PDA

View Full Version : If the Sox DON'T win the Central..what are the main reasons why??


captain54
09-06-2010, 03:37 PM
The Sox EASILY be in 1st right now, or in a dead heat...

Let's say the Sox DON'T end up winning the Central..what do you think would be the main reasons why?

here are my thoughts

1)lack of LH power/RBI guy anywhere in the lineup
2)no production from DH
3)inconsistency of Jenks, and no moves to address the closer issue in the offseason
4)injury to Peavy

doublem23
09-06-2010, 03:38 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

Daver
09-06-2010, 03:39 PM
It's your fault.

GoGoCrede
09-06-2010, 03:39 PM
This isn't a main reason, but their their suckiness against AL Central teams hurt (although they just swept the Indians, so their luck may be changing). Also, their inability to win in Minnesota.

MtGrnwdSoxFan
09-06-2010, 03:40 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

Plus the fact that the team waited until September to get a legitimate DH.

Also, the fact that they couldn't beat anyone in their division.

Rdy2PlayBall
09-06-2010, 03:40 PM
It's your fault.:rolling:

1). the bad start
2). losing record vs the Twins
3). blown leads in the second half

IMO

WhiteSox5187
09-06-2010, 03:41 PM
If they don't win the Central the reason will be because they could not consistently beat their opponents in the Central. The Twins have dominated the Central and consistently beat the teams they are supposed to beat. We don't.

sox1970
09-06-2010, 03:41 PM
1) 5-10 vs Twins, including 2 blown games.
2) Inconsistent starting pitching in April and May.
3) Crappy situational hitting in April and May.

Bottom line, they were a bad team until June. If they lose the division with 93-95 wins, it'll be tough to take.

DirtySox
09-06-2010, 03:42 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

This.

oeo
09-06-2010, 03:43 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

+1. And not just the offense, but the starting pitching. Peavy, Buehrle, and Floyd were just plain bad and didn't help matters at all with the poor offensive production.

captain54
09-06-2010, 03:44 PM
It's your fault.

who's "YOUR"... ??

guillensdisciple
09-06-2010, 03:45 PM
August.

Daver
09-06-2010, 03:48 PM
who's "YOUR"... ??

Pick one.

TommyJohn
09-06-2010, 03:48 PM
This.That and the other thing.

thomas35forever
09-06-2010, 03:51 PM
Inconsistency.

soxfanreggie
09-06-2010, 03:53 PM
The Sox EASILY be in 1st right now, or in a dead heat...

Let's say the Sox DON'T end up winning the Central..what do you think would be the main reasons why?

here are my thoughts

1)lack of LH power/RBI guy anywhere in the lineup
2)no production from DH
3)inconsistency of Jenks, and no moves to address the closer issue in the offseason
4)injury to Peavy

What you said plus our shabby record vs the Twins. If we win the thing, Kenny has given us two big pieces to help: Jackson and Manny.

chisoxfanatic
09-06-2010, 03:56 PM
Too many blown saves at the wrong times and lack of timely hitting in some very important situations.

Madvora
09-06-2010, 03:57 PM
There are a lot of good reasons mentioned. The first one that popped into my mind was the inability to beat the Twins.
I'm sure no one wants to hear this when everyone feels so great right now, but I still think this will prevent them from winning the division. As soon as the Twins passed us for first place, it was over. There are three more against the Twins and it's likely they will just increase the lead even further. This sucks. I'm a complete pessimist, but I also see this as being completely realistic.

34rancher
09-06-2010, 03:59 PM
Attendance, ivy, and ratings, you know the important stuff.

1. Too many blown leads (i.e. I felt like a walkoff was happening every other night in august).
2. Not enough 9th inning productivity. Only 2 come from behind leads after the 8th? Pathetic.

captain54
09-06-2010, 04:01 PM
Pick one.

you busted me .. I take the blame... there ya go....

