Are we really out of contention this coming season?

[EvilJester99]

Why would anyone care about the opinions of the mediots?? They are constantly offbase with most of their predictions...plus the Sox are far from being the "media darlings" that many of the other teams they often pick are. With that said I feel the Sox can compete as long as people are healthy and obviously improve from last season.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

when did I ever compare 2005 to 2006 pitching wise? I said that this season wasn't going to be as good as 2005 or 2006

 

yes, 300 TOTAL innings. As in career. As in that means something.

What do you project Vazquez's ERA to be, based on his career totals in the American League?

 

What do you project the fifth starter's ERA to be?

 

I project Vazquez at 5.00 and the fifth starter at about 5.00 as well AT BEST. Probably more likely is that they are around 5.25.

Now how could Vazquez be 5.00 AT BEST, if his ERA was 4.84 last season.

 

Is it fair to say that Vazquez going into 2007 is better than Jon Garland going into 2005? Who had the better track record entering the season; Vazquez going into 2007 or Garland going into 2005?

 

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

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?

LOL at Thome having a "career year." Even the "age and experience" doesn't cover up this load of bull.

 

Look at Thome's career stats. 2005 is the abnormal year, not 2006. Dye may not reproduce last year's numbers, but that certainly doesn't mean he won't be productive or a great hitter.

 

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

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.

The Sox have had the fewest injuries (in terms of games on the DL) over the past 15 years. Think proper conditioning, good coaches and Hermie have a big factor in that?

 

What is the Dye comment suppose to mean? we heard the same bunk with him before 2005 and 2006. Look at Thome's career. 2005 is the fluky year, he had surgery to repair it, and bounced back in 2006.

[fathom]

Look at Thome's career stats. 2005 is the abnormal year, not 2006. Dye may not reproduce last year's numbers, but that certainly doesn't mean he won't be productive or a great hitter.

The Sox have had the fewest injuries (in terms of games on the DL) over the past 15 years. Think proper conditioning, good coaches and Hermie have a big factor in that?

 

What is the Dye comment suppose to mean? we heard the same bunk with him before 2005 and 2006. Look at Thome's career. 2005 is the fluky year, he had surgery to repair it, and bounced back in 2006.

 

Yes, proper conditioning plays a role...but wouldn't you agree that luck does also? There's always fluke injuries, like stepping on a base the wrong way, which can injure a player. Thome is never going to play 162 games, and he hustles so much that he's just asking to tweak his powerful body once in a while. I'm not expecting Dye and Thome to play less than 140 games, etc.

[Balta1701]

Yes, proper conditioning plays a role...but wouldn't you agree that luck does also? There's always fluke injuries, like stepping on a base the wrong way, which can injure a player. Thome is never going to play 162 games, and he hustles so much that he's just asking to tweak his powerful body once in a while. I'm not expecting Dye and Thome to play less than 140 games, etc.

For both Thome and Dye though, there is a preventative solution to that potential problem...stop f***ing playing Rob Mackowiak in CF and use him to give Thome and Dye an extra day off every week to 10 days just so that they don't wear down as much.

[innersanctum]

Seems to me that most of the national pundits are calling for a Detroit and Cleveland battle for first, with the Sox coming in at 4th or possibly 3rd. Am I missing something? We have essentially the same team as last year. Detroit and Minny will regress (no way their pitching/hitting can duplicate last year) and yet the Sox were still in it the last week of the season, even though we had some of the worst career performances by some players, Buerhle in particular. Cleveland does scare me because they have an offense that can match us, but they did little to upgrade their pitching, specifically their bullpen.

 

Am I crazy to think the Sox should be the favorites or cofavorites at worst in the most difficult division in baseball (now three years running...)??

 

Yeah, remember, Cleveland was picked to win the Central Division last year.

[witesoxfan]

Yeah, remember, Cleveland was picked to win the Central Division last year.

 

I seem to recall about 95% of writers predicting the Sox to win the Central.

