PDA

View Full Version : 4th in the AL in....


jabrch
06-07-2008, 11:04 PM
RUNS SCORED

We are 1 run behind the twins who are in third - and will be there tomorrow after Floyd vs Slowey.

This offense sucks.

NDSox12
06-07-2008, 11:10 PM
RUNS SCORED

We are 1 run behind the twins who are in third - and will be there tomorrow after Floyd vs Slowey.

This offense sucks.

Good post. Plus, the Sox are very slightly ahead of their runs scored pace from 2005. It will be interesting to see if that holds up this month. If so, we could be looking at a very good season....

itsnotrequired
06-07-2008, 11:12 PM
All it takes is two or three losses in a row for the fruitcakes to start baking.

DumpJerry
06-07-2008, 11:14 PM
Fire Walker.

Hrniak would have had us first in MLB.

Scottiehaswheels
06-07-2008, 11:15 PM
Sorry.. I'm glad the bats are hot right now but this offense has sucked for 2 years... one good half week hasn't changed my mind on anything yet.

jabrch
06-07-2008, 11:17 PM
Sorry.. I'm glad the bats are hot right now but this offense has sucked for 2 years... one good half week hasn't changed my mind on anything yet.


This team has scored the 4th (soon 3rd) most runs in the AL. Scottie - how do you not feel foolish saying the offense sucks.

And it isn't one good half week. This team has scored runs most of the year.

Scottiehaswheels
06-07-2008, 11:26 PM
This team has scored the 4th (soon 3rd) most runs in the AL. Scottie - how do you not feel foolish saying the offense sucks.

And it isn't one good half week. This team has scored runs most of the year.They've been carried by about 1/3 of the friggin lineup all year in a down year for runs in the A.L. Thats how I can say that. If Quentin/A.J./~Crede/~J.D. had been hitting like the rest of the team, our asses would be fighting with Detroit for 4th regardless of the good pitching. When our entire offense is doing good for an extended period of time I will agree with you, but it took 15 innings to beat a ****ty Royals team 4 days ago. How many people did we leave in scoring position in that one? I'm pleased with the offense over the past 3-4 days as they are doing things the right way now it seems. But man, you can't gloss over the fact that the team has been downright crappy on offense for a long time based on 1 week. Hell if that were the case, the '07 bullpen was f'ing awesome cuz they had that great April.

jabrch
06-07-2008, 11:36 PM
They've been carried by about 1/3 of the friggin lineup all year in a down year for runs in the A.L. Thats how I can say that. If Quentin/A.J./~Crede/~J.D. had been hitting like the rest of the team, our asses would be fighting with Detroit for 4th regardless of the good pitching.

That's very "shoota-ish" of you.

When our entire offense is doing good for an extended period of time I will agree with you,

That's not how you evaluate an offense - at least that's not a good way to do so. If the team is scoring runs, that's what's important. Right now, only 3 teams have done it better than us - and one of them by 1 run (that team we have slaughtered the past two nights)

but it took 15 innings to beat a ****ty Royals team 4 days ago.

A) A team we swept
B) So what?
C) The LAA (best record in baseball) lost 2 of 3 to Seattle (worst team in baseball) which means....NOTHING Because it is a SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. Isolating the 15 inning game is just ridiculous.

How many people did we leave in scoring position in that one?

Who cares? The goal of the game is not to "not leave men in scoring position". It is to outscore your opponent - which we did. And since only 2 teams have outscored us by more than 1 run on the season, we should feel fairly good about our team.

I'm pleased with the offense over the past 3-4 days

The offense that has outscored nearly every other AL team on the season? And you are only pleased with them for 3-4 days? Dude...

as they are doing things the right way now it seems but man, you can't gloss over the fact that the team has been downright crappy on offense for a long time based on 1 week.

Again - it isn't 1 week. Look at this team over the course of the season.

munchman33
06-07-2008, 11:46 PM
RUNS SCORED

We are 1 run behind the twins who are in third - and will be there tomorrow after Floyd vs Slowey.

This offense sucks.

We've scored 3 runs or less in 26 games already this year.

We've scored 2 runs or less 18 times.

We've scored 1 run or less 12 times.

We've been shut out 6 times.

Runs scored per game is the WORST way to calculate how good an offense is. This offense hasn't scored enough runs to give the team a decent chance to win in nearly half it's games. Even Ozzie gets that.

