PDA

View Full Version : Cubs will win a World Series within ten years


october23sp
10-18-2008, 01:01 AM
As much as it pains me to say, its true. You look at the Boston Red Sox who hadn't won in 86 years ( I don't use us as an example because we weren't supposed to compete in 05) but the Red Sox were very close to getting to the WS in 03 and were a higher market team at the time you knew it was coming. You can say what you want about "curses" but the Red Sox and Cubs were just bad inbetween there World Series titles. With the Cubs payroll the way it is they will for sure win within 10 years. It seems like a vague and stupid prediction that everyone knows but it has been 100 years.

Edit: Just to clarify I hate the Cubs and I'm not a troll I'm just starting conversation.

Nellie_Fox
10-18-2008, 01:08 AM
As much as it pains me to say, its true.No, it's an opinion. Your opinion may turn out to be correct, but it's not currently "true."

october23sp
10-18-2008, 01:09 AM
No, it's an opinion. Your opinion may turn out to be correct, but it's not currently "true."

Yeah I guess I was just stating and I hope I'm wrong

grv1974
10-18-2008, 01:16 AM
No, it's an opinion. Your opinion may turn out to be correct, but it's not currently "true."

And your statement about his opinion is just an opinion, as well.:wink:

Nellie_Fox
10-18-2008, 02:19 AM
And your statement about his opinion is just an opinion, as well.:wink:No, it's not. It's not my opinion that his opinion isn't true. His opinion is not true until it's true, and it's not yet true; it's just an opinion. Therefore, my observation is not just an opinion, unless you can show that his opinion is true, in which case my observation is incorrect.

TDog
10-18-2008, 02:40 AM
No, it's not. It's not my opinion that his opinion isn't true. His opinion is not true until it's true, and it's not yet true; it's just an opinion. Therefore, my observation is not just an opinion, unless you can show that his opinion is true, in which case my observation is incorrect.

Well put. It should also be noted that some people held this opinion (the Cubs will win a World Series in 10 years) when they just missed going to the World Series in 1984 when the Padres went to the World Series instead. Some people held this opinion in 1969, when the Padres were a first year expansion team.

Along with being an opinion, it may be a fear. It certainly is nothing more than a guess.

Some people guessed when the Cleveland Indians began their run of contending teams more than 10 years ago that they would win a World Series within a decade. They were wrong, although the Indians do have a World Series trip to show for all their division titles.

KRS1
10-18-2008, 02:52 AM
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a35/hadnad/NewThreadCatButton2.gif

RadioheadRocks
10-18-2008, 02:52 AM
:cleo

"Hey now, don't you be treadin' on MY turf, mon!!!"

grv1974
10-18-2008, 03:30 AM
No, it's not. It's not my opinion that his opinion isn't true. His opinion is not true until it's true, and it's not yet true; it's just an opinion. Therefore, my observation is not just an opinion, unless you can show that his opinion is true, in which case my observation is incorrect.

.....

LITTLE NELL
10-18-2008, 05:27 AM
The White Sox will win another WS before the Cubs break their horrible curse.

DumpJerry
10-18-2008, 06:51 AM
As much as it pains me to say, its true. You look at the Boston Red Sox who hadn't won in 86 years ( I don't use us as an example because we weren't supposed to compete in 05) but the Red Sox were very close to getting to the WS in 03 and were a higher market team at the time you knew it was coming. You can say what you want about "curses" but the Red Sox and Cubs were just bad inbetween there World Series titles. With the Cubs payroll the way it is they will for sure win within 10 years. It seems like a vague and stupid prediction that everyone knows but it has been 100 years.

Edit: Just to clarify I hate the Cubs and I'm not a troll I'm just starting conversation.
I'm not sure I follow your logic. Are you saying it is the payroll or personnel that will carry the Cubs to a WS title by 2018? If it is payroll, then the Yankees would win the WS every year and the Rays would be at their fishing holes right now.

You can't say it is personnel because five years from now odds are that the roster will have maybe, at most, ten guys from the 2008 roster.