[Kalapse]

I seem to recall about 95% of writers predicting the Sox to win the Central.

Indians:

Jason Stark

Perter Gammons

Jerry Crasnick

Eric Karabell

Eric Neel

Gary Gillette

Mark Simon

 

White Sox:

Buster Olney

Tim Kurkjian,

Steve Phillips

Jim Caple

Pedro Gomez

Phil Rogers

Bob Klapisch,

Alan Schwarz

John Shea

Sean McAdam

Jim Callis

 

Twins:

Rob Neyer

[CanOfCorn]

Until the season is in full swing, no one knows what's going to happen. Can we end this thread now?

[witesoxfan]

Indians:

Jason Stark

Perter Gammons

Jerry Crasnick

Eric Karabell

Eric Neel

Gary Gillette

Mark Simon

 

White Sox:

Buster Olney

Tim Kurkjian,

Steve Phillips

Jim Caple

Pedro Gomez

Phil Rogers

Bob Klapisch,

Alan Schwarz

John Shea

Sean McAdam

Jim Callis

 

Twins:

Rob Neyer

 

Mainly White Sox anyways. 95% was just an exaggeration anyways.

[CWSGuy406]

Longer explanation is that we still have a great offense, the best in the division.

 

I don't think it's that clear that our offense is the best in the division. Cleveland outscored us last year despite playing in a much worse park to hit. They added a solid top-of-the-order guy in David Delluci, too. That's not to say our offense won't score more than they will this year (although I'd bet against it), but in no way can you make a clear 'our O is the best in the division' statement.

Edited January 18, 2007 by CWSGuy406

[zygoat]

we have too many question marks to be a number 1 or 2 team in the division, at least for critics. I believe that we will prevail but it will take our 5th starter and bullpen to step up.

[witesoxfan]

I don't think it's that clear that our offense is the best in the division. Cleveland outscored us last year despite playing in a much worse park to hit. They added a solid top-of-the-order guy in David Delluci, too. That's not to say our offense won't score more than they will this year (although I'd bet against it), but in no way can you make a clear 'our O is the best in the division' statement.

 

Cleveland's offense is going to be ridiculously good next year.

 

Over/under Keith: 875 runs

[qwerty]

Cleveland's offense is going to be ridiculously good next year.

 

Over/under Keith: 875 runs

 

They had 870 last season... that answers the question to me.

[witesoxfan]

They had 870 last season... that answers the question to me.

 

Ya pretty much

[KevHead0881]

Going out on a limb here: The White Sox, Tigers, Twins and Indians will all contend in 2007. And Travis Hafner will hit about 12 homers off our pitchers. Thats it from me in the prediction department.

 

To be completely honest, the thing I'm most concerned about going into the season is our 1 through 4 starters getting their s*** together. Much more so than our 5th starter. Some people make it sound like we solved our 5th starter problem in 2005. While it was better than the committee of garbage we were throwing out there in the years prior, it certainly wasn't anything beyond mediocre. I know I sure didn't feel very comfortable watching El Duque being thrown out there for 22 starts. Point is, we got to the post season because our 1-4 starters were outstanding for almost the entire season.

 

I can't say I have any idea that Buehrle, Garland, Count and Vazquez will pitch up to, or above, their expectations. But the entire season, IMO, is depending on it. As an optimist, I think they can...but who the hell really knows.

[Soxfest]

Sox will be in thick of Al Central race all year, maybe for the last time for a while .

[BainesHOF]

What I'm most disturbed about is bringing back Uribe, Podsednik and Anderson to the starting lineup. I don't think we're going to win the division with all three. Personally, I'm really in favor of Uribe returning. He's got a great glove, but let's face it, he was pretty bad offensively last year. We can put up with it, however, if Podsednik returns to form. If he doesn't, that's bad news. And I have no clue why Anderson is even being considered again. He's dumb offensively and defensively.