Noneck
06-07-2008, 11:47 PM
Right now, only 3 teams have done it better than us - and one of them by 1 run (that team we have slaughtered the past two nights)





Come on now, Play it fair here. There are at least 6 teams in the AL you could put a hat over in # of runs scored. In a couple days the Sox could have the largest lead in any division in baseball and could drop to 7th in runs scored. Its all about scoring enough to win, nothing more.

Scottiehaswheels
06-07-2008, 11:49 PM
That's very "shoota-ish" of you.



That's not how you evaluate an offense - at least that's not a good way to do so. If the team is scoring runs, that's what's important. Right now, only 3 teams have done it better than us - and one of them by 1 run (that team we have slaughtered the past two nights)



A) A team we swept
B) So what?
C) The LAA (best record in baseball) lost 2 of 3 to Seattle (worst team in baseball) which means....NOTHING Because it is a SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. Isolating the 15 inning game is just ridiculous.



Who cares? The goal of the game is not to "not leave men in scoring position". It is to outscore your opponent - which we did. And since only 2 teams have outscored us by more than 1 run on the season, we should feel fairly good about our team.



The offense that has outscored nearly every other AL team on the season? And you are only pleased with them for 3-4 days? Dude...



Again - it isn't 1 week. Look at this team over the course of the season.Dude, all I am looking for is a little consistency... It's great when we score double digits runs..However, I don't like the fact it's still a young season and we've gotten shut out in 6 games and scored 1 or 2 in 10 other games that we've lost. We've won 2 games this year scoring 2 runs or less because our pitching has been so good. So right now we're 2-16 in games we score less than 3 runs. But I'd be much happier if we could consistently score 4-5 a night and not go into these funks again where we score 4 runs in 4 games. This offense has shown a tendency to do so the past couple years. Thats all I'm saying.. It's great we're getting all this offense a short week after an ass chewing by Ozzie. Would it be there otherwise? Our starting pitching has been fantastic and I'm hoping our offense is starting to come around to support them, but I'm not yet ready to give it the benefit of the doubt just yet based on a week.

Tragg
06-07-2008, 11:50 PM
Took some beaks too - would be quite a different story with Owens and Uirbe out there instead of Quentin and Ramirez.
The injuries that did happen, and the lack of any significant negative injuries have been key so far.

itsnotrequired
06-07-2008, 11:54 PM
We've scored 3 runs or less in 26 games already this year.

We've scored 2 runs or less 18 times.

We've scored 1 run or less 12 times.

We've been shut out 6 times.

Runs scored per game is the WORST way to calculate how good an offense is. This offense hasn't scored enough runs to give the team a decent chance to win in nearly half it's games. Even Ozzie gets that.

The Cubs are often regarded as having one of the best offenses in baseball. They have scored 3 or less runs 26 times this season as well...and they have played two more games than the Sox.

:shrug:

jabrch
06-07-2008, 11:56 PM
It's great we're getting all this offense a short week after an ass chewing by Ozzie. Would it be there otherwise?

I really don't believe that good hitters are hitting because Ozzie had a hissy fit. I believe good hitters were due to hit.

I'm assuming most players, ours included, will end up withing a certain % of their 3 year averages. Now there are exceptions - but I highly doubt we have 5 exceptions on one club. We have already seen OC get hot. Swish is warming. PK and Thome have both shown that they are not dead.

I see no reason to believe this team won't end the season in the top quarter of the league in runs scored. That's damn good regardless of how it is distributed.

I understand we have had some bad games - many of them - but to say this offense "sucks" is just a bit too much.

munchman33
06-07-2008, 11:56 PM
The Cubs are often regarded as having one of the best offenses in baseball. They have scored 3 or less runs 26 times this season as well...and they have played two more games than the Sox.

:shrug:

I don't much care for their offense either. Stats driven by blowouts. :shrug:

jabrch
06-07-2008, 11:58 PM
The Cubs are often regarded as having one of the best offenses in baseball. They have scored 3 or less runs 26 times this season as well...and they have played two more games than the Sox.

:shrug:


I asked once before for someone to show me the statistics that prove out that we are any different than most other teams out there in terms of run distribution. Nobody has. I'm still curious. But if the Cubs, with one of the best offenses in baseball, show the same sort of distribution as us, I wonder who doesn't?

Craig Grebeck
06-07-2008, 11:59 PM
I don't much care for their offense either. Stats driven by blowouts. :shrug:
Find me a better offense than that team.

itsnotrequired
06-08-2008, 12:02 AM
I don't much care for their offense either. Stats driven by blowouts. :shrug:

Pick any hot-shot offense you want and you will see that they also have 20 or so games where they score three runs or less. Boston has 21. The Angels have 27 and they have the best record in the AL.

Three runs as some type of benchmark is arbitrary and worthless.

munchman33
06-08-2008, 12:06 AM
I really don't believe that good hitters are hitting because Ozzie had a hissy fit. I believe good hitters were due to hit.

I'm assuming most players, ours included, will end up withing a certain % of their 3 year averages. Now there are exceptions - but I highly doubt we have 5 exceptions on one club. We have already seen OC get hot. Swish is warming. PK and Thome have both shown that they are not dead.

I see no reason to believe this team won't end the season in the top quarter of the league in runs scored. That's damn good regardless of how it is distributed.

I understand we have had some bad games - many of them - but to say this offense "sucks" is just a bit too much.

26 games out of 61 is over 42%. Our offense is so bad that we require our ptichers to hold the opposition to 2 or less runs (and definately less in more than half of them) in 42% of our games. That isn't a good offense. That isn't even a decent offense. You're letting a few individual performances speak for the larger work. This offense sucks.

itsnotrequired
06-08-2008, 12:08 AM
26 games out of 61 is over 42%. Our offense is so bad that we require our ptichers to hold the opposition to 2 or less runs (and definately less in more than half of them) in 42% of our games. That isn't a good offense. That isn't even a decent offense. You're letting a few individual performances speak for the larger work. This offense sucks.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1919685#post1919685

Scottiehaswheels
06-08-2008, 12:09 AM
I really don't believe that good hitters are hitting because Ozzie had a hissy fit. I believe good hitters were due to hit.

I'm assuming most players, ours included, will end up withing a certain % of their 3 year averages. Now there are exceptions - but I highly doubt we have 5 exceptions on one club. We have already seen OC get hot. Swish is warming. PK and Thome have both shown that they are not dead.

I see no reason to believe this team won't end the season in the top quarter of the league in runs scored. That's damn good regardless of how it is distributed.

I understand we have had some bad games - many of them - but to say this offense "sucks" is just a bit too much.It doesn't "suck" but I'm still afraid of what kind of production we will get from the 4-7 spots in the order on a nightly basis. When that is basically the heart of your order, a baseball fan shouldn't be afraid of what to expect, they should be praying for that spot to come up in the order. I'm still paranoid it's gonna go back to a black hole of 0-12/14 with 2-3 inning ending DP's a night. Is that not justified based on what we've seen from this team over the past 2 years?

jabrch
06-08-2008, 12:10 AM
Pick any hot-shot offense you want and you will see that they also have 20 or so games where they score three runs or less. Boston has 21. The Angels have 27 and they have the best record in the AL.

Three runs as some type of benchmark is arbitrary and worthless.

Please stop messing up a beautiful bitch session with facts. This offense is not as horrible as some want us to believe. Saying that it "sucks" is just silly.

jabrch
06-08-2008, 12:23 AM
It doesn't "suck"


If you are changing your position, that's fine...

but I'm still afraid of what kind of production we will get from the 4-7 spots in the order on a nightly basis.

That's Paul Konerko, Jim Thome, Jermaine Dye and Nick Swisher. I'll take my chances with that.

Rest of our division....
Garko, Perralta, Blake, Gutierrez
Ordonez, Cabrerra, Larish?, Renteria?
Morneu, Cuddyer, Kubel, Young
Guillen, Olivo, Teahen, Buck


When that is basically the heart of your order, a baseball fan shouldn't be afraid of what to expect, they should be praying for that spot to come up in the order. I'm still paranoid it's gonna go back to a black hole of 0-12/14 with 2-3 inning ending DP's a night. Is that not justified based on what we've seen from this team over the past 2 years?

First off, you can keep saying the past two years, but that doesn't make it true. This team is amongst the league leaders in runs scored this season. Second, your admitted paranoia is exactly that. Paranoia. As with any paranoia, it is a dillusion, it is irrational and it is a disorder.

Don't be paranoid. Sit back, relax and strap one on. This is a good baseball team with good hitters. And - despite the irrational persecution complex that Sox fans have, this team IS a good offensive club.