Cub fans were right, this was their year. 2008 was probably their best shot at the World Series. I say this because they had a very solid roster in a league full of weak teams. The problem was that they were only 14 games over .500 against teams who finished over.500 (including interleague). As a result of their inability to put away the good teams, they blew it. This is why I have more anger, rage and disappointment from Cub fans this year than any other year before, including 2003.

Bottom line: it is difficult to predict what a team will do from one year to the next (2006-2007 White Sox; 2007-2008 Rays), much less what a team will do over a ten year period.

DrCrawdad
10-18-2008, 08:10 AM
No, it's not. It's not my opinion that his opinion isn't true. His opinion is not true until it's true, and it's not yet true; it's just an opinion. Therefore, my observation is not just an opinion, unless you can show that his opinion is true, in which case my observation is incorrect.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/85/Argument_Clinic.png/300px-Argument_Clinic.png (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k)
"No I didn't. Yes you did..."

Give the photo a click...

jamokes
10-18-2008, 08:23 AM
Maybe the Red Sox had clutch players, both pitching and hitting......as long as the cub have Ramirez at third, IMO they will not win big in October.

But hey cub fans, just keep spending that money!:bandance:

DrCrawdad
10-18-2008, 09:06 AM
As much as it pains me to say, its true. You look at the Boston Red Sox who hadn't won in 86 years ( I don't use us as an example because we weren't supposed to compete in 05) but the Red Sox were very close to getting to the WS in 03 and were a higher market team at the time you knew it was coming. You can say what you want about "curses" but the Red Sox and Cubs were just bad inbetween there World Series titles. With the Cubs payroll the way it is they will for sure win within 10 years. It seems like a vague and stupid prediction that everyone knows but it has been 100 years.

Edit: Just to clarify I hate the Cubs and I'm not a troll I'm just starting conversation.

You're glossing over the very reason the Cubbies have gone to the post-season the last two years. They have the advantage of playing in a horrible division. Last year the Cubbies were in reality not a very good team. In spite of being in the worst division in the weakest league, all they could do was 85 wins. They lost in the NLDS not because of goats, curses or bad luck but because they weren't good.

The '08 Cubbies were bettter, much better in fact. But for as much as Cubbie fans liked to say "career year" about Sox players on the '05 team, that very thing could be said about the '08 Cubbies.

Ryan Dempster? Career year.
Geovanny Soto? Career year.
Mark Derosa? Career year.
Ryan Theriot? Career year.
Rich Harden? Career year. (perhaps)

So for the Cubbies to win at least next year, are all of these guys going to equal or surpass their "career years"? Maybe, but doubtful.

I've heard this kind of talk about the Cubbies for most of my life, and especially in the last 20 years or so. In the '90's I remember hearing about how they had the best farm system in MLB and how they had position players ready to go who'd be the foundation of Cubbie winners for years. Who were these? Corey Patterson. Bobby Hill. Hee Sop Choi. Dave Kelton. Ben Christensen. Etc.

The reason the Cubbies flopped this season? They weren't as good as advertised.

IF they win in the next ten years, big deal. Tell me about it once they do it. I'm tired of hearing about how, "THIS IS OUR YEAR" and "IT'S GONNA HAPPEN." Get back to me when it does happen.

Steelrod
10-18-2008, 09:06 AM
Maybe Tampa!

DumpJerry
10-18-2008, 09:33 AM
Ryan Dempster? Career year.
Geovanny Soto? Career year.
Mark Derosa? Career year.
Ryan Theriot? Career year.
Rich Harden? Career year. (perhaps)
Definitely not true of Soto and Harden. Soto is the real deal. Harden is a very good AL pitcher who is now in the NL. The only thing that will prevent Harden from Cy Young consideration next year is his health.

Your other assertions sound like Cub fans talking about the White Sox after '05.

Railsplitter
10-18-2008, 09:34 AM
IF they win in the next ten years, big deal. Tell me about it once they do it. I'm tired of hearing about how, "THIS IS OUR YEAR" and "IT'S GONNA HAPPEN." Get back to me when it does happen.

Schlub fans say "This is our year" every year. Almost like seven day weather forcasts that always have rain (or snow) on the seventh day.

