PDA

View Full Version : 1984 season summary


theoakwoody
06-30-2009, 09:35 PM
Would someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction so I can read up on the '84 season. I tried googling something but I didn't really having any luck with any kind of synopsis or breakdown, just stats. I was talking to my dad the other day about it and he didn't really remember why the sox had such a huge dropoff after the great season they had in '83. Obviously they won a lot of close games in '83 which has a lot to do with luck but it has to be a lot more than that. Just looking at their stats doesn't paint a clear picture as to why they had a bad season either and Seaver actually pitched okay his first season with the sox. Was it injuries?

Brian26
06-30-2009, 09:48 PM
In this case, the stats should tell you everything you need to know. As good as the '83 team was, 1984 quickly revealed that a lot of guys had achieved career years in '83 or had already peaked in their careers.

Greg Luzinski:
1984: 13 HR, 58 RBI, .238 avg
1983: 32 HR, 95 RBI, .255 avg

Julio Cruz: (coming off a HUGE payday as a FA)
1984: .222 avg, 14 SB
1983: .252 avg, 57 SB

Pudge Fisk:
1984: .231 avg, 21 HR, 43 RBI
1983: .289 avg, 26 HR, 86 RBI

Rudy Law:
1984: .251 avg, 29 SB
1983: .283 avg, 77 SB

On the pitching side, Hoyt, Bannister and Burns all had near 5.00 ERAs, while the bullpen, lead by Ron Reed, was brutal.

LongLiveFisk
06-30-2009, 09:51 PM
One word:

Disappointing. :anon:

Lip Man 1
06-30-2009, 10:25 PM
The Sox were in first place at the All Star Break and had won seven straight at the time... in the second half they fell apart. I've had some guys who were on that club tell me some players just flat out quit on the season.

The trade of Jerry Koosman was cited by many including Reinsdorf as one of the major reasons for the dismal showing in 1984.

Lip

SOXfnNlansing
06-30-2009, 10:26 PM
The Tigers had Morris and we had a bunch of inflated egos and injuries.

bridgeportcopper
06-30-2009, 10:41 PM
The Tigers had Morris and we had a bunch of inflated egos and injuries.

Yeah, but the Tigers were not in our division back then......

theoakwoody
06-30-2009, 10:47 PM
The Tigers had Morris and we had a bunch of inflated egos and injuries.


Yeah but we weren't in the Tigers division then and the Royals won the West with a record of 84-78. They would have finished 6th in the East.


http://shrpsports.com/mlb/stand/1984finaldiv.htm

What's weird looking at the standings is that there were 14 teams in the AL and only 12 in the NL.

chisox77
06-30-2009, 11:45 PM
In this case, the stats should tell you everything you need to know. As good as the '83 team was, 1984 quickly revealed that a lot of guys had achieved career years in '83 or had already peaked in their careers.

Greg Luzinski:
1984: 13 HR, 58 RBI, .238 avg
1983: 32 HR, 95 RBI, .255 avg

Julio Cruz: (coming off a HUGE payday as a FA)
1984: .222 avg, 14 SB
1983: .252 avg, 57 SB

Pudge Fisk:
1984: .231 avg, 21 HR, 43 RBI
1983: .289 avg, 26 HR, 86 RBI

Rudy Law:
1984: .251 avg, 29 SB
1983: .283 avg, 77 SB

On the pitching side, Hoyt, Bannister and Burns all had near 5.00 ERAs, while the bullpen, lead by Ron Reed, was brutal.


Excellent summary!

Unfortunately, I remember it very well, not to mention many blown saves (Juan Agosto?). Tom Seaver led the staff in wins with 15. He was supposed to be the "cherry" on top of an invincible rotation, and wound up being the ace.

Chez
07-01-2009, 08:53 AM
One of the more disappointing seasons I can recall. I kept waiting for the team to turn it around in the second half (like the '83 team did), but they never seemed to gel. The offense was so erratic that we went out and acquired the great Roy Smally, Jr. to ignite us (he didn't). But it came down to pitching -- as it always does. The same guys who were lights out in the second half of '83 (Hoyt, Dotson and Bannister) were pretty mediocre in '84. Anyone else remember the Sports Illustrated story in the baseball preview issue touting the '84 staff as potentially the greatest of all time?

After the '83 season, I thought we were at the start of a sustained period of greatness (just like I did after the '93 season). Boy, was ever wrong!

jackbrohamer
07-01-2009, 11:21 AM
It was an awful season, adding Seaver seemed huge but they were awful the second half. What made it that much worse was the other team in town finished first, and everywhere I went that summer all I could hear was Harry Caray yelling.

surfdudes
07-01-2009, 12:03 PM
It seems that the Sox go flat the year after having a successful season. I'm thinking 84 and 06. I understand injuries, F.A.s, etc... play into all this,
but historically have the Sox had any decent back to back years?
Not being negative, just asking.
BTW, my new neighbor is a Sox fan originally from South Haven, MI.
God takes care of me.

Chez
07-01-2009, 12:07 PM
It seems that the Sox go flat the year after having a successful season. I'm thinking 84 and 06. I understand injuries, F.A.s, etc... play into all this,
but historically have the Sox had any decent back to back years?
Not being negative, just asking.
BTW, my new neighbor is a Sox fan originally from South Haven, MI.
God takes care of me.

They won 90+ games in 2006! They also had a strong season going in 1994 until the strike hit.

VeeckAsInWreck
07-01-2009, 12:07 PM
It seems that the Sox go flat the year after having a successful season. I'm thinking 84 and 06. I understand injuries, F.A.s, etc... play into all this,
but historically have the Sox had any decent back to back years?
Not being negative, just asking.
BTW, my new neighbor is a Sox fan originally from South Haven, MI.
God takes care of me.

