PDA

View Full Version : Fox sports power rankings


It's Time
06-10-2008, 11:39 AM
These are quite amusing this week. Notice where our beloved comes in.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/powerRankings

geraldfritz
06-10-2008, 11:43 AM
Well, I just can not wait until our team proves all these morons wrong. But you were right, some of these rankings were hilarious.

ondafarm
06-10-2008, 11:47 AM
The White Sox are third in runs scored and first in runs against in the AL and yet they are the fourth AL team. The Sox are currently expected to win 97 games tops in baseball.

Corlose 15
06-10-2008, 11:47 AM
The White Sox didn't have a single .300 hitter in 2005 either.


Of course Dye is hitting .299, AJ is hitting .297, and both Crede and Ramirez are hitting .291 but dammnit they're doomed unless at least one of them gets over .300.:rolleyes:

kittle42
06-10-2008, 11:47 AM
Well, I think all those teams ahead of the Sox had better records going into Monday, no? So what's the big deal?

bluestar
06-10-2008, 11:49 AM
Rays sweep? The Twins are "weak competition"?

There is a local guy (Andrew Braverman) here in Nashville that has a weekly baseball radio show where he talks about MLB and Collegiate baseball. The show is on Monday night. I caught some of last night's show. He does his own "power rankings." Last night he had the Phillies in the number 1 spot, and the Sox in the number 2 spot. I was pleasantly surprised when he talked about how good the Sox are looking. He pointed out that even in the series in Tampa, the games were close and could have gone either way. He also pleaded with the listeners to write-in Quentin on the All-Star ballot.

There is another local radio baseball guy, Nick "The Stick" Hunter, who has been suggesting an all-Chicago World Series is a definite possibility.

JorgeFabregas
06-10-2008, 11:49 AM
They were not swept by Tampa.

skottyj242
06-10-2008, 11:50 AM
We didn't get swept by the Rays.

kittle42
06-10-2008, 11:51 AM
Would everyone like some cheese with their whine?

soxpride724
06-10-2008, 11:52 AM
The ****ers from the north are still in first. I'm glad these don't mean anything.

It's Time
06-10-2008, 11:52 AM
I am not upset by the rankings, just amused. They act as if going 7-0 is an easy feat and is no big deal. It just seemed to have a negative tone towards the White Sox.

Corlose 15
06-10-2008, 11:55 AM
Would everyone like some cheese with their whine?

I just think his rationale is flawed. I really don't care about power rankings. I care about divisional standings.

pdimas
06-10-2008, 11:55 AM
I am not upset by the rankings, just amused. They act as if going 7-0 is an easy feat and is no big deal. It just seemed to have a negative tone towards the White Sox.

We werent 7 and 0 when they were posted

doublem23
06-10-2008, 12:11 PM
Would everyone like some cheese with their whine?

If we're going to hold simple grammar and spelling mistakes against posters on a fan website, I don't think it's too much to ask that we expect paid, national media folk to get their facts right.

hi im skot
06-10-2008, 12:32 PM
We werent 7 and 0 when they were posted

It says that it was posted 2 hours ago...

palehozenychicty
06-10-2008, 12:35 PM
Honestly, all of the pundits hate is good. I mean, everybody thought we were terrible to start the year, and we just made a statement on the division this past week. Everybody thought Kenny was a fool for his trades and signings. I even thought this year was transitory toward '09 and '10. So it's all good to me if they ride that underappreciation to another WS title.

Even in Crasnick's chat wrap, he didn't give a glowing impression of the Sox. Yet the Cubs are going to win the whole thing. They'll even trade for every pitcher available at the deadline, including Captain Cheeseburger! :o: once Wood makes his annual pilgrimage to the DL and their starters and pen blows to smithereens in August.

I'd rather the team just keep playing hard, and see where we stack up in September.

downstairs
06-10-2008, 12:43 PM
Hmmmm... I have no real problem with this list. The Cubs are the hottest team in baseball, and #7 is fair for the Sox considering their ups and downs. If the Sox keep it up, they'll be in the top 3 of everyone's Power Rankings.

But if you can't admit that the Cubs are hotter than any other team, then you're just lying to yourself.

I dig it, because this sorta thing generally leads to an epic collapse for our Northside friends.

palehozenychicty
06-10-2008, 12:48 PM
Hmmmm... I have no real problem with this list. The Cubs are the hottest team in baseball, and #7 is fair for the Sox considering their ups and downs. If the Sox keep it up, they'll be in the top 3 of everyone's Power Rankings.