"It's gonna happen" can be interpreted many. If your idea of "it" was another post-season humiliation on the North Side, it did happen.

LongLiveFisk
10-18-2008, 11:32 AM
There's no way of predicting that. Players come and go, and decisions of upper management play into everything. And as some here have reported, the Cubs are not in as good of financial shape as many people seem to think.

Just my two cents.

Chicken Dinner
10-18-2008, 11:39 AM
As much as it pains me to say, its true. You look at the Boston Red Sox who hadn't won in 86 years ( I don't use us as an example because we weren't supposed to compete in 05) but the Red Sox were very close to getting to the WS in 03 and were a higher market team at the time you knew it was coming. You can say what you want about "curses" but the Red Sox and Cubs were just bad inbetween there World Series titles. With the Cubs payroll the way it is they will for sure win within 10 years. It seems like a vague and stupid prediction that everyone knows but it has been 100 years.

Edit: Just to clarify I hate the Cubs and I'm not a troll I'm just starting conversation.
:dunce:

DrCrawdad
10-18-2008, 11:39 AM
Definitely not true of Soto and Harden. Soto is the real deal. Harden is a very good AL pitcher who is now in the NL. The only thing that will prevent Harden from Cy Young consideration next year is his health.

Your other assertions sound like Cub fans talking about the White Sox after '05.

That was my point.

But IIRC Soto put up numbers in the majors that are unlike what he put up in the minors. Steve Stone even suggested that perhaps it was thru a supplement program that Soto exploded in MLB.

This is Soto's first year in MLB. So it is a career year at least until he surpasses it.

Harden, yes he's a fine pitcher when he's healthy. '08 was the second highest number of IP for him in his 6 year career. Plus this was the best ERA of his career, hence a career year.

TheOldRoman
10-18-2008, 11:50 AM
Definitely not true of Soto and Harden. Soto is the real deal. Harden is a very good AL pitcher who is now in the NL. The only thing that will prevent Harden from Cy Young consideration next year is his health.

Your other assertions sound like Cub fans talking about the White Sox after '05.That, and the fact that he can't get out of the 6th inning. You aren't going to get many wins pitching 5 or 6 innings. He could have great numbers, but even if he is healthy (which is a huge leap), he won't be in the running for a Cy Young with 13 wins.

And, no, his other assertions are accurate. Dempster turned into a pumpkin come playoff time. He has never been close to great, and he comes out of nowhere to have one of the best seasons in MLB, at the age of 31? Good for him, because someone will give him an insane contract that they will rue for the next 3-4 years. And yes, I would say that DeRosa almost doubling his previous high in homers, and setting career highs in RBI, OBP, runs, and slugging %, all at the age of 33, is kinda a flash in the pan.

To a large extent, any team that catches fire and wins a world series will have had a good amount of luck. They aren't there yet, but does anyone see the Rays' pitching outide of Kazmir being as good next year? That's how it goes. When you get the chance, you have to win it all. The Sox couldn't make the playoffs in 06 with more talent than the previous year. Injuries and poor play wrecked the Bears try to return to the Superbowl last year. You never know who might step up next year, but you have to take advatance of these great individual years when you get a chance.

DumpJerry
10-18-2008, 11:52 AM
That, and the fact that he can't get out of the 6th inning. You aren't going to get many wins pitching 5 or 6 innings. He could have great numbers, but even if he is healthy (which is a huge leap), he won't be in the running for a Cy Young with 13 wins.
They don't let him get more than 6 innings because of his health. Hence the endless cycle of why he will be nothing more than one of the best inning eaters in the NL, but without a solid bullpen, won't have many wins to show for it.

Being a strikeout machine does not help. Keeps that pitch count high.

TDog
10-18-2008, 11:56 AM
I recall that after the 1970 season, when the Cubs with their future Hall of Fame manager and their future Hall of Fame players (people tended to put Ron Santo in that group, so they were overstating things), some people believed a World Series was around the corner. Sportswriter Jerome Holtzman had an answer for those people. He wrote the White Sox (coming off a 106-loss season) would get to the World Series before before the Cubs. Jack Drees, the White Sox television play-by-play man before Harry Caray, asked him about his claim. Holtzman said it was just a guess. Holtzman was right, of course. The White Sox would get to the World Series first and win it, long after Jack Drees was dead. In fact, the Cubs would never get to the World Series in Jerome Holtzman's lifetime. But it was just a guess.