Scottiehaswheels
06-08-2008, 12:25 AM
I hope you're right jabrch... I really do...

DSpivack
06-08-2008, 01:49 AM
If our offense was better we could be in first place.

Gerry
06-08-2008, 03:01 AM
This ballclub has the MAKINGS of a good offense, it's the consistency that's missing. If even if some of the players play up to their career averages, then it would make so much of a difference. I think games like last night and a few others on this recent home stand are indications of what this offense could be capable of doing consistently. But the issue has always been consistency. Gotta wait and see right now. The good news is that a few of the most struggling players in Konerko and Swisher are hopefully pulling out of their huge slumps.

Really if just two of the three (Swisher, Thome, Konerko) can hit like they are supposed to, then watch out. We all know about Quentin and Alexei is looking better and better every game, don't have to worry about an automatic out with Uribe anymore, Cabrera is going to be fine, Crede is off to his best start ever, and AJ has been good, surprisingly good batting second. They don't really have trouble getting on base, it's just getting those big hits when they need them has been a recurring problem this season.

TDog
06-08-2008, 03:59 AM
... but it took 15 innings to beat a ****ty Royals team 4 days ago. How many people did we leave in scoring position in that one? ...

The week before that Royals team lost to us in 15 innings, they lost two games in the Metrodome in extra innings. In one of those games, the Royals scored three in the ninth, handing Nathan a blown save. The Royals beat the Yankees 2-1 Friday night but lost to the Yankees Saturday 12-11, after taking an 11-10 lead in the ninth. The Royals aren't playing winning baseball, but that doesn't mean they aren't playing competitive baseball. The Sox actually hit the Royals starters fairly hard this week. And Ramirez missing the plate in the extra-inning game this week had nothing to do with his bat.

To put the runs socred into perspective, last weekend when the Sox were having trouble scoring runs in St. Petersburg, they were second in the American League in run differential to the A's. After Saturday's games, the White Sox are first in the American League in run differential. That's unusual for a team that, as I have read, has no offense and needs 15 innings to beat a lousy team like the Royals.

balke
06-08-2008, 10:14 AM
Although I agree blowouts are inflating the runs total for this offense (duh) and that it may not mean as much to lead in runs, The Sox are scoring regardless.

This is exactly what we've been waiting for. June = warm weather = homeruns.

The Sox are hitting the stride many think will never come. This is going to be a huge month for the Sox hitters. Crede has 5 HR's this month already. He's now .291/.362/.561 meaning there's 2 guys playing some serious baseball for the Sox right now between him and Quentin.

Swisher starting to produce little by little, and Dye has been pretty decent all season. This team is looking dangerous, watch out Dark Clouds. Better start rooting for the Tigers if you wanna whine the rest of the season.

sullythered
06-08-2008, 10:55 AM
Tenth in all of baseball in OPS. We stay at or near the top of the league in ERA, and right near where we are in OPS, we will win the division with ease.

FedEx227
06-08-2008, 10:59 AM
Tenth in all of baseball in OPS. We stay at or near the top of the league in ERA, and right near where we are in OPS, we will win the division with ease.

Absolutely agree. If we can keep OPS better than a majority of the league we'll be in the thick of things all year.

TomBradley72
06-08-2008, 11:00 AM
We've scored 3 runs or less in 26 games already this year.

We've scored 2 runs or less 18 times.

We've scored 1 run or less 12 times.

We've been shut out 6 times.

Runs scored per game is the WORST way to calculate how good an offense is. This offense hasn't scored enough runs to give the team a decent chance to win in nearly half it's games. Even Ozzie gets that.

The worst? The whole purpose of the game is scoring runs, any other measurement is bull****. But there are ways you can analyze their consistency which is probably what their problem is. Over 162 games, the team that scores the most runs has the best offense.

turners56
06-08-2008, 11:31 AM
There's a huge gap between the 3rd and 2nd offensive team in this league. The Red Sox are around 40 runs better than the Twins and they're in second when it comes to runs scored. Not really much of a feat here. Unless we can leapfrog Boston somehow, then it's really worth talking about.

munchman33
06-08-2008, 11:50 AM
The worst? The whole purpose of the game is scoring runs, any other measurement is bull****. But there are ways you can analyze their consistency which is probably what their problem is.

:scratch:

You said I was full of **** then agreed with me.