But if you can't admit that the Cubs are hotter than any other team, then you're just lying to yourself.

I dig it, because this sorta thing generally leads to an epic collapse for our Northside friends.

They are hot, no question. But their road splits and high number of pen appearances does not bode well for them.

twentywontowin
06-10-2008, 12:49 PM
Power rankings and opinions are like *******s...everyone has one.

Bring it on.

oeo
06-10-2008, 12:52 PM
I don't understand the problem. The Cardinals are probably the only team that shouldn't be ranked higher than the Sox. Otherwise, it's pretty spot on, IMO.

turners56
06-10-2008, 01:01 PM
My god, since when was winning 1 out of 4 considered getting swept? People need to pay some god damn attention.

Jerome
06-10-2008, 01:08 PM
I don't understand the problem. The Cardinals are probably the only team that shouldn't be ranked higher than the Sox. Otherwise, it's pretty spot on, IMO.

St Louis better than the Sox is some big time lolz but other than that, yeah, I'd say right now the Sox are about the 5th best team in baseball. Who do you all think they should be ahead of? I personally think that with this pitching staff we can beat anyone, but I'm a biased Sox fan.

DumpJerry
06-10-2008, 01:15 PM
It says that it was posted 2 hours ago...
It said that last night as well. I think their computer system is as good as their analytical skills.

turners56
06-10-2008, 01:15 PM
St Louis better than the Sox is some big time lolz but other than that, yeah, I'd say right now the Sox are about the 5th best team in baseball. Who do you all think they should be ahead of? I personally think that with this pitching staff we can beat anyone, but I'm a biased Sox fan.

And it's not like the Twins were some crappy commodity like the article says. Hell, the freaking Royals just split the series with the Yankees, yes the big bad Yankees, who are ranked 15th on their list while the Twins are 17th. What they said made no sense.

thomas35forever
06-10-2008, 01:19 PM
Weak competition, huh? More like battered competition.

So what if our hitters aren't cracking .300? We're winning, aren't we? Oh right, I forgot that a high batting average is more important than winning.

Ron Karkovice
06-10-2008, 01:44 PM
The ****ers from the north are still in first. I'm glad these don't mean anything.


The cubs are playing by far the best baseball right now so why wouldn't they be in first??

Boondock Saint
06-10-2008, 01:45 PM
How is it that this guy can call out the Sox for beating up on our "bad" division and not mention that the Cubs are barely holding up a .500 record against teams with a winning record? Hell, their last 27 games have been against teams with a record of .500 or below.

But I guess it's scoring a ****load of runs that wins a World Series, not great pitching and defense. So I'm sure he'll be right in the end.

MeteorsSox4367
06-10-2008, 01:47 PM
It seems like the Sox are damned if they do, damned if they don't. They sweep the Twins and Royals and it's considered to be against inferior competition.

Had the Sox been swept, then I'm sure they would have written that the Sox weren't that good.

Whatever. The only ranking that matters right now is the AL Central standings. First place.

Next.

balke
06-10-2008, 01:47 PM
Haha, the Cards better than the Sox right now? You can make a case for other teams, but the Cards are facing some challenges right now.

I think post all-star break the Sox will be #3 in those rankings.

kittle42
06-10-2008, 01:48 PM
If we're going to hold simple grammar and spelling mistakes against posters on a fan website, I don't think it's too much to ask that we expect paid, national media folk to get their facts right.

Ah, another shot to the gut from doublem23. I need at least one a week to make me feel wanted.

I was referring more their 7th place ranking. Obviously, he's an idiot for the sweep comment.

People who haven't managed to learn 4th grade grammar have just as little of an excuse.

turners56
06-10-2008, 01:50 PM
How is it that this guy can call out the Sox for beating up on our "bad" division and not mention that the Cubs are barely holding up a .500 record against teams with a winning record? Hell, their last 27 games have been against teams with a record of .500 or below.

But I guess it's scoring a ****load of runs that wins a World Series, not great pitching and defense. So I'm sure he'll be right in the end.

Wow that's quite an impressive stat there.

SoxGirl4Life
06-10-2008, 02:04 PM
I really don't care where we rank, what people say, how they want to discount our record, or anything else that doesn't get us a "W"

It's Time
06-10-2008, 02:10 PM
:hawk
"Those rankings are BS!"

shavo2k2
06-10-2008, 02:20 PM
Rays sweep? The Twins are "weak competition"?