TheOldRoman
10-18-2008, 12:11 PM
They don't let him get more than 6 innings because of his health. Hence the endless cycle of why he will be nothing more than one of the best inning eaters in the NL, but without a solid bullpen, won't have many wins to show for it.

Being a strikeout machine does not help. Keeps that pitch count high.I can't find a stat on pitches per start, but very few times has he been taken out early because they wanted to save his arm. They might take him out after 5 when he already has 95 pitches, but that is it. He always throws way too many pitches. Him going 6 tops is on his own account, not the team trying to save him. And besides, it won't help that they might have to pull him for a pinch hitter in the 6th. He didn't have that aspect in Oakland. I would be surprised if he wins 12 next year.

Eddo144
10-18-2008, 12:28 PM
They don't let him get more than 6 innings because of his health. Hence the endless cycle of why he will be nothing more than one of the best inning eaters in the NL, but without a solid bullpen, won't have many wins to show for it.

Being a strikeout machine does not help. Keeps that pitch count high.
:scratch: If he's only going 6 innings, max, how is he an innings eater?

In fact, he's the exact opposite: one of the best pitchers, but he doesn't give you enough innings to be as valuable as Zambrano, Sabathia, or Buehrle.

oeo
10-18-2008, 12:55 PM
Actually, with all the bad contracts on that team (and they'll add a couple more this offseason with Dempster and Wood), I think they're going to be a complete mess in a couple of years. That's what trying to buy a championship does to you. You give yourself a very small window, and if you don't win, good luck in the future.

DumpJerry
10-18-2008, 01:06 PM
Actually, with all the bad contracts on that team (and they'll add a couple more this offseason with Dempster and Wood), I think they're going to be a complete mess in a couple of years. That's what trying to buy a championship does to you. You give yourself a very small window, and if you don't win, good luck in the future.
You bring up a good point. How you negotiate player contracts when your team is up for sale? Tribo. will want small contracts to keep the sale price attractive, but still want good players. The potential buyers may wants certain players, but have no say in the matter until they are the owners.

whitesox901
10-18-2008, 01:31 PM
The White Sox will win another WS before the Cubs break their horrible curse.

totally :cool:

areilly
10-18-2008, 01:42 PM
Some people guessed when the Cleveland Indians began their run of contending teams more than 10 years ago that they would win a World Series within a decade. They were wrong, although the Indians do have a World Series trip to show for all their division titles.

Two, actually, and they lost them both (1995 vs. Braves, 1997 vs. Marlins). I would not mind the Cubs having a similar run of soul-crushing near-misses.

turners56
10-18-2008, 01:44 PM
The Cubs have the foundation to win for a couple of more years. The core of Soto, Lee, Soriano, and Ramirez is a good one, but not great. None of those guys really stepped up in the playoffs with the exception of Lee for game 3. However, I don't see Lee being on the Cubs much longer. Ramirez is in his 30s. Soriano can't stay healthy for a whole year and Soto's only a catcher. Add on the fact that Derosa, Theriot, and Dempster had career years and it really dawns on you that the Cubs won't be as good as they were this year next season. I think the window for this Cubs team is 2-3 years. If they don't win it by then, they'll have to restock. Remember, the lifespan of the 2003 Cubs was only 2 years. As they had two good seasons and then dipped under the average mark in 2005. This core has already been at it for two years. It will only take a couple of injuries to screw them over.

ChiSoxFan81
10-18-2008, 07:42 PM
This thread is a black hole that opened in the Stupid galaxy.

munchman33
10-18-2008, 08:02 PM
Ryan Dempster? Career year.
Geovanny Soto? Career year.
Mark Derosa? Career year.
Ryan Theriot? Career year.
Rich Harden? Career year. (perhaps)


While I don't envision the Flubs winning a WS anytime soon, this is a bit much.

