Jump to content

For those of you with 2005 World Series DVDs


Jake

Recommended Posts

I command you to take a day or an evening and watch everything you can -- just remember how great that was and still is, and you'll know not to sweat the small stuff. It's so amazing that we all got to witness that and we of all franchises know that that can be a once in a lifetime chance. If that is the case, then so be it; it'll be all the sweeter. Sure we need to and should push for as many titles as humanly possible, but I think this board is too hard to please...I think that's the penalty for knowing too much :P

 

Just think back to that time and I think you won't feel so negative for a while.

 

 

 

By the way...that team was in a similarly awkward position to us. Trade Carlos Lee, lose Magglio, sign a bunch of guys that weren't exactly stars (JD being an exception) and there you have it, a fourth place team, right? I'm not saying, I'm just saying. Let's just let the season play out :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 05:24 PM)
I command you to take a day or an evening and watch everything you can -- just remember how great that was and still is, and you'll know not to sweat the small stuff. It's so amazing that we all got to witness that and we of all franchises know that that can be a once in a lifetime chance. If that is the case, then so be it; it'll be all the sweeter. Sure we need to and should push for as many titles as humanly possible, but I think this board is too hard to please...I think that's the penalty for knowing too much :P

 

Just think back to that time and I think you won't feel so negative for a while.

 

 

 

By the way...that team was in a similarly awkward position to us. Trade Carlos Lee, lose Magglio, sign a bunch of guys that weren't exactly stars (JD being an exception) and there you have it, a fourth place team, right? I'm not saying, I'm just saying. Let's just let the season play out :D

 

Paulie = Frank (elder statesmen in clubhouse)

Reed = Jenks

Danks = Buehrle

De Aza = Pods

Viciedo = ...Carl Everett?

Morel = Crede

Alexei = Uribe

Edited by Quinarvy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 06:28 PM)
Paulie = Frank (elder statesmen in clubhouse)

Reed = Jenks

Danks = Buehrle

De Aza = Pods

Viciedo = ...Carl Everett?

Morel = Crede

Alexei = Uribe

that's really not all that unreasonable. the only thing we need is a decent season from peavy, average season from gavin, and for sale to be our contreras. (that's the tricky part, but he's definitely got the talent)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 05:28 PM)
Paulie = Frank (elder statesmen in clubhouse)

Reed = Jenks

Danks = Buehrle

De Aza = Pods

Viciedo = ...Carl Everett?

Morel = Crede

Alexei = Uribe

 

Honestly, when you start stacking it this way this might even be the better squad on paper than that team.

 

I don't think there's really a fair Viciedo comparison.

 

Dunn might be closer to Everett since both are poor fielders that we don't expect much offense from, though both were pretty good in their hayday. Perhaps Rios is closer, but he plays better defense.

 

Crede was more established than Morel, but Crede was also established much more clearly as an average player with a great glove by then. Those two are really rather similar, but Morel I don't believe was as exciting of a prospect.

 

De Aza has a similar game to Pods except of course he's had less ML exposure. Then again, most folks thought that Scotty Pods was a one year flash in the pan once we got him.

 

I would say Humber is our Garland where we'd expect something like a 4.5 ERA but if he becomes a sub-4 guy this year it makes our rotation a LOT more formidable.

 

And our bullpen probably looks much better on paper than that team's. The most sure thing in that bullpen was Shingo Takatsu.

 

Alexei is a bit different and a bit superior than Uribe, but close enough for these purposes.

 

At this point, Paulie > Frank because he's performing at a much higher level (especially in terms of consistency and health) than Frank was at that time.

 

And Reed = Jenks, for sure (at least in theory :P)

 

Peavy is kind of like Contreras in that you know this guy could be great but you don't know what you're getting out of him. Coming into '05 we would have been more surprised by a Contreras all-star appearance than a Contreras trade/salary dump.

 

Anyways, my point wasn't necessarily to make you believe the Sox are going to win the World Series this year. Just do a service to your mental health and let yourself relive some of those moments from '05.

Edited by Jake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 06:49 PM)
Sorry to spoil that comparison, but it's not just the Sox team you should compare, but the division itself. And there was no 2012 Tigers in that 2005 division.

 

I'll agree to an extent. The 05 Indians did win 93 games.

 

Just on paper, it looks like the big winners will be Tigers, Rangers, Angels, Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, with the Blue Jays, White Sox, and Royals as possible surprises. There's only so many wins to go around the league.

 

For the Sox to win this year, they'll need every thing to go right, and maybe Verlander to get hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any comparison between 2005 and 2012 is moot for one reason.

 

That bullpen was perhaps the best in White Sox history.