Noneck
06-08-2008, 11:55 AM
There are 6 teams within 11 runs after Texas and Boston. Being in 3rd is quite meaningless , as I said before the Sox could have the largest lead of any division in baseball in a couple days and be 8th in AL in runs. At this point being 3rd in runs means squat.

Pear-Zin-Ski
06-08-2008, 11:56 AM
It sucks watching the good guys get shutout or be held to two runs or less...but guess what...we are in first place in the AL Central...we have a winning home record AND a winning road record...with all the "flaws" in our offense (might I say people are not compeled to watch the games if we dont put up 5 or more runs???) we are kicking some major ass....

Im a nitpicker as much as anyone is but it feels damn good to have a nice 5 game win streak going on right now....

turners56
06-08-2008, 11:58 AM
It sucks watching the good guys get shutout or be held to two runs or less...but guess what...we are in first place in the AL Central...we have a winning home record AND a winning road record...with all the "flaws" in our offense (might I say people are not compeled to watch the games if we dont put up 5 or more runs???) we are kicking some major ass....

Im a nitpicker as much as anyone is but it feels damn good to have a nice 5 game win streak going on right now....

We're actually .500 on the road thanks to the Rays. Even so, that's the 3rd best road record in baseball right now.

WHITE SOX PRIDE!
06-08-2008, 12:06 PM
This team has scored the 4th (soon 3rd) most runs in the AL. Scottie - how do you not feel foolish saying the offense sucks.

And it isn't one good half week. This team has scored runs most of the year.
i agree

shes
06-08-2008, 12:18 PM
Saying we're fourth in the AL in runs scored sounds a lot nicer than it is, and those of you saying it know that. You're just spinning stats to make your point, same as those on the other side of the argument. We're actually 5th in runs scored PER GAME, and we're .06 runs/game away from being in 8th. I mean, come on. If the PLAYERS and MANAGER can come out and admit that there's something wrong with the offense, why can't the fanbase?

If you watch the games, you know that there is something wrong when so many talented players look so lost and overmatched at the plate. Yes, the Sox are in first, but they have an average offense at best, and have underachieved a great deal. A pitching staff that is better than anyone could have anticipated has kept us from fighting for third place.

If either the Tigers and Indians had rushed out of the gates the way we all anticipated, I think a few more of you guys would be willing to admit that the offense needs to step it up a bit for us to compete down the stretch and possibly in the postseason.

But hell, we ARE in first on June 8 with a 4.5 game lead, and our O has looked better since Ozzie's latest tirade (8.4 runs/game), even if we were facing the lowly Royals and very pedestrian Twins. I'll drink a beer to that (:gulp:), but I won't be getting too comfortable until we show that our offense can pick up our pitching at some point this season. Contreras is old and Danks and Floyd don't have a lot of career experience; how are they going to look as they approach 200+ innings on the year? I have a feeling we're going to need to win a lot of 7-5 games in August and September. At this point I don't think our offense is capable of doing that.

Jerome
06-08-2008, 12:31 PM
We've scored 2 runs or less 18 times.

exactly, let's not get ahead of ourselves yet. Total runs scored is a nice stat but we all know they haven't been scoring consistently, and have wasted some outstanding pitching performances. Hopefully with the weather Thome and Konerko will get back to their old selves.

FWIW, Sox are 9th in hits and 10th in batting average in the AL.

TheOldRoman
06-08-2008, 12:38 PM
:scratch:

You said I was full of **** then agreed with me.
Yep, that is how I feel about you and this quote. :D:
We've scored 3 runs or less in 26 games already this year.

We've scored 2 runs or less 18 times.

We've scored 1 run or less 12 times.

We've been shut out 6 times.

Runs scored per game is the WORST way to calculate how good an offense is. This offense hasn't scored enough runs to give the team a decent chance to win in nearly half it's games. Even Ozzie gets that.

champagne030
06-08-2008, 12:39 PM
RUNS SCORED

We are 1 run behind the twins who are in third - and will be there tomorrow after Floyd vs Slowey.

This offense sucks.

That's a very, VERY BP'ish post. Maybe we still didn't win the division in 2005 because our run differential wasn't great enough.

