Theories? Why do the White Sox fade in Aug/Sept. every year?

[shago]

Outside of the bullpen in the Detroit series (specifcally Putz), I don't think the White Sox played bad in that series. They had a 2-1 lead in the 9th inning on Sunday and a 7-5 lead in the 7th (and I believe 7-6 in the 8th). You can't ask for more than to have a lead in the late innings. If one of the best relievers on the club suddenly falls apart, that's just bad luck/timing.

Based loaded, no outs.............................................................

[hogan873]

Ozzie/Wise/Nix are no more responsible for the Sox tanking last season than Ozzie/Kotsay/Jones are for the Sox playing poorly over the past week. In both cases, a bad bullpen hurt the team a lot more.

Not saying anything about last year, but some of Ozzie's decision making has been responsible for losses this year. Certainly an imploding bullpen was responsible for the ugliness of the past few games. But I think that the Sox would be in a better position right now if they didn't have to rely on the likes of Kotsay and/or Jones in the lineup so often.

[LVSoxFan]

Tired?! How the hell are we tired? We have a rotating DH situation that gives guys more rest than we've seen in recent years?

 

They sure looked tired yesterday. Even Ozzie said there was no energy.

 

[WCSox]

Not saying anything about last year, but some of Ozzie's decision making has been responsible for losses this year.

 

You can say that for half of the managers/teams in the league.

 

Certainly an imploding bullpen was responsible for the ugliness of the past few games. But I think that the Sox would be in a better position right now if they didn't have to rely on the likes of Kotsay and/or Jones in the lineup so often.

 

Sure, but you're talking about ONE position. How about our LF, RF, C, and 2B not being able to hit and 2/5 of our rotation sucking for the first two months of the season? How about Jenks not being effective for much of the season? How about Freddy and Putz being horrible lately?

 

The truth is that we could've had Thome or Damon at DH and our record wouldn't be all that much different. Because this team's problems have extended FAR beyond the DH position.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Here's the other thing I frankly don't f***ing get - Nieves last night was on the score saying "you NEED to give guys rest. They NEED the days off."

 

Really? Don't the elite players just play 155-160 games every year? In the old days, didn't people just f***ing play every day?

 

This whole "scheduled days off" thing that Ozzie started has really brainwashed people close to the Sox into thinking that these guys NEED the days off.

 

Sure, it seems like it works sometimes....some days it really seems like it doesn't.

A couple points.

 

First...yeah, in the old days people went out and played every day. They also didn't spend the offseason working professional weight training regimens, they didn't spend an hour in the weight room on gameday followed by hours of hitting instruction or whatever it is those guys do prior to games, and they weren't being paid $15 million a season such that people are really angry with them and it's on video forever if they decide to pull a Game 5/6 Lebron show ona day when they are tired.

 

Secondly...Sometimes it's also what your body is conditioned to do. JJ Putz hadn't thrown in 3 straight games since 2007, if I read things right this morning.

[BigSqwert]

JJ Putz hadn't thrown in 3 straight games since 2007, if I read things right this morning.

Told you Freddy would kill this bullpen in the 2nd half.

[Balta1701]

The truth is that we could've had Thome or Damon at DH and our record wouldn't be all that much different. Because this team's problems have extended FAR beyond the DH position.

OTOH...we're 2 games out. Our record doesn't need to be all that much different for it to be a huge difference in the standings.

 

Yes, this team has problems beyond the DH slot. Yes, Beckham and Quentin have had horrendous years, Pierre's been a step backwards in a number of ways, Teahen got hurt and was only bailed out by a 43 year old, AJ Pierzynski's been dreadful with the bats.

 

None of that excuses making obvious mistakes with the roster coming into the season.

[WCSox]

OTOH...we're 2 games out. Our record doesn't need to be all that much different for it to be a huge difference in the standings.

 

Pretty much. Thome and Damon both have a WAR of around 2, while Kotsay and Jones roughly cancel each other out with an approximate WAR of 0. So we'd be ~1 game out instead of 3 games out right now, if you think that WAR is an accurate metric.