Dempster had his first full season as a starter since he was 25 and his first season as a starter not battling injuries since he was 23. And back then he threw 226 innings and had a 3.66 era, so his production isn't that unreasonable. A lot of people on here think he's going to dropoff. I don't see it. His stuff is too good. If he bombs, it'll be because of injuries, not because he all of a sudden sucks. It's moot though, because he won't be a flub much longer anyway.

Harden did what he always does...throws less than 150 innings, but looks stellar doing so. It wasn't a career year for him. He threw 190 innings in '04.

Soto? Are you kidding me? The kid had an OPS of 1.076 in AAA in 2007. He was ready to bust out.

Theriot hit over .300 in AA and in AAA with no power. That he'd hit .300 with no power in the majors shouldn't be a stretch. He's doing exactly what was expected of him.

DeRosa certainly had a career year. But it wasn't THAT much better than what he normally does. He hit 10 more homers than normal, but the rest of his stats were all around his career norms.

soxrepublican
10-18-2008, 08:22 PM
Good luck on this, buddy. I see the pirates winning one before these clowns.

DrCrawdad
10-18-2008, 08:39 PM
While I don't envision the Flubs winning a WS anytime soon, this is a bit much.

Dempster had his first full season as a starter since he was 25 and his first season as a starter not battling injuries since he was 23. And back then he threw 226 innings and had a 3.66 era, so his production isn't that unreasonable. A lot of people on here think he's going to dropoff. I don't see it. His stuff is too good. If he bombs, it'll be because of injuries, not because he all of a sudden sucks. It's moot though, because he won't be a flub much longer anyway.



2000 was Dumpster's best year UNTIL 2008. After 2000 though, in his next three seasons as a starter, he sucked. The Cubbies put him in the BP because he sucked as a starter.

YR..ERA..W/L.IP...WHIP
'00 3.66 14/10 226 1.356
'08 2.96 17/06 207 1.210

2008 was a career year for Dumpster. No doubt about it. If you don't like that term, you'd have to agree though that '08 was his best year as a starter, wouldn't you?

munchman33
10-18-2008, 10:01 PM
2000 was Dumpster's best year UNTIL 2008. After 2000 though, in his next three seasons as a starter, he sucked. The Cubbies put him in the BP because he sucked as a starter.

YR..ERA..W/L.IP...WHIP
'00 3.66 14/10 226 1.356
'08 2.96 17/06 207 1.210

2008 was a career year for Dumpster. No doubt about it. If you don't like that term, you'd have to agree though that '08 was his best year as a starter, wouldn't you?

It was his best year as a starter, yes. But you're remembering wrong about why he was put in the pen. He had trouble holding up as a starter early in his career. He suffered from a lot of prolonged periods of injury related ineffectiveness that he tried to pitch through. The last few years, he held up better and the flubs moved him back into a starting role. His arm's just stronger now.

DrCrawdad
10-18-2008, 10:44 PM
It was his best year as a starter, yes. But you're remembering wrong about why he was put in the pen. He had trouble holding up as a starter early in his career. He suffered from a lot of prolonged periods of injury related ineffectiveness that he tried to pitch through. The last few years, he held up better and the flubs moved him back into a starting role. His arm's just stronger now.

Emphasis on ineffectiveness.

aryzner
10-18-2008, 11:27 PM
They'll win in 2015 because Back to the Future Part II says so.

october23sp
10-18-2008, 11:29 PM
They'll win in 2015 because Back to the Future Part II says so.

haha

RadioheadRocks
10-18-2008, 11:35 PM
They'll win in 2015 because Back to the Future Part II says so.


:rolling:

johnnyg83
10-18-2008, 11:46 PM
Good luck on this, buddy. I see the pirates winning one before these clowns.

I hate the Cubs as much as the next guy, but unless there's a 180 change of philosophy the Pirates won't win anytime soon. Part of it is they draft so poorly, and they make such awful signings and trade away value.

Tampa was the opposite ... analysts kept saying "not this year, but soon." And soon came quicker than expected. I've never heard anyone even put the Pirates on the over .500 prediction much less the postseason since Bonds left.