It's not how many, it's when you score them.:gulp:

kevin57
06-08-2008, 01:00 PM
If you watch the games, you know that there is something wrong when so many talented players look so lost and overmatched at the plate...But hell, we ARE in first on June 8 with a 4.5 game lead, and our O has looked better since Ozzie's latest tirade (8.4 runs/game)

Agreed. While I'm glad that the offense has been better of late, it's maddening that the middle of our lineup is so terrible. Hell, using BA is my stat of choice, one could argue that having the pitcher bat instead of our designated hitter would be a better move! Konerko has been in a "slump" for well over a year, truth be told. While our pitching has been superior, and I'll take that kind of "stat" over offensive punch, I don't know if we'll go very far with the middle of our lineup continuing on this tear.

Besides, we continue to rely almost totally on the long ball. Our left-on-base numbers are horrific. Why do so many of our guys fail to understand that desirability of moving runners over?

Finally, I do believe that a manager's rant like Ozzie's can be and in this case was effective when players believe he means business. When the "boss" tells you your days playing every day or even being around are numbered unless there's improvement--I don't care what organization you belong to--things are going to start moving...and fast.

TDog
06-08-2008, 01:11 PM
That's a very, VERY BP'ish post. Maybe we still didn't win the division in 2005 because our run differential wasn't great enough.

It's not how many, it's when you score them.:gulp:

Speaking of which, all of last year the White Sox didn't score on the road beyond the 10th inning and home and away scored only 10 extra-inning runs, half at home and half on the road.

Of course, you could do a lot better than the 2007 Sox and still not be a very good team. But runs aren't as important as wins. The 2005 White Sox season began and ended with 1-0 wins and came back from the All-Star break with a 1-0 win. I don't remember people complaining them. (Maybe they were, but I don't remember it.)

Tragg
06-08-2008, 01:20 PM
Over 162 games, the team that scores the most runs has the best offense.
I guess. But, there's a difference between bashing mediocre pitching and scoring on good pitching. Some offenses are better bashers. but less skilled at eeking out a run or 2 against good pitching when you have to.
This team needs to eek out a little better....and we probably will as the season wears on. We won't leave the runners on 3rd like we did in a few series. The lack of speed will limit us in this regard, however.
Last season, they tried to center the offense around "manufacturing" runs...that's questionable as a main philosophy; but when coupled with bad pitching, it's a disaster.

jabrch
06-08-2008, 01:47 PM
There's a huge gap between the 3rd and 2nd offensive team in this league. The Red Sox are around 40 runs better than the Twins and they're in second when it comes to runs scored. Not really much of a feat here. Unless we can leapfrog Boston somehow, then it's really worth talking about.


That's silly.

jabrch
06-08-2008, 01:49 PM
and our O has looked better since Ozzie's latest tirade (8.4 runs/game),

Our O has looked good all season. We had a rough streak for a few weeks, but this team can score runs.

jabrch
06-08-2008, 01:53 PM
but we all know they haven't been scoring consistently,


Nobody has yet shown me anything to prove that there is this large group of teams who score the same amount of runs as we do - but more consistently. In fact, in this thread there are numbers that show that other good offenses are equally as likely to put up 3 or less than we are.

I'm not convinced we are as bad as some want to say. I just think our fans are quicker to throw themselves off the bridge after a bad stretch than to realize the same for other clubs.

champagne030
06-08-2008, 02:43 PM
Nobody has yet shown me anything to prove that there is this large group of teams who score the same amount of runs as we do - but more consistently. In fact, in this thread there are numbers that show that other good offenses are equally as likely to put up 3 or less than we are.

I'm not convinced we are as bad as some want to say. I just think our fans are quicker to throw themselves off the bridge after a bad stretch than to realize the same for other clubs.


Pound sand.......:tantrum:

Craig Grebeck
06-08-2008, 04:47 PM
I'm still waiting to hear of a better offensive team than the Cubs.

balke
06-08-2008, 04:58 PM
I'm still waiting to hear of a better offensive team than the Cubs.

I haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know if you're serious... but Boston, Philly, Texas

Craig Grebeck
06-08-2008, 05:03 PM
I haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know if you're serious... but Boston, Philly, Texas
Munchman said he wasn't a fan of their offense. It's really not even funny how good they are.

Edit: Position by position, you can't really make an argument against them.

turners56
06-08-2008, 05:08 PM
We're 3rd now though. :).

balke
06-08-2008, 08:29 PM
Munchman said he wasn't a fan of their offense. It's really not even funny how good they are.

Edit: Position by position, you can't really make an argument against them.