 

Yes, this team has problems beyond the DH slot. Yes, Beckham and Quentin have had horrendous years, Pierre's been a step backwards in a number of ways, Teahen got hurt and was only bailed out by a 43 year old, AJ Pierzynski's been dreadful with the bats.

 

None of that excuses making obvious mistakes with the roster coming into the season.

 

True, but implying that the rotating DH is the major reason for this team being in second place ignores the bigger (and more accurate) picture.

 

[Balta1701]

True, but implying that the rotating DH is the major reason for this team being in second place ignores the bigger (and more accurate) picture.

It's not "The" major reason.

 

It is definitely "A" major reason.

 

I can give you a list of major reasons...Peavy getting hurt, Peavy sucking at the start of the year, Jenks imploding, Teahen getting hurt, Beckham sophomore slump, Quentin being down, Putz's last 3 games, Floyd's start to the year, AJ Pierzynski's bat, some of Ozzie's lineup decisions...

 

However...big difference...for everything on that list, I can either say "that was unpredictable coming into the season" (Peavy hurting, Teahen hurting, AJ's bat) or "yeah that sucked but it's been balanced out by this" (i.e. Floyd's start balanced out by Floyd's recent dominance or AJ's bat balanced by his handling of the pitching staff) or "Yeah that sucked but you weren't going to do anything about it" (i.e. replacing Beckham and Quentin)

 

Mark Kotsay getting 300 PA's as DH is a singular example here of something that was fully predictable coming in to the season, easily avoidable, and really not balanced out by anything. About the only positive you can say is that Konerko's had a great year and maybe the extra rest is a part of that...but the answer to that was not to keep Kotsay, it was to plan to move Teahen to 1b every now and then to spell him.

[Balta1701]

Give you another example...Jenks struggling this season was something a lot of people could have foreseen coming in to the year. He struggled last year and he's been up and down for a good part of his career. Going into the season with Bobby Jenks as the lone closing option would have been very risky, and it would have proven to be a mistake. So...what did we do instead? We at least set up with backup options. If we had to go to closer by committee, we had a dominant lefty already out there, and we grabbed another righty with closing experience so that we have some extra options. It's possible that all of those options would fail (see; the last week) but we didn't go in with no backup plan.

 

We had zero backup plans in the event that Mark Kotsay was not an adequate DH.

[WCSox]

It's not "The" major reason.

 

It is definitely "A" major reason.

 

I don't know what your definition of "A major reason" is, but I'd say that it's not even in the top 3, and possibly not even the top 5.

 

However...big difference...for everything on that list, I can either say "that was unpredictable coming into the season" (Peavy hurting, Teahen hurting, AJ's bat) or "yeah that sucked but it's been balanced out by this" (i.e. Floyd's start balanced out by Floyd's recent dominance or AJ's bat balanced by his handling of the pitching staff) or "Yeah that sucked but you weren't going to do anything about it" (i.e. replacing Beckham and Quentin)

 

Mark Kotsay getting 300 PA's as DH is a singular example here of something that was fully predictable coming in to the season, easily avoidable, and really not balanced out by anything. About the only positive you can say is that Konerko's had a great year and maybe the extra rest is a part of that...but the answer to that was not to keep Kotsay, it was to plan to move Teahen to 1b every now and then to spell him.

 

Predictability vs. surprise doesn't change the end result, though. Major factors are major factors, whether they're the result of bad luck or poor design.

 

I absolutely agree that Kotsay in the lineup when Teahen should be is inexcusable. That said, it won't matter much if our bullpen can't hold a lead.

 

[caulfield12]

Another example was having made no improvement over LHP Williams in the offseason.

 

Yes, I know somebody will say "no team has quality depth at every position," but wasn't there a better option out there available? I guess they felt all along that Threets COULD be the guy, but he was dealing with injury and command problems in the first half.

 

Whatever happens, the DH debacle will be the focus of this offseason.

 

Yes, logically you can say that if Quentin/Beckham/Pierre/AJ/Teahen hit would have hit consistently all season, it would have taken some of the spotlight off the DH spot, sure.