 

This one will be comprised of 4 rookies/unknowns, barring another move by KW.

 

Of course, you can argue that Cotts and Politte were equally strange pre-season picks to be at All-Star level, Jenks was the ultimate head case/"personality disorder" guy with the Angels and Takatsu actually looked like the surest thing in that pen. Nobody expected much out of Hermanson with his previous injury history, although he was originally a high draft pick.

 

But I guess you can compare Marte and Thornton, in terms of where they are/were with their careers at similar points.

 

Reed=Jenks, Thornton=Marte, Politte=Crain, Cotts=Ohman, etc.

 

That still leaves us short a Takatsu, Hermanson, Vizcaino, etc.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 08:03 PM)
Any comparison between 2005 and 2012 is moot for one reason.

 

That bullpen was perhaps the best in White Sox history.

 

This one will be comprised of 4 rookies/unknowns, barring another move by KW.

 

Of course, you can argue that Cotts and Politte were equally strange pre-season picks to be at All-Star level, Jenks was the ultimate head case/"personality disorder" guy with the Angels and Takatsu actually looked like the surest thing in that pen. Nobody expected much out of Hermanson with his previous injury history, although he was originally a high draft pick.

 

But I guess you can compare Marte and Thornton, in terms of where they are/were with their careers at similar points.

 

Reed=Jenks, Thornton=Marte, Politte=Crain, Cotts=Ohman, etc.

 

That still leaves us short a Takatsu, Hermanson, Vizcaino, etc.

especially the Hermanson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Reddy @ Mar 7, 2012 -> 07:54 PM)
especially the Hermanson.

 

He had 34 saves that season, I think.

 

We can argue we have 3 quasi-closers too, in Crain, Thornton and Reed, but it's hard to compare them ability-wise to Takatsu/Jenks/Hermanson, at least in terms of the impact those last two had on the Sox in 2005.

 

And then there was El Duque as well in the playoffs.

 

And Marte wasn't so good in 2005, but from 2001-2004, he was arguably the best left-handed set-up guy in baseball, and was even the closer for part of 2003 until Tom Gordon took the bull by the horns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, that bullpen pre-2005 was anything but certainly good. Marte and Politte were the best known entities, and this year's equivalents are very similar. Shingo was expected to be dominant but couldn't even stay on the roster. Hermanson was a dubious acquisition, we thought he'd be a middle reliever. We did not expect much at all from Neal Cotts. Jenks was off the map, other than being my Soxtalk Adopt-a-Prospect :D

 

But seriously, I didn't mean for this to be my plea that this year's team is the reincarnation of the 05 team -- though there are similarities.

 

I just want us to put everything in perspective and remember the fun part of being a fan so we don't have to look on the Sox as a source of stress or anger, because that's not what it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue that this team is far more comparable to the 2004 team than the 2005 team. You can make all the comparisons to 2005 that you want to, but everything just came together that year and they went on a hell of a run.

 

There was a lot of talent on that 2004 team, which should be pretty obvious. But this season feels a lot like 2004. A new regime has taken over in the clubhouse, they lost a great starter, were very quiet in the free agent market, had some younger, unproven pieces in place to contribute offensively, had talent in both the rotation and bullpen but a lot of question marks still remained, and both had at least one anchor in both the rotation and the lineup (2004 had 4 great hitters in the lineup, but 2 of them were injured midseason or earlier...I still think having Thomas and Ordonez for that final stretch would have made the division race quite a bit closer, but alas, Ron Gardenhire put a bounty on Jamie Burke and Torii Hunter got paid). You can also call me crazy, and dear god am I going to get chastised for saying this by a couple of uber-homers, but I see a little bit of Aaron Rowand in Brent Lillibridge, minus the PED allegations.

 

I'm excited for this season, but I think that's more or less because for the first time since Ozzie's 1st season, I have absolutely no expectations for this team. I could see them winning or losing 95 or anywhere in between and I wouldn't be surprised.

 

---

 

2005 was awesome though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will sound greedy, but I just refuse to accept that it has to be "once in a lifetime"

 

I know the playoffs are chaotic, but now especially with the changes being made...we should expect to be in them. With more frequency than has been the case as of late. We spend most years and don't have enough to show for it (b/c of destroyed farm system and problems in the office and dugout).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Mar 8, 2012 -> 10:04 AM)
This will sound greedy, but I just refuse to accept that it has to be "once in a lifetime"

 

 

Anyone under 30 better believe that, for anyone older than YASNY, well it just might be.

 

I wonder how many people lived long, long, lives thinking I can't believe the Cubs will not win a championship in my lifetime?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...