Against the Cubs? Yeah I could. I don't do plus minus though when grading offenses. Jimmy Rollins for Philly is like twice as good as the Cubs SS. To give one point to Philly for that is a crime.

They can't top Philly's offense. Burrell, Rollins, Howard, Victorino, Utley.. gimme a break. Philly and Boston healthy are better offensively.

Don't get me wrong, Lee, Aramis, Soriano, Fukudome, Soto, Derosa. But, where's the Outrageously insane top tier calibur player like Hamilton, Utley, Howard? DLee is sometimes that, but right now he's not that hot. Soriano can't be that way if he doesn't steal anymore. He's now just a decent power guy with a good avg. and low OBP.

turners56
06-10-2008, 12:53 PM
The White Sox are now 8th in the MLB in runs scored and 16th in hitting.

TDog
06-10-2008, 04:30 PM
Nobody has yet shown me anything to prove that there is this large group of teams who score the same amount of runs as we do - but more consistently. In fact, in this thread there are numbers that show that other good offenses are equally as likely to put up 3 or less than we are.

I'm not convinced we are as bad as some want to say. I just think our fans are quicker to throw themselves off the bridge after a bad stretch than to realize the same for other clubs.

You might consider scoring seven runs Monday inconsistent because the Sox didn't score in double figures for the fourth straight day. The fact is, no American League team has ever scored at least 10 runs and collected at least 15 hits in four straight games. Had the Sox picked up two more hits in each of the innings where they left the bases loaded, they likely would have been the first to accomplish something that not even the 1927 Yankees could accomplish. Attribute the dropoff in the offense Monday to inconsistency.

The fact is, all offenses are inconsistent. The Tigers' offense has had two 19-run games this season but has been shutout more than the White Sox. The Royals are in last place, in large part because of their offense, but their offense in recent weeks has gotten to Nathan, Jenks and Rivera for blown saves.

Scald a line drive that the defense turns into a doubleplay, and you're a bum. Bloop a ball in front of the leftfielder who overruns it with two out and the bases loaded in a tie game and you're a hero. Your batting average won't help you when you step into the batter's box. It only tells you how successful you have been before you came up to the plate.

jabrch
06-10-2008, 04:34 PM
You might consider scoring seven runs Monday inconsistent because the Sox didn't score in double figures for the fourth straight day. The fact is, no American League team has ever scored at least 10 runs and collected at least 15 hits in four straight games. Had the Sox picked up two more hits in each of the innings where they left the bases loaded, they likely would have been the first to accomplish something that not even the 1927 Yankees could accomplish. Attribute the dropoff in the offense Monday to inconsistency.

The fact is, all offenses are inconsistent. The Tigers' offense has had two 19-run games this season but has been shutout more than the White Sox. The Royals are in last place, in large part because of their offense, but their offense in recent weeks has gotten to Nathan, Jenks and Rivera for blown saves.

Scald a line drive that the defense turns into a doubleplay, and you're a bum. Bloop a ball in front of the leftfielder who overruns it with two out and the bases loaded in a tie game and you're a hero. Your batting average won't help you when you step into the batter's box. It only tells you how successful you have been before you steeped up to the plate.


Great post

whitesoxfan
06-10-2008, 04:56 PM
Our O has looked good all season. We had a rough streak for a few weeks, but this team can score runs.

Our offense has looked good in the last seven games, but it has hardly looked good all season long.

Hopefully this is the offense that we can come to see for the majority of the season.

jabrch
06-10-2008, 05:08 PM
Our offense has looked good in the last seven games, but it has hardly looked good all season long.

Hopefully this is the offense that we can come to see for the majority of the season.

That's untrue.

Our offense looked good in April. It looked decent in parts of May also. All offenses have that ebb and flow. And all offenses get shut down from time to time.

Frater Perdurabo
06-10-2008, 06:59 PM
Every statistic is a measure of past results and is not necessarily a predictor of future results.

Madscout
06-10-2008, 09:23 PM
I don't know if anyone has done this yet, but I would like to echo the calls for a little more consistancy. It seems like any given night, this offense can explode, and put up double digets, while other nights can't buy a run. I did some calculations with standard deviation. All numbers are rounded up to two decimals

Here are the sox numbers
Runs per game: 4.77
Standard Deviation: 3.35

Red Sawks' numbers
Runs per game: 5.06
Standard Deviation:3.12

Angels' numbers
Runs per game: 4.303
Standard Deviation: 2.418

Blue Jays' numbers
Runs per game:4.14
Standard Deviation:2.74

Just wanted to throw a last place team in there that has had offensive struggles. For all of you who don't know what standard deviation is, it is in this case a caclulation of the normal deviation from the mean, or how much more the Sox score more and less than 4.77 runs per game.