There is a local guy (Andrew Braverman) here in Nashville that has a weekly baseball radio show where he talks about MLB and Collegiate baseball. The show is on Monday night. I caught some of last night's show. He does his own "power rankings." Last night he had the Phillies in the number 1 spot, and the Sox in the number 2 spot. I was pleasantly surprised when he talked about how good the Sox are looking. He pointed out that even in the series in Tampa, the games were close and could have gone either way. He also pleaded with the listeners to write-in Quentin on the All-Star ballot.

There is another local radio baseball guy, Nick "The Stick" Hunter, who has been suggesting an all-Chicago World Series is a definite possibility.


I grew up with Andrew Braverman. He's from Northbrook, and is a huge sox fan.

lukeman89
06-10-2008, 02:30 PM
:hawk



See, the Sox are the best team in baseball. It's that simple.

JermaineDye05
06-10-2008, 02:52 PM
Who does the research over there. They make it seem like all their starters are borderline 4 ERA "4 starters with a sub 4 ERA". Of those 4 starters 2 of them are just a tick over 3 and one is sub 3. Also fails to mention the surge in the offense, oh and a lights out bullpen.

hi im skot
06-10-2008, 02:59 PM
Eh, who cares?

bluestar
06-10-2008, 03:06 PM
I grew up with Andrew Braverman. He's from Northbrook, and is a huge sox fan.

Is this the same guy? He lives in Nashville and works for WGFX-FM, 104.5 The Zone?

He honestly did sound like a Sox fan. I am not accustomed to hearing local radio people talk about the Sox like that. Normally they only mention the Sox whenever Ozzie says something that attracts attention.

doublem23
06-10-2008, 03:20 PM
Ah, another shot to the gut from doublem23. I need at least one a week to make me feel wanted.

I was referring more their 7th place ranking. Obviously, he's an idiot for the sweep comment.

People who haven't managed to learn 4th grade grammar have just as little of an excuse.

Ah, someone's got to keep you on your toes. Anyway, I think we're on the same page, I probably just misinterpretted your first post.

Moving forward...

TDog
06-10-2008, 03:30 PM
I really don't care where we rank, what people say, how they want to discount our record, or anything else that doesn't get us a "W"


Neither do I. At this point it's all hype anyway. Alexei Ramirez is hitting .291 after getting off to a horrible start, and Fukudome is hitting .292 after getting off to a great start. Ramirez has a better slugging percentage and as many home runs in less games and is playing exceptional defense, but Fukudome walks a lot, and those walks are darned exciting, hence the Fukudome-mania and lack of Ramirez-mania.

A team doesn't have to be great to play great baseball, especially in April, May and June, or portions thereof. The 1976 White Sox incredibly may have been playing the best baseball in the country for about a week in May. I was never concerned with the White Sox offense this season because ultimately pitching wins games. What happens with the pitching staffs in August and September ultimately will decide what happens to the Chicago teams. Floyd and Danks could hit some sort of wall, but the bullpen isn't being overworked. It isn't like the Sox only have two relievers that they go to in every close game.

What I find incredible is how people have been saying for years that the Cubs play in a soft division, and that is a reason for optimism, while this year the Sox playing in a soft division (yes, I imagine there would be a couple more .500 teams if they weren't getting beaten up by the Sox, but I digress) is a reason for pessimism.

The White Sox and Cubs could both storm into the postseason this year. Maybe not. I doubt the Cubs rotation is going to hold up and I'm only cautiously optimistic about the White Sox rotation. Instead of people celebrating something that hasn't happened for 102 years -- longer than it's been since the Cubs won the World Series -- people are excited for the Cubs. There seems some resentment about the White Sox.

From what I've read though, the Cubs were the glamour team in 1906 that was supposed to destroy the White Sox in October. It's entirely possible that history could repeat itself.

Jollyroger2
06-10-2008, 03:35 PM
How is it that this guy can call out the Sox for beating up on our "bad" division and not mention that the Cubs are barely holding up a .500 record against teams with a winning record? Hell, their last 27 games have been against teams with a record of .500 or below.

But I guess it's scoring a ****load of runs that wins a World Series, not great pitching and defense. So I'm sure he'll be right in the end.

Exactly. How many games have the Cubs played vs. the likes of Pittsburgh, SD, Colorado, Washington, etc? Seems like close to half their games have been against not just weak teams but awful ones. The Cubs struggle on the road too....but everyone's making them out to be a superpower.

Let em celebrate now again, like usual.

mccoydp
06-10-2008, 03:43 PM
Power rankings are a diversion from what really counts: the standings.