LITTLE NELL
09-06-2010, 04:03 PM
April and May and a little meltdown in August.
The whole team sucked those 2 months, the hitting and pitching was just not good. As the weather got hot so did the Sox.
Peavy was starting to come on but Jackson has been a great surprise and Garcia has done the job so I don't know how many more games we would have won with a healthy Peavy.
I'm sure that the lack of a power hitting left handed DH also cost us a few games here and there.

Soxman219
09-06-2010, 04:05 PM
blown games in the 2nd half

soxfanatlanta
09-06-2010, 04:07 PM
Not good enough

captain54
09-06-2010, 04:09 PM
Attendance, ivy, and ratings, you know the important stuff.

1. Too many blown leads (i.e. I felt like a walkoff was happening every other night in august).
2. Not enough 9th inning productivity. Only 2 come from behind leads after the 8th? Pathetic.

right on the money....

the blown lead stuff is all on Jenks, big time...IMHO...as good as he was at times, that's as bad as he was at times...and it disrupted the entire bullpen.
off course

I can think of about 4 walkoffs off the top of head....that puts us in first

no 9th inning productivity has put games into extras when there was no reason for them to be in extras...and that all goes back to the lack of the viable run producer for most of the year

1989
09-06-2010, 04:09 PM
It'll be our inability to hit the catwalk in Tampa with routine fly balls. Also, in the late inning leads we've blown, no ump erroneously ruled that the runner rounding 3rd touched the 3rd base coach.

We'll work on those things going into next season

LongLiveFisk
09-06-2010, 04:17 PM
Too many losses to inferior teams. You have to have that killer instinct no matter who you are playing. No playing down to the level of competition.

MarySwiss
09-06-2010, 04:18 PM
Because they don't win 4 more games than the Twinkies the rest of the way.

Sunnydre
09-06-2010, 04:21 PM
The defense

bunty_doghunter
09-06-2010, 04:22 PM
With the imbalanced schedule, the first reason is always inability to beat your division rivals, and only if you keep up in the Central do you look for other reasons.

Nelfox02
09-06-2010, 04:24 PM
inability to beat the Twins head to head, sticks in my mind, most infamously the sunday after the ASB when Bobby blew the three run lead----instead of leaving there with a 4.5 game lead on then and 4 days knocked off the calender, we put them 2.5 out and left the door open....

Chez
09-06-2010, 04:25 PM
This thread is premature and will be ridiculed when we clinch at home against Cleveland on the last Saturday of the season.

fram40
09-06-2010, 04:25 PM
3 - 4 record vs Baltimore

Soxman219
09-06-2010, 04:26 PM
this thread is premature and will be ridiculed when we clinch at home against cleveland on the last saturday of the season.

i really hope that happens.

mpshans
09-06-2010, 04:27 PM
If the Sox don't win the division it is because the twins did. They could end up with 92 or 93 wins and I wonder what the preseason poll here said was the number of wins required to win the central. We all want to win, but if the twins end up with 93 wins and we don't it is hard to say that we didn't win it but rather that they did. hope this doesn't sound too much like a downer.

that being said ... GO SOX!

this concludes my one post every six months

thank you

SOXSINCE'70
09-06-2010, 04:32 PM
The Sox EASILY be in 1st right now, or in a dead heat...

Let's say the Sox DON'T end up winning the Central..what do you think would be the main reasons why?

here are my thoughts

1)lack of LH power/RBI guy anywhere in the lineup
2)no production from DH
3)inconsistency of Jenks, and no moves to address the closer issue in the offseason
4)injury to Peavy

Add this one:
5. Playing like **** in August.:angry:

SOXSINCE'70
09-06-2010, 04:34 PM
3 - 4 record vs Baltimore



- 6-9 record versus Tribe.

oeo
09-06-2010, 04:43 PM
- 6-9 record versus Tribe.

7-8 actually, I think. Still not good, but that goes as part of the "didn't start playing until June" category.

Tragg
09-06-2010, 04:45 PM
Our record against certain teams has been poor. No DH, certain other offensive issues.

