Are we really out of contention this coming season?

[fathom]

We lost the division by 6 when:

 

Buerhle had his worst year as a pro

Garcia was terrible until august (and even then he only had a couple good games)

Garland and Contreras didn't get hot until the summer

injuries plagued the team: Thome, Dye, Crede, contreras, etc etc missed key games in the late months of the season

the front half of the bullpen stunk worse than horse****

our starting pitching was managed poorly. how many games would we have won if ozzie doesn't stick with vazquez through 6? 5 games at least?

uribe had a terrible year, well below his averages

detroit played over their heads last year (no way rogers is half of what he was last year)

we lacked focus and made terrible errors throughout the season which was abnormal for this group

 

and thats all i can think of right now. but i'm sure there are more.

 

I hate the injury excuse with this team. We probably had the most luck in all of baseball in regards to injuries. I don't think we can expect guys like Dye and Thome to stay healthier than they did in 2006. If we can have the same type of health issues as we did in 2006 every season, we'll be in good shape. The only injury that I feel had any impact on the season was that to the back of Contreras. He was never the same after that.

[Fantl916]

I see a lot of people complaining about our rotation as the reason why we cannot compete in the Central this year...

 

Then I read about how people love our bullpen, and how it could be one of the best/deepest in the majors...

 

I dont think anyone doubts that we will be able to score runs with our offense at a pace no worse than anyone else in the AL central, as i just dont believe anyone has more talent on offense than the Sox. Look... everyones is making a big deal about Floyd/whomever is the 5th starter crippling us much like a couple years ago, yet i beg to differ. Floyd, or whomever else is the 5th starter, need only throw 5-6 solid innings, and then turn it over to Thornton, Aardsma, MMac, and Jenks. Beyond that, i dont think anyone here can logically think Buerhle or Vasquez will be that bad again, they're rested and ready to be solid innings eaters. Contreras will be his normal sometimes dominant, sometimes inconsistant self, and Garland may not be dominant but more often than not he keeps us in games and gives us a chance to win.

 

Can we compete? Of course we can. Minnesota is leaning heavily on 3-4 picthers behind Santana that are either unproven or just not very good. Detroit and Cleveland have some GREAT players, but much like the Sox have to put it together over the course of the year. We aren't losing before the season starts, a la Kansas City, and in my humble opinion will be involved in a race with Cleveland and Detroit for most of the season.

[witesoxfan]

We lost the division by 6 when:

 

Buerhle had his worst year as a pro

Garcia was terrible until august (and even then he only had a couple good games)

Garland and Contreras didn't get hot until the summer

injuries plagued the team: Thome, Dye, Crede, contreras, etc etc missed key games in the late months of the season

the front half of the bullpen stunk worse than horse****

our starting pitching was managed poorly. how many games would we have won if ozzie doesn't stick with vazquez through 6? 5 games at least?

uribe had a terrible year, well below his averages

detroit played over their heads last year (no way rogers is half of what he was last year)

we lacked focus and made terrible errors throughout the season which was abnormal for this group

 

and thats all i can think of right now. but i'm sure there are more.

 

The Sox back end of the pen could have, like, 5 IP of MLB experience. That's real comforting.

They could easily have a carousel of a 5th starter.

Uribe could come into camp way much slower because of his offseason drama.

Crede's back was a huge problem come September, and it's not going to just get better.

Thome's not any younger.

Contreras is older than Thome. In fact, I think he's older than America itself.

Dye's not likely to put up a 1.000 OPS again.

Ozzie's still managing.

Buehrle isn't guaranteed to do anything.

MacDougal is always a huge injury risk, what with his violent motion.

Anderson is still an unproven hitter.

Scott Podsednik-Dergan - Mr. 333 OBP or Mr. 66% SB rate - is still leading off.

The Sox OF depth is still jacks***.

 

There's my what if's, and I think they'll be better than most people give them credit for.

 

There can be optimism, but saying they'll win the division by atleast 5 games is a stretch, at best. That pretty much means they dominate. I don't see any team within this division dominating anything.

[LosMediasBlancas]

No team is out of contention before the frickin' season even starts.

[RockRaines]

How are people always saying we won ninety games despite everything in the universe going wrong, when Thorton, Dye and Thome basically career years given their age and experience?

How are those 3 in the same sentence as having career years, and regarding their age?

 

How many games did a bullpen guy like thorton really win for us? He may have possibly offset the crappiness of Cotts and polite.

 

 

If Buehrle pitches like he normally does, and Garica pitches a little better, PODS doesnt crap the bed, and the Count doesnt get hurt, we make the playoffs. Why is that so hard to believe? Do you really think this team is that bad? There are lots of other teams out there for you to cheer for

[Hideaway Lights]

How are those 3 in the same sentence as having career years, and regarding their age?

 

How many games did a bullpen guy like thorton really win for us? He may have possibly offset the crappiness of Cotts and polite.

If Buehrle pitches like he normally does, and Garica pitches a little better, PODS doesnt crap the bed, and the Count doesnt get hurt, we make the playoffs. Why is that so hard to believe? Do you really think this team is that bad? There are lots of other teams out there for you to cheer for

 

Ah yes, the "negativity means you should go root for another team" argument. I hadn't heard that one before, really.

 

Crede hit 25 points above his career average. If he hits his career average, we probably win 5 less games. If Thome gets injured for half a year, if Paulie has a down year, if Dye doesn't have a career year, if Jenks has a sophomore slump etc. etc. etc.

 

I think this team got noticably WORSE in the offseason, that's all.

[witesoxfan]

Ah yes, the "negativity means you should go root for another team" argument. I hadn't heard that one before, really.

 

Crede hit 25 points above his career average. If he hits his career average, we probably win 5 less games. If Thome gets injured for half a year, if Paulie has a down year, if Dye doesn't have a career year, if Jenks has a sophomore slump etc. etc. etc.

 

I think this team got noticably WORSE in the offseason, that's all.

 

Jenks did have a sophomore slump dude. Just check the numbers.

[Hideaway Lights]

Jenks did have a sophomore slump dude. Just check the numbers.

 

By sophomore slump I mean Takatsu sophomore slump.

[witesoxfan]

By sophomore slump I mean Takatsu sophomore slump.

 

Damn that's a way back to April 2005 name.

 

Yeah, it is a good thing he wasn't that bad.

[Jenksismyhero]

Ah yes, the "negativity means you should go root for another team" argument. I hadn't heard that one before, really.

 

Crede hit 25 points above his career average. If he hits his career average, we probably win 5 less games. If Thome gets injured for half a year, if Paulie has a down year, if Dye doesn't have a career year, if Jenks has a sophomore slump etc. etc. etc.

 

I think this team got noticably WORSE in the offseason, that's all.

 

So wait. Lets see, Bonderman gets better and better each year and projecting that he'll have a slight falling off is moronic because all indications of his stats point to him having a better year than last year (which doesn't really work in baseball after a few years in the majors, but anyway...)

 

Yet Crede getting better and better each year is a fluke and we got lucky he played so well?

[RockRaines]

Ah yes, the "negativity means you should go root for another team" argument. I hadn't heard that one before, really.

 

Crede hit 25 points above his career average. If he hits his career average, we probably win 5 less games. If Thome gets injured for half a year, if Paulie has a down year, if Dye doesn't have a career year, if Jenks has a sophomore slump etc. etc. etc.

 

I think this team got noticably WORSE in the offseason, that's all.

If I was you, i would keep exploring that rabbit hole, maybe you can find some truth in the "negativity argument."

 

Crede is improving, is that so hard to believe. Sometimes players actually improve throughout their career. Amazing!!!!

 

Basically any excuse works for you to how we could win less games, and how crappy our team was last year blah blah blah.

 

The bullpen is better than last year. The only change is that we have a new 5th starter. That alone is going to make us a .500 team? Please.

[witesoxfan]

So wait. Lets see, Bonderman gets better and better each year and projecting that he'll have a slight falling off is moronic because all indications of his stats point to him having a better year than last year (which doesn't really work in baseball after a few years in the majors, but anyway...)

 

Yet Crede getting better and better each year is a fluke and we got lucky he played so well?

 

It's harder to project Crede, due to his back problems and below average plate discipline. However, he's likely to put up a year similar to last year.

[Jenksismyhero]

The Sox back end of the pen could have, like, 5 IP of MLB experience. That's real comforting.

They could easily have a carousel of a 5th starter.

Uribe could come into camp way much slower because of his offseason drama.

Crede's back was a huge problem come September, and it's not going to just get better.

Thome's not any younger.

Contreras is older than Thome. In fact, I think he's older than America itself.

Dye's not likely to put up a 1.000 OPS again.

Ozzie's still managing.

Buehrle isn't guaranteed to do anything.

MacDougal is always a huge injury risk, what with his violent motion.

Anderson is still an unproven hitter.

Scott Podsednik-Dergan - Mr. 333 OBP or Mr. 66% SB rate - is still leading off.

The Sox OF depth is still jacks***.

 

There's my what if's, and I think they'll be better than most people give them credit for.

 

There can be optimism, but saying they'll win the division by atleast 5 games is a stretch, at best. That pretty much means they dominate. I don't see any team within this division dominating anything.

 

I don't think we'll dominate, but I'm not sure how you can accept the position that considering everything negative from last year kept us 6 games out wouldn't be a positive going into this season. Besides the Sheffield move (assuming it was a good move...i'm still not sold) no one did anything in the offseason. The two teams that beat us overachieved and we played like crap most of the year. This would indicate to me that we have an excellent shot of winning the division.

[juddling]

How about because he has electric stuff in a pitcher's park? There's a reason why the Tigers are turning down talent like Mark Teixeira for Bonderman, and we're getting Rangers minor leaguers for McCarthy. Bonderman and Verlander are two of the best young pitchers in all of baseball.

 

 

Over his first 4 years in the league, Bonderman has a 45-53 record with a ERA of 4.72* (Granted...last year was his lowest at 4.08). Not exactly setting the league on fire. I'm not saying that Bonderman won't be good, i'm just saying that it's not guarenteed. Personally....considering that the Tigers had issues at 1B last year and picked up Sean Casey....i think they are stupid for turning down Teixeira IMO.

 

 

*By comparison..MB's first 4 years in the league he was 65-44. The highest ERA he had was 4.14. And he went to hell last year. Bonderman could easily do the same thing

Edited January 17, 2007 by juddling

[DrunkBomber]

There are so many variables that are gonna determine how well the Sox do next year. First off, I dont see any way people can rule us out of contention already. If our starting pitchers 1-4 pitch to their capabilities and our offense is near where it was at last year we can easily be in contention for a playoff run. Of course, if we get stung by the injury bug it could hurt us. The thing I like about this year is that we wont have a bullseye on our back like we did last year and hopefully we can play well and fly under the radar.

[witesoxfan]

I don't think we'll dominate, but I'm not sure how you can accept the position that considering everything negative from last year kept us 6 games out wouldn't be a positive going into this season. Besides the Sheffield move (assuming it was a good move...i'm still not sold) no one did anything in the offseason. The two teams that beat us overachieved and we played like crap most of the year. This would indicate to me that we have an excellent shot of winning the division.

 

Cleveland added a bullpen. It won't be great, but it won't be nearly as bad as it was last year.

 

Sheffield will be a good hitter until his wrists fall off. He'll probably lose much of his power in the next 2-3 years, but I'd be very, very surprised if he didn't hit .290 with about a .875 OPS next year.

 

Minnesota's always scary, even without Liriano. They still have Santana. That's the key.

[Hideaway Lights]

If I was you, i would keep exploring that rabbit hole, maybe you can find some truth in the "negativity argument."

 

Crede is improving, is that so hard to believe. Sometimes players actually improve throughout their career. Amazing!!!!

 

Basically any excuse works for you to how we could win less games, and how crappy our team was last year blah blah blah.

 

The bullpen is better than last year. The only change is that we have a new 5th starter. That alone is going to make us a .500 team? Please.

 

We swapped out one of the most dominant big-game pitchers for a minor leaguer, and you act like it's an oil change. Ok.

 

FWIW, I projected 105 wins before the 2006 season. I call it like I see it. We got worse this offseason.

[RockRaines]

We swapped out one of the most dominant big-game pitchers for a minor leaguer, and you act like it's an oil change. Ok.

 

FWIW, I projected 105 wins before the 2006 season. I call it like I see it. We got worse this offseason.

So losing FG would be a difference of 22 wins in your opinion? Because you projected 105 for 2006 and 83 for 2007 with the only real change being the loss of FG.

 

Who knew a 4.54 ERA would mean so much?

Edited January 17, 2007 by RockRaines

[Hideaway Lights]

So losing FG would be a difference of 22 wins in your opinion? Because you projected 105 for 2006 and 83 for 2007 with the only real change being the loss of FG.

 

Who knew a 4.54 ERA would mean so much?

 

 

Believe it or not, it's possible, just possible, that the entire 2006 season may have changed expectations for some of us regarding certain players potential. I know that's hard to believe, but bear with me on this one.

[southsideirish71]

By sophomore slump I mean Takatsu sophomore slump.

 

 

There is a slight difference in the stuff that Takatsu was featuring over Jenks. There are 2 things that can derail Jenks, one is waistline, and the 2nd is his control. If he throws his stuff over the plate and gets ahead early he can dominate.

 

Takatsu was a look I throw side arm and slow, slower and slowest. And then the league said, well I will make this guy throw strikes and then sit on the meatball. Then Takatsu was back to Japan.

[NorthSideSox72]

Believe it or not, it's possible, just possible, that the entire 2006 season may have changed expectations for some of us regarding certain players potential. I know that's hard to believe, but bear with me on this one.

Assuming for a second that your projection of a "disaster" 5th starter is correct, then we get a 5.25 ERA instead of 4.54 from Freddy. That would be a step down, no question.

 

So you take that negative, and go down to 83-87 wins? From 90? Doubtful (assuming we are relatively healthy).

 

But then, that's not even taking into account the positives we got in the offseason, including a much improved bullpen, a competent backup C, and a manager who won't be playing Mack in CF. Nothing huge, but a few games in the positive column anyway. Probably the same as the difference between Garcia and the 5th starter.

 

Then there is the fact that many more KEY players had down years last year (the entire starting staff, AJ, Uribe, Pods, Anderson*, the entire bullpen other than Thornton) than up years (Dye, Crede, Thornton). I'd say that Iguchi, Thome and PK all had years on par with their last few healthy ones. Add to that the extra month of rest, and I'd say you are looking at a few more games there too, probably.

 

So overall, the team looks BETTER than last year to me, not worse. Probaly 90-95 wins, and that's assuming the 5th starter sucks, and players are around RECENT career averages. Anything beyond that, and the team gets even better. The only reason I see for this team to be less than 90 wins is if injuries play a major factor.

 

Plus, KW put us in a much better position for 2008 and beyond, loading up on young pitching. A very nice bonus.

 

Oh, and, I wouldn't say the offseason is done just yet.

[Rowand44]

Yup. We have absolutely no chance.