The only good thing they provide me is amusement, nothing more.

jabrch
06-10-2008, 04:17 PM
everyone's making them out to be a superpower.

I think they are as good an offense as there is in baseball. Other than CF, they get + performance from every position, have decent depth, and have some versatility.

Are they a "Superpower"? They aren't the '27 Yanks. They aren't the 2006 Red Sox. But this is the best Cubs offense I have seen in my life, and it is amongst the best offenses in MLB today.

kittle42
06-10-2008, 04:19 PM
Exactly. How many games have the Cubs played vs. the likes of Pittsburgh, SD, Colorado, Washington, etc? Seems like close to half their games have been against not just weak teams but awful ones. The Cubs struggle on the road too....but everyone's making them out to be a superpower.

Let em celebrate now again, like usual.

No one can ever admit when the Cubs are actually good, can they?

The Cubs are 14-16 on the road. You know how many teams in baseball are above .500 on the road? 4.

Oh, and here's a look at the Red Sox splits:

40-26 .606 26-6 14-20

I guess they suck, too.

I hate the Cubs and their stupid "Believe" fanbase as much as anyone, but come on - the excuses and nitpicking re: exactly how they have the best record in baseball around here is pathetic. The Cubs have won 10 games against teams currently .500 or better. The Sox have won 11. Whoopie.

They have generally beaten what has been put in front of them. Good job by them so far. I hope they are ready for the pounding they'll get in 10 days.

Boondock Saint
06-10-2008, 04:24 PM
No one can ever admit when the Cubs are actually good, can they?

The Cubs are 14-16 on the road. You know how many teams in baseball are above .500 on the road? 4.

Oh, and here's a look at the Red Sox splits:

40-26 .606 26-6 14-20

I guess they suck, too.

I hate the Cubs and their stupid "Believe" fanbase as much as anyone, but come on - the excuses and nitpicking re: exactly how they have the best record in baseball around here is pathetic. The Cubs have won 10 games against teams currently .500 or better. The Sox have won 11. Whoopie.

They have generally beaten what has been put in front of them. Good job by them so far. I hope they are ready for the pounding they'll get in 10 days.

I don't think it's a refusal to recognize good baseball when it's being played. I think it's a reaction to the shameless media ass-kissing that the Cubs get year in and year out, while the Sox just constantly get picked apart by anyone that even bothers to look their damned way.

Procol Harum
06-10-2008, 04:24 PM
Power rankings are a diversion from what really counts: the standings.
The only good thing they provide me is amusement, nothing more.

They provide me with nothing, nothing at all--the proof comes out in the figurative pudding that are the standings and the big mack daddy of desserts--the playoffs. Until then, stay thirsty my friends...
:bandance:

palehozenychicty
06-10-2008, 04:27 PM
I don't think it's a refusal to recognize good baseball when it's being played. I think it's a reaction to the shameless media ass-kissing that the Cubs get year in and year out, while the Sox just constantly get picked apart by anyone that even bothers to look their damned way.

Thank you.

oeo
06-10-2008, 04:27 PM
No one can ever admit when the Cubs are actually good, can they?

When was the last time they were good? That's what makes it so difficult to believe. They've made the postseason a few times recently, but those were never very good teams. This has to be the first time in my lifetime that they've had a good team, that could actually do something.

The Cubs are never good...they're usually mediocre at best. I'll hand it to you that they're playing good ball right now, and look like they have a great offense. I'm not so sure about that pitching staff holding up, though.

It's Time
06-10-2008, 04:39 PM
They have generally beaten what has been put in front of them. Good job by them so far. I hope they are ready for the pounding they'll get in 10 days.

Gotta hope for that. Another 1-5 showing will be hard to take this year, especially after they came in and swept at the Cell.

TDog
06-10-2008, 04:40 PM
I think they are as good an offense as there is in baseball. Other than CF, they get + performance from every position, have decent depth, and have some versatility.

Are they a "Superpower"? They aren't the '27 Yanks. They aren't the 2006 Red Sox. But this is the best Cubs offense I have seen in my life, and it is amongst the best offenses in MLB today.

I checked to make sure the 1969 Cubs predated your lifetime.

Of course, Randy Hundley dropped off significanly when the toll on catching caught up to him late in the season. While the same could be said to a lesser degree of the entire team, Ferguson Jenkins was not only a future Hall of Fame pitcher, but every bit the hitter that Carlos Zambrano is. Their entire infield and catcher made the All-Star team, although their best hitter, future Hall of Famer Billy Williams, did not. The 1969 Cubs were an offensive power that fizzled in mid-August and ended up finishing a distant second to a team that had never previously finished better than ninth.