They are the worst organization in baseball over the last 15 years.

DSpivack
10-18-2008, 11:56 PM
I hate the Cubs as much as the next guy, but unless there's a 180 change of philosophy the Pirates won't win anytime soon. Part of it is they draft so poorly, and they make such awful signings and trade away value.

Tampa was the opposite ... analysts kept saying "not this year, but soon." And soon came quicker than expected. I've never heard anyone even put the Pirates on the over .500 prediction much less the postseason since Bonds left.

They are the worst organization in baseball over the last 15 years.

This is true, but what amazes me is that they are even worse than the Royals!

munchman33
10-19-2008, 01:32 AM
Emphasis on ineffectiveness.

Well, if that's the way you want to look at it, he hasn't suffered from ineffictiveness in quite a while.

DrCrawdad
10-19-2008, 07:37 AM
Well, if that's the way you want to look at it, he hasn't suffered from ineffectiveness in quite a while.

Are you related to Dempster or his agent? You are aware that he was the Cubbies closer for a couple years (2007, 2006) those two years where he had 4.73 & 4.80 ERA? IIRC the Cubbies were done with him as a closer and gave him a go as a starter.

Dempster lost his job as a starter because he sucked at it and lost his job as a closer. He's now had a very good season as starter. If you want to look at it someother way, fine. He may have another terrific year as a starter. Dempster is a free agent, do you think the Sox should sign him? I don't.

Dempster had a great year in his contract year. Good for him. He'll no doubt be overcompensated for that now and the team that signs him soon regret that signing.

munchman33
10-19-2008, 10:33 AM
Are you related to Dempster or his agent? You are aware that he was the Cubbies closer for a couple years (2007, 2006) those two years where he had 4.73 & 4.80 ERA? IIRC the Cubbies were done with him as a closer and gave him a go as a starter.

Dempster lost his job as a starter because he sucked at it and lost his job as a closer. He's now had a very good season as starter. If you want to look at it someother way, fine. He may have another terrific year as a starter. Dempster is a free agent, do you think the Sox should sign him? I don't.

Dempster had a great year in his contract year. Good for him. He'll no doubt be overcompensated for that now and the team that signs him soon regret that signing.

I wouldn't sign him, no. But if it were down to having him in the rotation for 4 years and 15 per or two more years of Vazquez, that's a no brainer to sign him up.

I keep hoping for Derek Lowe.

doublem23
10-19-2008, 01:08 PM
Like most "good" pitchers in the National League, Dempster would be eaten alive over here in the A.L.

TheOldRoman
10-19-2008, 01:27 PM
But if it were down to having him in the rotation for 4 years and 15 per or two more years of Vazquez, that's a no brainer to sign him up.
:rolling:
Thank you. You have been in vintage form these last few weeks.

turners56
10-19-2008, 03:30 PM
They'll win in 2015 because Back to the Future Part II says so.

Yeah, they'll win against Miami. Miami who? Are the Marlins going to call themselves the Miami Marlins and move to the AL then?

october23sp
10-19-2008, 04:00 PM
Yeah, they'll win against Miami. Miami who? Are the Marlins going to call themselves the Miami Marlins and move to the AL then?

Obviously. Theres an article on snopes about it.

TDog
10-19-2008, 04:02 PM
Yeah, they'll win against Miami. Miami who? Are the Marlins going to call themselves the Miami Marlins and move to the AL then?

Yeah, it was a joke. The joke was that the Cubs were playing a team that didn't exist in 1989 and the Cubs were the Cinderella underdogs, as if a team from Florida was created in the 1990s and had won multiple World Series titles while the Cubs were nearly 1.2 centuries from winning a World Series.

Funny stuff.

Of course, I didn't think it was funny in the beginning of the 1970s when my eighth grade science teacher joked that the White Sox wouldn't get to the World Series until 1999. The truth proved even less funny.

1908<2005
10-19-2008, 05:25 PM
Yeah, they'll win against Miami. Miami who? Are the Marlins going to call themselves the Miami Marlins and move to the AL then?