 

It's been amusing to see a certain segment of fans annoint Anderson as a Gold Glover. Do they watch all the games? (Newsflash - a center fielder should be good defensively.) Sure, he's above average, but he suffered too many mental lapses in the field and he had trouble going back on the ball. Overall, his range is very good, but his arm is so so, and certainly doesn't scare anyone, especially when he throws to the wrong base so often.

 

I'm hoping Williams makes at least one change at these three spots before the season starts.

[witesoxfan]

It's been amusing to see a certain segment of fans annoint Anderson as a Gold Glover. Do they watch all the games? (Newsflash - a center fielder should be good defensively.) Sure, he's above average, but he suffered too many mental lapses in the field and he had trouble going back on the ball. Overall, his range is very good, but his arm is so so, and certainly doesn't scare anyone, especially when he throws to the wrong base so often.

 

Newsflash - rookies make mistakes.

 

You're treating him like he's a veteran.

 

I don't know who's been annointing him as a gold glover, but he sure as hell is above average and very well could be a gold glover if he can ever hit for a decent enough average (and I think he will at some point, because I've constantly compared him to Torii Hunter, and I still see that as a valid comparison, even if he is slightly worse both offensively and defensively than Hunter in his prime years).

 

He had about as much range as Rowand last year, and perhaps/probably more. As a 9 hitter, I'll take him and give him another year.

 

(and it's still within the realm of possibility that he could act as a 4th OFer, which is something I'm also in favor of. The only thing I am not in favor of is trading him in a one for one deal).

[Jordan4life_2007]

Wite pwned this thread. Good posting, my friend.

[southsider2k5]

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.

 

I hope you aren't using being wrong by 22 games to support the arguement that you are right...

[Hideaway Lights]

I hope you aren't using being wrong by 22 games to support the arguement that you are right...

 

I predicted we would win 105 games in 2006.

We won 90 games.

 

That's a difference of how many games?

 

How many wins did you predict for the 2006 season?

[southsider2k5]

I predicted we would win 105 games in 2006.

We won 90 games.

 

That's a difference of how many games?

 

How many wins did you predict for the 2006 season?

 

86-88.

[Hideaway Lights]

wow, I would love to see that post, because I cannot fathom what you thought made us worse by that many games going into 2006.

[southsider2k5]

wow, I would love to see that post, because I cannot fathom what you thought made us worse by that many games going into 2006.

 

Actually I based it on my noticing the pitching was faltering during spring training.

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?s=...t&p=1068724

[effectivelywild]

IMHO, so much of this depends on the pitching and the new bullpen. Will Buehrle return to form? Will Vazquez finally figure out how to not come completely unhinged after the fifth inning? What will we get from our 5th starter?

And equally importantly, the bullpen: Yeah, I know Ozzie likes to leave the starters in as long as possible, but the bullpen was a real weak point last year. So we've got some new set-up guys that can throw hard. Let's hope they can locate their pitches.

 

Offensively, the only thing I don't like is Posednik still being on the team, but given the contracts that were being thrown around thiss off-season and the lack of a viable replacement, I won't b**** about it too much. Yes, Anderson sucked for a lot of last year, but he looked better as the season went on. It was pretty noticeable if you watched his at-bats; early in the season he looked terrified to be at the plate, but in the second half he looked like he had actually played a bit of baseball before. And despite his occasional mental lapses (hello rookie season!) he really was an above average centerfielder. Give the kid another year to develop.

Uribe? Yeah, he's an offensive black hole. I have dreams at night about him suddenly figuring out how to take a pitch and not swing at junk out of the zone. Does that make me weird? I think it does. Regardless, even without that we still have a great defender at a key position and the occasional home run from whatever pitcher is silly enough to throw him a strike.

 

So, yeah, there's a lot of question marks, but there's no reason to think that some of the breaks couldn't go our way.

Besides, what's the fun in being down on a team (only one year removed from being the world champs, mind you) before they've even played a game?