For that matter, the 1977 Whtie Sox were a better offensive team than the current Cubs team is -- although as (I think it was) Bill Gleason put it, they ran the bases like something out of the Middle Ages, when there was no baseball and people just ran aimlessly through fields and forests and such.

At this point power ratings are just hype. Key injuries can always devestate a team, as it did to the 1973 White Sox, one of the most promising Sox teams that ever got off to a good start. Often with teams that look great in June injuries aren't even needed to destroy a season.

jabrch
06-10-2008, 04:56 PM
At this point power ratings are just hype.

I totally agree with that.

At this point, however, it is not insane to put the Cubs atop the list. You can easily argue that one of about 5 other teams could be there - and that can change week to week. But as you point out - Power Ratings mean nothing - they are one man/woman's highly subjective opinions.

TDog
06-10-2008, 05:08 PM
I totally agree with that.

At this point, however, it is not insane to put the Cubs atop the list. You can easily argue that one of about 5 other teams could be there - and that can change week to week. But as you point out - Power Ratings mean nothing - they are one man/woman's highly subjective opinions.

One reason it is not insane to put the Cubs at the top is that that the power ratings are hype and it has been a century since the Cubs finished a season by winning the World Series. What a great story to put the Cubs on top! The fact that the people looking for great stories put them there helps.

If the White Sox hadn't won three seasons ago, they might be second. What a great story it would be to have to long struggling Chicago teams to be the top two teams in the ratings. Or maybe not. The media was mobilized to to make this the year of the Cubs, and the Cubs haven't disappointed them, as the Tigers and Indians have in the American League.

I was in Alaska in 2005 working for a newspaper that had a baseball column from the Dallas Morning News come over the news group's wire every Friday. I have forgotten the writer's name. To his credit, for the entire season after the Sox began to distance themselves from the rest of the pack, minus a couple of the horrendous weeks we might recall, this writer had the White Sox on top in his power rankings simply because he (wrote) he believed they were the best team in baseball. I wonder what his ranking look like this week.

1989
06-10-2008, 05:51 PM
under the radar...just like 2005!!1!!!11!

asindc
06-10-2008, 07:58 PM
I don't understand the problem. The Cardinals are probably the only team that shouldn't be ranked higher than the Sox. Otherwise, it's pretty spot on, IMO.

I agree with this assessment. I don't think the Cards should be ranked ahead of the Sox, but everyone else seems fair based on the season thus far.

As far as the Cubs are concerned, you can make the argument that they are the best team in baseball at this point. No big injustice there. Actually, I think it is more questionable to rank the Cards ahead of the Sox than to rank the Cubs first. No big deal.

hi im skot
06-11-2008, 01:02 PM
under the radar...just like 2005!!1!!!11!

Teal or no teal, this is so ****ing annoying.

Mohoney
06-11-2008, 02:10 PM
The White Sox are third in runs scored and first in runs against in the AL and yet they are the fourth AL team.

I don't really have a problem with that. IIRC, we do have losing records against the Rays and Angels, so I really can't argue with them being ahead of us. As for the Red Sox, they are the defending champs, so I can't argue with them being ahead of us, either.

My main gripe is that the Cardinals are ahead of us. Other than that, an argument can definitely be made for each of the other 5 teams being better than us. I'm not saying I agree with it (despite dropping the last 3 games in Tampa, I still think we're better than the Rays), but I will say that the argument isn't completely baseless.

pdimas
06-11-2008, 02:24 PM
It says that it was posted 2 hours ago...

It still says that it was posted 2 hours ago......

It will occasionally say updated and give a date and time but the rankings were posted on 6/8/08

chunk
06-11-2008, 02:57 PM
What the problem with the rankings is how one thing is negative for one team, but positive for another. Take for instance, the offense waking up. The middle of the order has been dead most of the year, yet the Sox are still in first place. In this case, the Cubs are getting credit for a similar circumstance. Another is the weak schedule. The Sox and Cubs played similar schedules last week, in that they played one crappy team (Royals/Padres) and one decent team (Twins/Dodgers). However, the Sox fared better, but are getting knocked for it. Plus we have a number of hitters near .300, and our staff is better then just sub 4 ERA. It's just plain bad writing. The emergence of the Cubs is real, and writers are jumping on it early so they can say I told you so if they make it all the way.