PDA

View Full Version : Who had a better REGULAR SEASON rotation? 05 sox or 08 sox?


ElmhurstMarcus
08-13-2008, 10:39 PM
I don't post here much, I read just about every day though, and was interested in what you guys think about this. I want to know who you guys think had the better starting staff, the 05 team or 08 team. Do not include the playoffs because it is nearly impossible to top what the 05 staff did in the post season. And if you think the 05 staff was better, does this staff have the potential to be better then the 05 staff in the future?

Gavin
08-13-2008, 10:41 PM
2005 without question

BigP50
08-13-2008, 10:42 PM
I would have to wait and see how the season finishes up.

But probably '05

chisoxmike
08-13-2008, 10:43 PM
And if you think the 05 staff was better, does this staff have the potential to be better then the 05 staff in the future?

No.

ElmhurstMarcus
08-13-2008, 10:44 PM
In 05 the team ERA was 3.61. Currently the 08 squad is at 3.97. In 05 the bullpen was considerably better. I couldnt find the starters ERA but just looking at them induvidually, they have to be almost equal or even a slight edge to the 08 staff.

Vienna
08-13-2008, 10:45 PM
Thinking about where the '05 team was at this point in the season (to your point, not thinking about the awesome awesomeness that was their playoff pitching). I think it goes to them.

Daver
08-13-2008, 10:48 PM
Compare innings pitched by the starters in 2005 compared to this year, your answer is there.

BigP50
08-13-2008, 10:48 PM
2005 World Champion Staff

as of now it has to be them

ElmhurstMarcus
08-13-2008, 10:54 PM
2005 World Champion Staff

as of now it has to be them
The question was about the regular season. Obviously this staff cannot compare to what they did in the post season.

UofCSoxFan
08-13-2008, 11:10 PM
The 2005 staff was 1-5 one of the better staffs in the steroid era IMO....I don't think the 2008 staff compares. That being said the 2008 staff is pretty solid and our offense is a lot better 1-9 so our staff doesn't need to be as good.

To compare:
Burls 2005 was better than 2008 Burls
Jose 2005 was better than 2008 Jose and his injury replacement
Vazquez 2008 is better than El Duque
Danks is comprable to what Garcia gave us
I give a slight edge over Garland.

I don't think the difference is as pronounced as some may believe, but the 05 was much more consistent and got even better in the postseason. We'll see how his staff measures up.

BigP50
08-13-2008, 11:12 PM
The question was about the regular season. Obviously this staff cannot compare to what they did in the post season.


O, my bad well I still have to say No

doublem23
08-13-2008, 11:22 PM
2005 Starter Stats:

75-44, 3.75 ERA, 1074 IP (72.8% of team total), 1045 H, 284 BB, 690 K, .255 BAA, 1.24 WHIP, 2.43 K/BB, 5.78 K/9 IP

2008 Starter Stats:

46-39, 4.12 ERA, 734.1 IP (69.1% of team total), 744 H, 219 BB, 549 K, .262 BAA, 1.31 WHIP, 2.51 K/BB, 6.73 K/9 IP

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggregate?sort=&split=0&group=7&season=2008&seasonType=2&statType=pitching&type=reg

ElmhurstMarcus
08-13-2008, 11:24 PM
2005 Starter Stats:

75-44, 3.75 ERA, 1074 IP (72.8% of team total), 1045 H, 284 BB, 690 K, .255 BAA, 1.24 WHIP, 2.43 K/BB, 5.78 K/9 IP

2008 Starter Stats:

46-39, 4.12 ERA, 734.1 IP (69.1% of team total), 744 H, 219 BB, 549 K, .262 BAA, 1.31 WHIP, 2.51 K/BB, 6.73 K/9 IP
oops maybe I was a bit off on my ERA guess

doublem23
08-13-2008, 11:24 PM
Compare innings pitched by the starters in 2005 compared to this year, your answer is there.

It's actually not that far off, this starting staff is still on pace to throw about 1,000 innings.

Also, innings pitched, by itself, isn't a great measurement of success; I'm not saying the '08 Staff is better, but they have some better peripherals, most notably strikeout rates... If anyone can find the BABip for the '05 Starters and '08 Starters, that would also be helpful in this debate.

Daver
08-13-2008, 11:29 PM
It's actually not that far off, this starting staff is still on pace to throw about 1,000 innings.

Also, innings pitched, by itself, isn't a great measurement of success; I'm not saying the '08 Staff is better, but they have some better peripherals, most notably strikeout rates... If anyone can find the BABip for the '05 Starters and '08 Starters, that would also be helpful in this debate.

With how many CG's?

doublem23
08-13-2008, 11:30 PM
With how many CG's?

9 in '05, 4 and counting in '08 (statistically meaning we should finish the year with 5).

Cuck the Fubs
08-13-2008, 11:32 PM
2005 in a landslide!

Konerko05
08-13-2008, 11:36 PM
Definitely 2005. That staff had guts.

BigP50
08-13-2008, 11:37 PM
and only 6 different pitchers started a game

cali2005.
08-13-2008, 11:38 PM
i'd definitely have to go with the '05 pitching staff. I just felt alot more comfortable with them than this staff.

BigP50
08-13-2008, 11:43 PM
yea when they pitched I always thought we would win


when the guys no pitch, I get nervous

LoveYourSuit
08-14-2008, 12:12 AM
'05 rotation is better than this one, and I don't even put the '05 rotation under "great" status. That rotation got hot at the right time when it counted.

Now this '08 team IMO is deeper and better than the '05 team. Now will the hunger be there like it was in '05? Rosters on paper don't win championships as we already know.

BigP50
08-14-2008, 12:14 AM
what I like about this year is we have other options who can get the job done

Rdy2PlayBall
08-14-2008, 12:29 AM
It's cool how we were complaining about horrible starting and bullpen pitching for about 2 weeks and how we get these 2 (or 3 w/e) great starts and were compairing this seasons pitching to 05'. :rolleyes: But duh, 08' just came out of a pitching slump (hopfully), and I think if that slump didn't happen, 05' and 08' wouldn't be that much different. :P I'm going to have to go with 05' so far because they got enough wins to get into the postseason, I can't say that yet for 08'. *hopes it will* :tongue:

BigP50
08-14-2008, 12:32 AM
Brandon McCarthy in that '05 rotation makes it a whole lot less appealing :D::D::D::D:, even those few games he was in were painful:scratch: