels defense around him. I think Santana will improve off his solid rookie campaign. I can think of a lot worse #5 starters than Escobar. I agree with you about their bullpen. It's flat nasty.

[Soxpranos]

That picture of Moronotti is hilarious!!!!  

 

 

He looks like the Spangoolie on prom.

[KevHead0881]

Weaver is a decent #3.  He's a good bet to win anywhere from 12-15 games.  I also think he'll benefit with that stellar Angels defense around him.  I think Santana will improve off his solid rookie campaign.  I can think of a lot worse #5 starters than Escobar.  I agree with you about their bullpen.  It's flat nasty.

 

Weaver isn't terrible. But I do think he's a significant downgrade from Byrd. The stats may not show it, but think about it this way. Who would you rather face in a big game situation? I'd say Weaver without a doubt. The guy is a head case. Just look at his time in New York.

 

Byrd, on the other hand, is a gamer, and I think he was a nice signing for Cleveland.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Weaver isn't terrible.  But I do think he's a significant downgrade from Byrd.  The stats may not show it, but think about it this way.  Who would you rather face in a big game situation?  I'd say Weaver without a doubt.  The guy is a head case.  Just look at his time in New York.

 

Byrd, on the other hand, is a gamer, and I think he was a nice signing for Cleveland.

 

I agree with that. Weaver is like Matt Clement. 10-million dollar arm, 10 cent brain.

[samclemens]

Twins are my pick to win it if we don't.

 

based on...

 

twinks suck worse this year than last!

[hammerhead johnson]

based on...

 

twinks suck worse this year than last!

 

You can make an argument that they have the best bullpen in all of baseball. They're a pretty solid all-around defensive club (pitching, position players, etc).

 

This lineup is good, albeit nothing special:

 

1. Shannon Stewart

2. Luis Castillo

3. Justin Morneau

4. Joe Mauer

5. Rondell White

6. Torii Hunter

7. Tony Batista

8. Michael Cuddyer

9. Jason Bartlett

 

I don't know what their 7-9 in the order is going to look like, actually. But I see no reason why they can't win 85 to 88 games.

[benbacca37]

Hey I just noticed that SI.com has the White Sox winning the World Series over the Cardinals this year. So at least they're getting respect from someone.

 

SI.com's predictions

Edited March 29, 2006 by benbacca37

[G&T]

Hey I just noticed that SI.com has the White Sox winning the World Series over the Cardinals this year.  So at least they're getting respect from someone.

 

SI.com's predictions

 

The preseason ranks show just how bad the National League is. Yikes.

[whitesoxmanager]

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Mar 27, 2006 -> 05:23 PM)

Who cares what these guys think?

 

Preseason predictions, as we all saw last year, mean nothing.

 

They're not even worth discussing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

this is true when you are an adult. but i remember when i was a kid this was very important. it is was so much fun for me to listen to what others thought was going to happen! now that i am 36 i could give a rats. but it definitely matters for the kids in my opinion. that makes it worth talking about.

[TLAK]

Why does everyone get so wrapped up in what writers predict. Their votes don’t count. Only the player's votes count; they vote with their arms, bats and legs everyday of the season. By the end of the season we'll all know who won.

[Rowand44]

twinks suck worse this year than last!

Uh....Please explain, I'd love to hear this.

[nitetrain8601]

You can make an argument that they have the best bullpen in all of baseball.  They're a pretty solid all-around defensive club (pitching, position players, etc). 

 

This lineup is good, albeit nothing special:

 

1. Shannon Stewart

2. Luis Castillo

3. Justin Morneau

4. Joe Mauer

5. Rondell White

6. Torii Hunter

7. Tony Batista

8. Michael Cuddyer

9. Jason Bartlett

 

I don't know what their 7-9 in the order is going to look like, actually.  But I see no reason why they can't win 85 to 88 games.

 

Don't forget that they actually were keeping pace with the White Sox up until Hunter's injury. I mean we were the hottest team in baseball and had the best record and yet they were like 5 games behind.

[witesoxfan]

Uh....Please explain, I'd love to hear this.

 

They lost Joe Mays. Duh. DUH.

[JoshPR]

Why do you guys even pay attention to them? I mean.. They miss every year... There just wild gueses like someone said based on there biased opinion. The games are played on the field not what the ESPN morons say. I didn't read it but how many of those morons have the cubs in the NL and the Yanks winning it alll?

[Flash Tizzle]

Why do you guys even pay attention to them? I mean.. They miss every year... There just wild gueses like someone said based on there biased opinion. The games are played on the field not what the ESPN morons say.

How can you possibly suggest something so absurd?

 

 

Oh.