 

By the way, what's Vladimir Guerrero's WAR value at the current moment? There's absolutely no way that I'll believe we would be trailing the Twins with him as our everyday DH this season, or Aubrey Huff.

 

(Someone will next say that everyone thought Guerrero, Huff and Thome were cooked, right?)

Edited August 16, 2010 by caulfield12

[mmmmmbeeer]

It's not "The" major reason.

 

It is definitely "A" major reason.

 

I can give you a list of major reasons...Peavy getting hurt, Peavy sucking at the start of the year, Jenks imploding, Teahen getting hurt, Beckham sophomore slump, Quentin being down, Putz's last 3 games, Floyd's start to the year, AJ Pierzynski's bat, some of Ozzie's lineup decisions...

 

However...big difference...for everything on that list, I can either say "that was unpredictable coming into the season" (Peavy hurting, Teahen hurting, AJ's bat) or "yeah that sucked but it's been balanced out by this" (i.e. Floyd's start balanced out by Floyd's recent dominance or AJ's bat balanced by his handling of the pitching staff) or "Yeah that sucked but you weren't going to do anything about it" (i.e. replacing Beckham and Quentin)

 

Mark Kotsay getting 300 PA's as DH is a singular example here of something that was fully predictable coming in to the season, easily avoidable, and really not balanced out by anything. About the only positive you can say is that Konerko's had a great year and maybe the extra rest is a part of that...but the answer to that was not to keep Kotsay, it was to plan to move Teahen to 1b every now and then to spell him.

 

Add in the fact that amphetamine is now outlawed and tested for.

 

[Greg Hibbard]

Let's clear up a couple of misconceptions:

 

1) We had a winning record in August in every year from 2000 to 2003.

 

2) We had a winning record in September in every year from 2000 to 2005.

 

3) From 2000 to 2009, we had a winning record in 6 augusts, and a losing record in 4 augusts. We had a winning record in 7 septembers, 1 .500 record, and a losing record in 2 septembers.

 

4) From 2000 to 2009, the White Sox' winning percentage over August and September is .513. The aggregate winning percentage for the club over those ten seasons is .529.

 

It's not that we don't play well enough percentage-wise, it's that a certain team beats us almost every year, head-to-head.

 

EDIT: I'm including October games in September where applicable.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Greg Hibbard

[Vance Law]

Pretty much. Thome and Damon both have a WAR of around 2, while Kotsay and Jones roughly cancel each other out with an approximate WAR of 0. So we'd be ~1 game out instead of 3 games out right now, if you think that WAR is an accurate metric.

 

I would slightly disagree here. I, like many people, had no problem with the signing of Jones. As a 4th OF who can play all of the positions well, and hit lefties quite well, that was a very smart signing by Kenny for dirt cheap.

 

Ozzie said (I'm paraphrasing) he couldn't justify bringing in Thome and only playing him one or two games a week. Why the reporters didn't push him to explain this "logic", I do not know. He saw (and sees) no problem with playing Kotsay at DH 4 or5 games a week, however. Kotsay 4 or 5 times a week, but Thome could only play there once or twice a week.

 

So, I disagree with the notion of Jones' positve WAR canceling out Kotsay's negative. Thome and Jones would have been a perfect platoon at the DH position, and even better once it becomes clear to put Jones in RF and Quentin at DH against lefties. So Thome's 2.1 WAR and Kotsay's -.08 is basically 3 games, maybe more considering Thome would have 50 more plate appearances if he'd taken all of Kotsay's.

 

[BigSqwert]

And the Twins would have been that much worse off without Thome....especially with this Morneau thing.

[stretchstretch]

too many people are straying from the original question and replying about this year--DH, Thome, Peavy, bullpen, etc. The question is about the Sox tendency to have a weak 2nd half, and the Twins completely predictable 2nd half rise.

 

I would like to hear more from the knowledgeable, fact-holders more about why every late summer in memory feels like a replay of the one before.

 

I think there are two posts in here with data on Sox second halves, not one countering with MN numbers. And no one is asking if the Yankees have MN's number.

 

Does a single person here, in their heart, really feel the Sox are capable to passing and keeping MN down for the remaining stretch? Doesn't almost everyone hear feel like we've been here over and over and over again?

 

When we were 3+ games up, and had numerous opportunities to get it to 6, each miss felt like blowing a 10 ten game lead because I KNEW the twins were going to do the annual mult-game leapfrog in a week's time....and here we are....and I would bet a week's pay we'll finish 8-9 games back, without hesitation

[caulfield12]

too many people are straying from the original question and replying about this year--DH, Thome, Peavy, bullpen, etc. The question is about the Sox tendency to have a weak 2nd half, and the Twins completely predictable 2nd half rise.

 

I would like to hear more from the knowledgeable, fact-holders more about why every late summer in memory feels like a replay of the one before.

 

I think there are two posts in here with data on Sox second halves, not one countering with MN numbers. And no one is asking if the Yankees have MN's number.

 

Does a single person here, in their heart, really feel the Sox are capable to passing and keeping MN down for the remaining stretch? Doesn't almost everyone hear feel like we've been here over and over and over again?

 

When we were 3+ games up, and had numerous opportunities to get it to 6, each miss felt like blowing a 10 ten game lead because I KNEW the twins were going to do the annual mult-game leapfrog in a week's time....and here we are....and I would bet a week's pay we'll finish 8-9 games back, without hesitation

 

 

Yes, that was pretty much the point of my OP.

 

One theory that certainly makes sense this year is our farm system was too depleted to make major trades for a bat. I get that.

 

But from 2006 and beyond, this has really become an ALARMING trend. With the exception of one miraculous 3 game stretch at the end of 2008, we're talking about total Twins' dominance.

 

 

Let's clear up a couple of misconceptions:

 

1) We had a winning record in August in every year from 2000 to 2003. ( Yes, but those years encompass some of the better White Sox teams talent-wise, and the 2003 team was 7 game behind KC at the ASB, so they had to start playing better eventually...and of course they picked late August and September to do a fade-out

 

2) We had a winning record in September in every year from 2000 to 2005. Choose any statistics with those 2000/2003/2005 teams and they'll look pretty good

 

3) From 2000 to 2009, we had a winning record in 6 augusts, and a losing record in 4 augusts. We had a winning record in 7 septembers, 1 .500 record, and a losing record in 2 septembers. Playing barely above .500 doesn't get it done, it's the same as our "championships" for having the 3rd/4th/5th best record in baseball since the early 90's behind the Braves/Yankees/Red Sox for most of those random stretches

 

4) From 2000 to 2009, the White Sox' winning percentage over August and September is .513. The aggregate winning percentage for the club over those ten seasons is .529. see point 3

 

It's not that we don't play well enough percentage-wise, it's that a certain team beats us almost every year, head-to-head.

And therein lies the question, we're 5 games over .500 for the last 10-11 years before the All-Star Break (head-to-head vs. MINN) and 20-something games under .500 after it, including 4-19 the past three years, you can understand a team being 5 games under .500 against the same opponent over that long of a stretch of history, but the White Sox seemingly fall apart against the Twins, they just don't get beat 2/3, it's always sweeps or 3/4

 

EDIT: I'm including October games in September where applicable.

Edited August 17, 2010 by caulfield12

[Leonard Zelig]

Told you Freddy would kill this bullpen in the 2nd half.

 

Didn't you also say back in April or May that you didn't have anything to look forward to sports-wise until next baseball season because the Sox are out of it and the Raiders will suck next year?

 

It really is amazing how selective some posters' memories are.

 

This is truly a special season for White Sox fans, how many teams' fans get a chance to give up on their team three times in one season?

[BigSqwert]

Didn't you also say back in April or May that you didn't have anything to look forward to sports-wise until next baseball season because the Sox are out of it and the Raiders will suck next year?

 

It really is amazing how selective some posters' memories are.

 

This is truly a special season for White Sox fans, how many teams' fans get a chance to give up on their team three times in one season?