[fathom]

Read the whole thread, and I think there are actually good points from both sides. Obviously every season can be a huge question mark, but this one just seems so wide open. IMHO, the Sox could be healthy all year and win 80 games. They could also win 95-100. It all goes on the pitching. Maybe I am overlooking Uribe-Anderson-Pods, but right now, its just not a concern for me(Pods leving is a priority however)

 

The rotation and bullpen are just huge, huge questions. Can Mark bounce back? Can Count tap into the fountain of youth one more time. Can Garland ever put together a WHOLE season of good ball? Was the late stretch by Vaz just luck, or is he ready to be the 1-2 Kenny, and some of us(me included) thinks he can be. Who the hell is our 5th starter? Floyd?Haeger?Danks? Can any of these guys actually get outs in the majors?

 

Then we have the bullpen. I am confident in Jenks, but his elbow is held together by pins, and the hip became an issue last season. We all know Mac is going to miss time this season, it's a given. Can Thornton even come close to what he did last season, or is he going to go back to his Seattle days? Then we have the mix of Aardsma-Haeger-Sisco-Masset-Logan-Floyd all mixed in basically fighting for two spots. Can we get anything consistant out of them?

Now those are all basically negitive questions, and the for me alot of the answers can and hopefully will be positive, but I think they are realistic questions that we really wont know the answer to till probably May or June.

Should be a fun ride.

 

Great post.

[DBAHO]

I think the Sox have taken some steps to fixing some things that obviously hurt us last season. Getting a new backup catcher who can hit lefties, getting more guys into the mix in the pen (which really hurt us last season) and not letting Mack play CF. So that should help.

 

And then I think you'll see improvements from a few players. Brian Anderson should certainly have a better season. If Scott Podsednik can stay healthy, maybe he could get back to his 2005 pre ASB level of production. Juan Uribe, well I don't know what he's going to do, but surely he could put up a higher OBP than around the .255 mark couldn't he (I hope).

 

Of course the likes of Thome and Dye probably aren't going to be as good as they were in 2006, so it'll balance itself out.

 

So that means for me it comes down to the pitching (obviously). Bringing a new 5th starter into the mix in Floyd could cost us, if he's not up for the job. But if the likes of Buehrle and Contreras can pitch better than they did to end the season, Vazquez continues to improve, and Garland remains steady, then I think we'll be alright.

 

We're around a 85-92 win team at the moment, and I think with teams like the Twins and maybe the Tigers going to regress a little, then that could be enough for the division.

 

Of course these are all predictions, and it doesn't matter what your team may look like on paper, they have to go out there and produce. No-one gave Detroit a chance in hell of winning the division in 2006 and look what happened. Anything can happen.

[VAfan]

Count me among those who believe we can contend, but we could also finish 4th.

 

Starting pitching: Do we get the Contreras of the first half, or the second half? Will Buehrle bounce back? How consistent will Garland be? Can Vazquez pitch more than 5 innings without melting down? Who will our 5th starter be? One would hope the ERA of our starters should improve, but it might not, and if it doesn't look a whole lot more like 2005 than 2006, we aren't going to make the postseason.

 

Bullpen: Sure, we have better arms, but how many guys are proven? Jenks, McDougal, Thornton. We could have some growing pains out there. And with Javy unable to pitch more than 5 innings, and an unproven 5th starter, we could have major bullpen needs in at least 2/5ths of our games.

 

Lineup: Powerful offense?? Really?? We scored a lot more runs than 2005, but we had significant problems, and almost none of them got fixed in the offseason. Against lefties -- remember Santana and Sabathia will each be lined up against us 5 or more times -- we had next to no offense last year. We had only 3 players on our ROSTER who could hit a lefty -- Dye, Konerko, and Crede. The 4th best -- Ross Gload -- was traded. We've added a righty catcher, so that's a wash. Pods, Iguchi, Thome, AJ, Uribe, Anderson, Mack, and Cintron were all PATHETIC against lefties. After Ozuna got hurt, he was pathetic against everyone. Plus, even against righties, we have too many outs -- Uribe, Anderson, and Pods strung together make it very easy for a pitcher to kill rallies and to get a breather at least every third inning.

 

In short, I think Kenny did very little to strengthen the team for 2007. I think most of his moves were designed to be able to turn over the starting staff over the next 3-4 years.