Actually the Marlins are changing their name to the Miami Marlins in a few years (Wikipedia) will they move to the AL? nah.

munchman33
10-19-2008, 08:39 PM
:rolling:
Thank you. You have been in vintage form these last few weeks.

Vasquez's 2007 on a terrible team vs. Dempster's 2008 on a division champ. Discuss.

LongLiveFisk
10-19-2008, 08:43 PM
Actually the Marlins are changing their name to the Miami Marlins in a few years (Wikipedia) will they move to the AL? nah.

I always thought that should have been their name from Day 1.

And rather than move to the AL, maybe they should just disappear altogether. :devil:

turners56
10-19-2008, 08:43 PM
Actually the Marlins are changing their name to the Miami Marlins in a few years (Wikipedia) will they move to the AL? nah.

So that can't be true unless the Cubs move to the AL. Which is virtually impossible unless the Sox either move to another city or we move into the NL. So yeah, it's impossible. Back to the Future lied!

Nellie_Fox
10-20-2008, 01:02 AM
So that can't be true unless the Cubs move to the AL. Which is virtually impossible unless the Sox either move to another city or we move into the NL. So yeah, it's impossible. Back to the Future lied!Don't put it past Buddy to do a complete realignment to create more rivalries, with the Sox, Cubs, and Brewers in the same division with maybe the Cards and Twins or Tigers.

DSpivack
10-20-2008, 01:16 AM
Don't put it past Buddy to do a complete realignment to create more rivalries, with the Sox, Cubs, and Brewers in the same division with maybe the Cards and Twins or Tigers.

Ugh. I would hate that.

BadBobbyJenks
10-20-2008, 01:44 AM
Ryan Dempster? Career year.
Geovanny Soto? Career year.
Mark Derosa? Career year.
Ryan Theriot? Career year.
Rich Harden? Career year. (perhaps)



So you are saying a rookie had a career year?
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b60/timmyab1/Guiness-Brilliant.jpg

TDog
10-20-2008, 04:58 AM
So you are saying a rookie had a career year? ...

I would never say anyone had a career year until they are at or near retirement. After a player's career, you can see where he had his career year. Saying a team this year had a great year because several players had "career years" always sound dismissive to me. You have no idea if a player will have a better year next year.

Of course, many players have had career years as rookies. In 1989, two Cubs rookies, Dwight Smith and NL Rookie of the Year Jerome Walton, had career years in helping the Cubs get to the NLDS. In 1983, Ron Kittle had a career year as a rookie (if you exclude his 1982 season at Edomonton where he hit 50 home runs in the shorter PCL schedule. Mark Fydrich had a career year as a rookie. Fred Lynn won only one MVP, and it was the same year he was the AL Rookie of the Year. A lot of players have career years as rookies, whether it is because they sustain injuries or the league catches up with them.

What I think was most impressive about the White Sox winning their division this year is that they did it wthout any offensive players (except perhaps Quentin, Ramirez and, although not as significantly, Wise) having what could someday be considered a career year. Whether their seasons, or the seasons of Danks and Floyd were breakthough years or career years only time will tell.

If you want to make an argument about a team benefiting from a number of players having "career years," come back in 10 years when you know what you're talking about.

DrCrawdad
10-20-2008, 07:07 AM
So you are saying a rookie had a career year?
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b60/timmyab1/Guiness-Brilliant.jpg

I was illustrating how Cubbie fan logic which they applied to the '05 Sox could be applied to the '08 Cubbies. If you don't like the term career year, bear in mind those types of dismissive comments were made about the Sox.

If you don't like the term career year, you could substitute best season in his short career. I believe too that I commented further in this discussion about Soto.

veeter
10-20-2008, 04:01 PM
The way I see it, is that the cubs got tremendous mileage out of Edmonds and Reed Jonhson. Between their clutch homeruns and circus, diving catches, THEY were their MVPs. How does old man Edmonds not get hurt? Why does Reed Johnson suddenly become almost great? The check writer Hendry now covets a left handed bat, because Fukodome sucks. If he gets one, he'll be hard pressed to equal what Edmonds did.