I'll put it this way, it is normal for the sox to come out one night and score 1 or 2 runs, and also normal for them to come out and score 7. The angels, for example, are a little more consistant (in fact, when I was punching in the numbers, I noticed several back to back nights where they score the same number of runs).

Anyway, just thought I would throw that in. If you are interested in this, I'll paste the link at the bottom. I just got the numbers from the schedual feature on baseball reference, and plugged them into the followoing website.

http://www.easycalculation.com/statistics/standard-deviation.php

jabrch
06-10-2008, 10:03 PM
You would logically expect teams with fewer runs scored to have a lowed standard deviation - as your data shows. Our's is in line with Boston's.

Can you draw any significant conclusions from that data? I can't.

That said - nice job gathering it.

I don't know if anyone has done this yet, but I would like to echo the calls for a little more consistancy. It seems like any given night, this offense can explode, and put up double digets, while other nights can't buy a run. I did some calculations with standard deviation. All numbers are rounded up to two decimals

Here are the sox numbers
Runs per game: 4.77
Standard Deviation: 3.35

Red Sawks' numbers
Runs per game: 5.06
Standard Deviation:3.12

Angels' numbers
Runs per game: 4.303
Standard Deviation: 2.418

Blue Jays' numbers
Runs per game:4.14
Standard Deviation:2.74

Just wanted to throw a last place team in there that has had offensive struggles. For all of you who don't know what standard deviation is, it is in this case a caclulation of the normal deviation from the mean, or how much more the Sox score more and less than 4.77 runs per game.

I'll put it this way, it is normal for the sox to come out one night and score 1 or 2 runs, and also normal for them to come out and score 7. The angels, for example, are a little more consistant (in fact, when I was punching in the numbers, I noticed several back to back nights where they score the same number of runs).

Anyway, just thought I would throw that in. If you are interested in this, I'll paste the link at the bottom. I just got the numbers from the schedual feature on baseball reference, and plugged them into the followoing website.

http://www.easycalculation.com/statistics/standard-deviation.php

Eddo144
06-10-2008, 10:36 PM
You would logically expect teams with fewer runs scored to have a lowed standard deviation - as your data shows. Our's is in line with Boston's.

Can you draw any significant conclusions from that data? I can't.

That said - nice job gathering it.
Yeah, looks like there aren't really any significant conclusions to be drawn.

However, you wouldn't necessarily expect lower scoring teams to have much lower standard deviations.

Example:
Team A scores: 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7.
Team B scores: 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 8.

Team A: average = 4.9, stdev = 1.67.
Team B: average = 5.9, stdev = 1.67.

Granted, there's a floor of zero runs, so practically, you would expect a minor decrease in standard deviation for lower scoring teams, but not a whole lot.

fquaye149
06-10-2008, 10:49 PM
That's very "shoota-ish" of you.



That's not how you evaluate an offense - at least that's not a good way to do so. If the team is scoring runs, that's what's important. Right now, only 3 teams have done it better than us - and one of them by 1 run (that team we have slaughtered the past two nights)



A) A team we swept
B) So what?
C) The LAA (best record in baseball) lost 2 of 3 to Seattle (worst team in baseball) which means....NOTHING Because it is a SMALL SAMPLE SIZE. Isolating the 15 inning game is just ridiculous.



Who cares? The goal of the game is not to "not leave men in scoring position". It is to outscore your opponent - which we did. And since only 2 teams have outscored us by more than 1 run on the season, we should feel fairly good about our team.



The offense that has outscored nearly every other AL team on the season? And you are only pleased with them for 3-4 days? Dude...



Again - it isn't 1 week. Look at this team over the course of the season.

It's June. We're still at the point where a couple games in a row scoring 10 runs can be the difference between being 4th in the league in runs scored and being much worse.

So before the Minnesota series you should feel like an idiot for saying this offense sucks, but now that we won 4 games in a row, he should feel like an idiot?

COOL DUDE!!!!!!!!! Total insight.

Isn't June great?