2006 was a good year. The team won 90 games, unfortunately Minnesota won 96 and Detroit 95.

I will say that the 2001 season was a bigger disappointment because that's when David Wells was supposed to be our ace and we had that young team coming off a division title.

KenBerryGrab
07-01-2009, 12:07 PM
'06 "flat"? They won 90 games!

TDog
07-01-2009, 12:11 PM
In this case, the stats should tell you everything you need to know. ....

Stats don't tell you much. They are averages. They just tell you the players didn't play well, but they don't describe the hearbreak.

They don't tell you how the Sox grabbed the lead in the division in the game going into the All-Star break, but came out of it losing a doubleheader to the Orioles, allowing just five runs in the two games, but scoring just one. And they lost the next night despite scoring a run on a wild pitch in the 11th inning to take the lead. Ron Reed pitching his second inning, gave up a hit and made an error to put a second runner on before a sacrifice and a Cal Ripken Jr. home run turned victory into defeat. Tito Landrum had been traded away, but that didn't mean the Orioles couldn't still break White Sox hearts.

The stats don't tell you that people questioned the White Sox even needing Tom Seaver, their pitching was that good, but Tom Seaver ended up being the only consistently good pitcher, or at least the closest the Sox had to one.

They came out of the break with a 15-game road trip, beginning with five in Baltimore and three in Detroit. They lost 11 games on that trip. They came home three games under .500 in third place three games out, and lost two of three to the Yankees. While it didn't seal their fate, the season was spinning out of control.

I had the opportunity to ask LaMarr Hoyt about 1984. He said the team was overconfident. He wasn't in the shape he was in 1983. Late in the season, everything had been so easy for them. When they got off to the bad start in 1984, there was no sense of urgency. They had gotten off to a bad start in 1983. And the Sox actually did grab first place going into the All-Star break. But the 1983 rookies were going through sophomore slumps. Other teams didn't roll over for them as they seemed to down the stretch in 1983.

It's cliche and often disingenuous to say teams aren't "hungry" enough. But in the case of the 1984 White Sox, it may well have been the case.

Lip Man 1
07-01-2009, 12:25 PM
Surf:

In 1963 through 1965 the Sox averaged 96 wins.

1963 - 94 wins
1964 - 98 wins
1965 - 95 wins

Lip

peelwonder
07-01-2009, 12:49 PM
1984 Tigers won 104 games and started an astounding 35-5. IIRC the 1984 sox did sweep them right before the break and catapaulted them to first place. They did go through quite a 2nd half swoon.

theoakwoody
07-02-2009, 03:36 PM
... Anyone else remember the Sports Illustrated story in the baseball preview issue touting the '84 staff as potentially the greatest of all time?...

I'd love to read it do you remember which issue it was? Must have been the March or early April? Or was it like a special edition preview issue as opposed to the regular edition?

LITTLE NELL
07-02-2009, 05:29 PM
After winning the pennant in 59 the 1960 Sox were in the thick of the race as late as the end of August but it seemed like they lost their mojo after losing a big game to the Orioles on a bad call by umpire Ed Hurley. Big Klu had hit a HR but Hurley said time had been called. Sox still finished 20 games over at 87-67.

DumpJerry
07-02-2009, 05:57 PM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHW/1984.shtml

Click on "schedule and results" for a day-to-day breakdown.

Lip Man 1
07-02-2009, 07:37 PM
Nell:

Here you go:

August 28, 1960 - Of all the crazy games and things that have happened when the Sox played at Baltimore, this one tops the list. The Sox started the day two and a half games behind the Yankees and trailed the O’s 3 - 0 going into the 8th. With two out, Luis Aparicio, Nellie Fox and Roy Sievers ripped consecutive singles, scoring a run and putting the tying runs on base. Manager Al Lopez called on Ted Kluszewski to pinch hit. “Big Klu” drilled the pitch from Milt Pappas into the right field stands for an apparent three run homer except for one small thing. Third base umpire Ed Hurley called time! Nobody remembered seeing him do it but he refused to change his call. Both Lopez and Fox were ejected in the confrontation afterwards. The next day Hurley was quoted in the newspapers as saying "I wish to heck I hadn’t called it, I’d gladly take it back...”End result was the Sox lost, and were now three games behind the Yankees. Kluszewski later recalled that this game was the one that broke the team’s spirit that season.


Lip

LITTLE NELL
07-02-2009, 07:54 PM
Nell:

Here you go:

August 28, 1960 - Of all the crazy games and things that have happened when the Sox played at Baltimore, this one tops the list. The Sox started the day two and a half games behind the Yankees and trailed the O’s 3 - 0 going into the 8th. With two out, Luis Aparicio, Nellie Fox and Roy Sievers ripped consecutive singles, scoring a run and putting the tying runs on base. Manager Al Lopez called on Ted Kluszewski to pinch hit. “Big Klu” drilled the pitch from Milt Pappas into the right field stands for an apparent three run homer except for one small thing. Third base umpire Ed Hurley called time! Nobody remembered seeing him do it but he refused to change his call. Both Lopez and Fox were ejected in the confrontation afterwards. The next day Hurley was quoted in the newspapers as saying "I wish to heck I hadn’t called it, I’d gladly take it back...”End result was the Sox lost, and were now three games behind the Yankees. Kluszewski later recalled that this game was the one that broke the team’s spirit that season.


Lip

Somethings you never forget, I listened to that game on my new Hitachi transistor radio that my Dad got me for graduating grammar school in June. Fell asleep listening to many a Sox game wtith that radio under my pillow.