*calls 911 to log a stalking complaint*

 

[caulfield12]

I am concerned for those posters with Fred Manrique or Wayne Tolleson avatars.

 

They're always just a little bit suspicious.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

too many people are straying from the original question and replying about this year--DH, Thome, Peavy, bullpen, etc. The question is about the Sox tendency to have a weak 2nd half, and the Twins completely predictable 2nd half rise.

 

I would like to hear more from the knowledgeable, fact-holders more about why every late summer in memory feels like a replay of the one before.

 

I think there are two posts in here with data on Sox second halves, not one countering with MN numbers. And no one is asking if the Yankees have MN's number.

 

Does a single person here, in their heart, really feel the Sox are capable to passing and keeping MN down for the remaining stretch? Doesn't almost everyone hear feel like we've been here over and over and over again?

 

When we were 3+ games up, and had numerous opportunities to get it to 6, each miss felt like blowing a 10 ten game lead because I KNEW the twins were going to do the annual mult-game leapfrog in a week's time....and here we are....and I would bet a week's pay we'll finish 8-9 games back, without hesitation

Did you not read Greg Hibbard's post just above yours? It refutes your statements and further, does exactly what you asked in the bolded.

 

[witesoxfan]

Let's clear up a couple of misconceptions:

 

1) We had a winning record in August in every year from 2000 to 2003.

 

2) We had a winning record in September in every year from 2000 to 2005.

 

3) From 2000 to 2009, we had a winning record in 6 augusts, and a losing record in 4 augusts. We had a winning record in 7 septembers, 1 .500 record, and a losing record in 2 septembers.

 

4) From 2000 to 2009, the White Sox' winning percentage over August and September is .513. The aggregate winning percentage for the club over those ten seasons is .529.

 

It's not that we don't play well enough percentage-wise, it's that a certain team beats us almost every year, head-to-head.

 

EDIT: I'm including October games in September where applicable.

 

These include 4 years under Manuel, and the team generally played better in the second half under Manuel. There are also only two players on the current roster that played on those teams - Konerko and Buehrle - and a few of the players weren't even playing professionally yet. It seems a bit outdated to use that data when looking at recent trends. You surely aren't going to invest with Bernie Madoff now a days because of his reputation in 2002.

 

Here are the second half records under Ozzie Guillen

2004 - 37-41

2005 - 42-34

2006 - 33-41

2007 - 33-43

2008 - 35-33

2009 - 34-40

2010 - 16-15

 

That is a record of 230-247, for a winning percentage of .482, and, not including 2010 because it has yet to be completed, that's 2 winning second half records in 6 seasons.

[Balta1701]

These include 4 years under Manuel, and the team generally played better in the second half under Manuel. There are also only two players on the current roster that played on those teams - Konerko and Buehrle - and a few of the players weren't even playing professionally yet. It seems a bit outdated to use that data when looking at recent trends. You surely aren't going to invest with Bernie Madoff now a days because of his reputation in 2002.

 

Here are the second half records under Ozzie Guillen

2004 - 37-41

2005 - 42-34

2006 - 33-41

2007 - 33-43

2008 - 35-33

2009 - 34-40

2010 - 16-15

 

That is a record of 230-247, for a winning percentage of .482, and, not including 2010 because it has yet to be completed, that's 2 winning second half records in 6 seasons.

When you look at the years though...in 2004, the Sox were without their 2 biggest bats for the full 2nd half of the year. 2005, check. 2007...they were a bad team the full year, and Hell, they might have been better in September than they were at any other point that yera. 2008, above .500.

 

Basically, it comes down, so far, to 2006 and 2009 being the years where they were unusually bad in the 2nd half.

[BigSqwert]

When you look at the years though...in 2004, the Sox were without their 2 biggest bats for the full 2nd half of the year. 2005, check. 2007...they were a bad team the full year, and Hell, they might have been better in September than they were at any other point that yera. 2008, above .500.

 

Basically, it comes down, so far, to 2006 and 2009 being the years where they were unusually bad in the 2nd half.

You can't just make injury excuses for bad 2nd halves. Every team has injuries including the Twins with their all star Morneau.