But not beg the question, but the real answer if we don't win the division is that the Twins/Rays/Yanks won more. This team will win between 90-95 games, that's a pretty reasonable result from Sox management, and if it isn't good enough, it isn't good enough.

happydude
09-06-2010, 04:46 PM
If the Sox don't win the division it is because the twins did. They could end up with 92 or 93 wins and I wonder what the preseason poll here said was the number of wins required to win the central. We all want to win, but if the twins end up with 93 wins and we don't it is hard to say that we didn't win it but rather that they did. hope this doesn't sound too much like a downer.

that being said ... GO SOX!

this concludes my one post every six months

thank you

Unless they tail off significantly they'll win more than 92 or 93 games; in fact, we should be able to win 93, ourselves. But I agree with the spirit of your post; they are winning it as opposed to us losing it even when taking into consideration the things that have gone wrong this year which have been accurately pointed out in other posts.

Given the questions about the offense heading into this year, none but the most optimistic were predicting we'd win 90-plus games; yet it seems as if we will. If we come up short the season will have been a disappointment, of course, but not in the way that other seasons have.

Lip Man 1
09-06-2010, 04:53 PM
Lot of reasons:

The poor first two months, an inconsistent offense (16 losses so far this year where the pitching staff gave up three runs or less), a bullpen meltdown for two weeks and a less than stellar record against three of the four worst teams in the league come immediately to mind. (Baltimore, Kansas City and Cleveland)

But again this club could win 87-88 games, just a few less than the 2006 club, with far less talent...considering where they were in May, nine under, that is worth mentioning.

Is it what we would have wanted as fans? No. But it still wouldn't be a "bad" season by any stretch.

Lip

Eastcoastsoxfan1
09-06-2010, 04:53 PM
Everything has been said but what really sticks out to me is the poor execution particularly in close games. When you look at our record in 1 run games especially in August this sort of bares this out.

The question is why didn't/couldn't we execute-

1. Lack of a professional hitter whether it be a LH power hitter or RH hitter. We had really no one outside of Paulie who pitchers were concerned about. Huge oversight by Ozzie and Kenny for letting it happen.

2. Poor approaches by the balance of the line up. AJ, Teahen, Kotsay, and the list goes on.

If not for our pitchers pitching out of their mind in June and July we probably aren't even this close.

Dan H
09-06-2010, 04:53 PM
Historically Alexi and Gavin start out poorly. They eventually right their ships but in the mean time early season losses mount up. I am not scapegoating these two; the first two months was a team effort. Hopefully the team will find some way to get out of the gate stronger next year. You can't play this bad for that long and expect to have a great season. The fact that the Sox are where they are is a huge accomplishment. It is frustrating that the whole club underperformed for the first 55 games of the year. That's not a slump; that's bad baseball.

White City
09-06-2010, 04:58 PM
Those two blown losses to the Twins. If we had won just those two games, We would be up 0.5 game right now.

Not only that, that awful Jenks performance in the first of those two chokes killed all of the momentum our guys had. It was the worst thing at the worst possible time.

SI1020
09-06-2010, 04:59 PM
Inconsistency. Very true. The hitting, SP and bullpen have all taken turns being lousy for extended periods. This is one of the most maddenly inconsistent Sox teams I can ever remember. With all this they're still playing important games in September.

VMSNS
09-06-2010, 05:05 PM
1) Poor starting pitching in April and May
2) Inconsistent offense in April and May
3) Failure to sign a legitimate DH until September
4) Failure to win games against horrible clubs like Cleveland, KC, and Baltimore
5) Bullpen implosion in August
6) Peavy injury
7) Poor record and play versus the Twins

SOXfnNlansing
09-06-2010, 05:13 PM
As of close of business today: Sox record vs AL: 62-57 after 7 game winning streak. MN record vs AL: 73-47.

oeo
09-06-2010, 05:22 PM
As of close of business today: Sox record vs AL: 62-57 after 7 game winning streak. MN record vs AL: 73-47.

This is all because they played terrible in April and May. Twins played poorly in May and June.

cub killer
09-06-2010, 05:23 PM
There will be only 1 reason. Starts with a T, ends with an S, and in the middle is "win", which is what they keep doing.

