iWiN4PreP Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 It doenst matter who the tigers faced really. From my perspective its simply there pitching. They have not bad hitting. But there pitching is going absolotly nuts. Way overacheiving, and theyll come back down to earth. Maroth is injured, Bonderman is so-so, Verlander has never pitched more then 130 innings, nate = nothing special, and rogers is a first half pitcher. Already stated in this topic. But hey, if those 5 pitchers have years like they are having? Then yeah. they will be first or second easily in the division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finkelstein Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(GoSox05 @ May 30, 2006 -> 09:59 AM) Kenny Rodgers has always been bad in second half, Maroth is already hurt, Bonderman has been so so, Jason Verlander has never thrown more than 130 innings, not even in the minors. And last time i check Nate Robertson isnt Cy Young. This is the reason why I am not worried about the Tigers yet. If they are still around in early-mid August then I will take notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(southsideirish @ May 30, 2006 -> 11:38 AM) We slumped at the end? Where? For how long? I'm amazed people don't realize that we still had a pretty damn good record in the second half of last year.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ May 30, 2006 -> 09:49 AM) I'm amazed people don't realize that we still had a pretty damn good record in the second half of last year.. he said they "slumped toward the end" Going 12-16 in August with a 7 game losing streak doesn't qualify as a slump? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) he said they "slumped toward the end" Going 12-16 in August with a 7 game losing streak doesn't qualify as a slump? I think that the Sox had a .552 winning percentage (or something close to that) in the second half of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ May 29, 2006 -> 04:11 PM) The Yankees rotation should be, "Small Wang Johnson." At least "Pettitte" is gone. :puke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Interesting note: If the Tigers can just play around .500 baseball between now and late September, they will have a shot at the postseason. Here's another reason the Tigers will be there at the end: They finish the season with six of their final nine games against the Royals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ May 30, 2006 -> 05:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> he said they "slumped toward the end" Going 12-16 in August with a 7 game losing streak doesn't qualify as a slump? We were 17-12 in September and ended up with a 5 game winning streak going into the playoffs. Isn't that towards the end? August is more towards the middle, no? The Sox did have a .552 winning percentage after the all-star break. They went 42-34 after the all star-break. It is not exactly 57-29 and a .663 winning percentage like they did before the break, but hardly a slump. Plus we were 11-1 in the playoffs, which, if included in the 2nd half totals, brings it up to 53-35 and a .602 winning percentage. Still not as good as before the break, but hardly a slump. Plus no one expected them to win at a .663 winning percentage for the entire year as they did before the break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balance Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(That funky motion @ May 28, 2006 -> 03:59 PM) 2.5. Apparently I was a day early on that. Oops. It's 1.5 now. Edited May 30, 2006 by Balance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 06:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Interesting note: They also have Toronto and the White Sox in late September. The problem the White Sox face in September will be a lot of traveling against good teams. They play at Boston for 3 games, come home to play Cleveland for 4 games, then travel to the West Coast to play 3 against the Angels (then get a day off) and 3 against the A's, then come back home to play 3 against Detroit and 4 against Seattle, and then back out to Cleveland for 3 more. That is 23 games in 24 days, flying east to midwest to west and back to the midwest in that span. That stretch looks pretty brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 So, the schedule heavily favors Detroit coming down the stretch. Look, these guys aren't going to go away. Teams that get off to this kind of start are definitely hard pressed to not make the playoffs. The thing is, this year, there's 5 teams for three spots (NYY, BOS, CLE, DET, and CWS). Then you have the last spot going to whoever comes out in the West (probably OAK with around a 85 win total or so). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 11:49 AM) So, the schedule heavily favors Detroit coming down the stretch. Look, these guys aren't going to go away. Teams that get off to this kind of start are definitely hard pressed to not make the playoffs. The thing is, this year, there's 5 teams for three spots (NYY, BOS, CLE, DET, and CWS). Then you have the last spot going to whoever comes out in the West (probably OAK with around a 85 win total or so). I'd love to know why you put Cleveland instead of Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 06:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So, the schedule heavily favors Detroit coming down the stretch. Look, these guys aren't going to go away. Teams that get off to this kind of start are definitely hard pressed to not make the playoffs. The thing is, this year, there's 5 teams for three spots (NYY, BOS, CLE, DET, and CWS). Then you have the last spot going to whoever comes out in the West (probably OAK with around a 85 win total or so). I never said they were going away. I would put Toronto ahead of Cleveland or just say 6 for 3 spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(southsideirish @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:54 PM) I never said they were going away. I would put Toronto ahead of Cleveland or just say 6 for 3 spots. Blue Jays > Indians. Cleveland is getting no where near the playoffs this year, they're a .500 team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Linky. Following yesterday's look at the Tigers and how their team ERA stands head and shoulders above the American League, I thought I would take a look - as I did here and here with slugging and OBP - at the all-time great pitching teams in terms of team ERA compared to league ERA (bear in mind these figures do not include any adjustment for home park). I'm not suggesting that, before May is even over, we can project that the Tigers will end up in this group - the contrary is far more likely - but it should help give a sense of the rarefied air they are breathing right now. This list covers major league teams back to 1893, when the mound was moved to its present distance of 60'6". Year/Team ERA Lg ERA % Below Lg 1. 1906 Cubs 1.75 2.62 49.7 2. 1909 Cubs 1.75 2.59 48.0 3. 1905 Cubs 2.04 2.99 46.6 4. 1907 Cubs 1.73 2.46 42.2 5. 1910 A's 1.79 2.52 40.8 6. 2006 Tigers 3.38 4.73 39.9 7. 1939 Yankees 3.31 4.62 39.6 8. 1894 Giants 3.83 5.32 38.9 9. 1966 Dodgers 2.62 3.61 37.8 10. 2003 Dodgers 3.16 4.28 35.4 11. 1944 Cardinals 2.67 3.61 35.2 12. 1926 A's 3.00 4.02 34.0 13. 1954 Indians 2.78 3.72 33.8 13. 1964 White Sox 2.72 3.63 33.5 15. 1948 Indians 3.22 4.29 33.2 16. 1905 White Sox 1.99 2.65 33.2 17. 1997 Braves 3.18 4.21 32.4 18. 1913 Giants 2.42 3.20 32.2 19. 1967 White Sox 2.45 3.23 31.8 20. 1912 Giants 2.58 3.40 31.8 21. 1954 Giants 3.09 4.07 31.7 22. 1919 Cubs 2.21 2.91 31.7 23. 1943 Cardinals 2.57 3.38 31.5 24. 2002 Braves 3.13 4.11 31.3 25. 1981 Astros 2.66 3.49 31.2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 You all are right, TOR is probably more likely to fight for a spot then CLE, but I think that CLE is going to catch fire in the second half similiar to what they did last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:04 PM) but I think that CLE is going to catch fire in the second half similiar to what they did last season. I'm not sure why people still think this will happen. Cleveland's pitching staff is ten times worse than last year. Listening to sports talk radio here in Cleveland today, no one in this town has any hope of them making a run like last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ May 30, 2006 -> 08:24 PM) I'm not sure why people still think this will happen. Cleveland's pitching staff is ten times worse than last year. Listening to sports talk radio here in Cleveland today, no one in this town has any hope of them making a run like last year. That's true, they don't have the staff they did last year. But I also think that they are a 85-87 wins team. Detroit is about 90 (even if they go .500 for the rest of the year now), and so are the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 I didn't read the whole thread, but the Tigers aren't a second half team. I believe Maroth and Bonderman both broke down in the second half the last couple of years. That being said, they aren't going to go away, but let's see how they play the Beasts of the East and their west coast swings before we relegate the Sox to the WC. Plus, the Sox are still hanging-over from last year, I believe. When they get Uribe, Garland and Politte straightened out, then we can talk about a real race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ May 30, 2006 -> 12:30 PM) he said they "slumped toward the end" Going 12-16 in August with a 7 game losing streak doesn't qualify as a slump? Yeah, thanks. Ozzie said we were stinking up the joint toward the end, and we were. Let's not bulls*** ourselves. We had a good second half, a half to be proud of, but there were some bad slumps at the end, too. QUOTE(knightni @ May 30, 2006 -> 01:02 PM) At least "Pettitte" is gone. :puke Small Wang Petitte! Sounds like a winner to me. Tigers play the Yankees. Moose is up. If we can win, we should be back up to half a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UC76 Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 30, 2006 -> 03:04 PM) You all are right, TOR is probably more likely to fight for a spot then CLE, but I think that CLE is going to catch fire in the second half similiar to what they did last season. I think Cleveland will heat up but I have a hard time believing they will get as hot as last year. That will be hard to do. Didn't they win like 32 of 40 at one point (or something like that)? That's hard to do two years in a row. Or ever! At least I hope they don't get as hot as last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 QUOTE(UC76 @ May 31, 2006 -> 11:50 AM) I think Cleveland will heat up CC doesn't pitch 7 games each week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 Small Moose Wang? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 QUOTE(knightni @ May 31, 2006 -> 12:48 PM) Small Moose Wang? yankee rotation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted May 31, 2006 Share Posted May 31, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ May 31, 2006 -> 03:51 PM) yankee rotation my bad... Small Moose Wang? 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.