Eastcoastsoxfan1
09-06-2010, 05:24 PM
This is all because they played terrible in April and May. Twins played poorly in May and June.


Also because the Twins beat up on the division. Look at their record in interleague and against the AL east. This is the reason they never make noise in the playoffs. Not playing the royals and Indians in October.

SOXSINCE'70
09-06-2010, 05:27 PM
1) Poor starting pitching in April and May
2) Inconsistent offense in April and May
3) Failure to sign a legitimate DH until September
4) Failure to win games against horrible clubs like Cleveland, KC, and Baltimore
5) Bullpen implosion in August
6) Peavy injury
7) Poor record and play versus the Twins

Hard to argue.

SOXSINCE'70
09-06-2010, 05:29 PM
MN record vs AL: 73-47.

Yes, but can they beat the Yankmees??
We'll have to wait till October for an answer.

A. Cavatica
09-06-2010, 05:31 PM
Thome. (half teal)

thomas35forever
09-06-2010, 05:42 PM
This is all because they played terrible in April and May. Twins played poorly in May and June.
Pretty much. We've all heard the saying that you can't win a division in the early months, but you can certainly lose them. This unfortunately looks to be one of the examples.

tstrike2000
09-06-2010, 06:22 PM
The late leads we've blown here in the second half are really telling.

Rdy2PlayBall
09-06-2010, 06:29 PM
Thome. (half teal)I pray the Sox win this year so I don't have to read that name every day this offseason.

slavko
09-06-2010, 06:32 PM
Lot of reasons:

The poor first two months, an inconsistent offense (16 losses so far this year where the pitching staff gave up three runs or less), a bullpen meltdown for two weeks and a less than stellar record against three of the four worst teams in the league come immediately to mind. (Baltimore, Kansas City and Cleveland)

But again this club could win 87-88 games, just a few less than the 2006 club, with far less talent...considering where they were in May, nine under, that is worth mentioning.

Is it what we would have wanted as fans? No. But it still wouldn't be a "bad" season by any stretch.

Lip

The long of it, all on target.

The late leads we've blown here in the second half are really telling.

The short of it, because those are the ones we'll remember.

JB98
09-06-2010, 06:33 PM
The late leads we've blown here in the second half are really telling.

To me, the dreadful play the first 60 games of the season is the bigger problem.

The Sox bullpen was solid for 110 games, had a dreadful two weeks in August, and has now reverted to good form the last couple weeks.

The Sox haven't had a single blowout victory on this trip. Every game has been tight, and the bullpen has been nails in six out of the seven wins.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2010, 06:33 PM
As others have said, and in no particular order:

Losing winnable games against crappy teams (CLE, KC, BAL);

Losing winnable games to the Twins;

Bullpen implosions, some due to injuries, some due to idiocies;

Choosing to keep Mark Kotsay instead of signing Jim Thome for the same cost.

oeo
09-06-2010, 06:35 PM
Thome. (half teal)

Should be full teal, and the biggest reason is health. Not just Thome, but Quentin and Konerko.

Would Thome be having this year with the Sox? Highly unlikely, because he would have been used a whole lot more and likely would have had health flare ups. Reason he's been so good is he's been able to stay healthy because he didn't have to play as much.

Would Konerko be having the year he's having? I'm going to say no again, because he's been able to take time off from first base. The biggest key to Konerko's year this year is health. He's been healthy all year up until right now. You can't say the same the last few years, especially in 2008.

Would Quentin have 82 RBI's? Maybe, again, if he stayed as relatively healthy as he has this year. He'd be playing RF everyday, and a bad one at that, so unlikely he doesn't end up pulling more muscles, maybe even breaking a couple legs the way he plays out there.

As bad as Jones and Kotsay have been this year on the stat sheet, they've certainly given us some advantages as well that we wouldn't have with Thome. I think possibly the biggest advantage of having Thome would be that the Twins would NOT have him right now. Saying Thome would have us in first place right now is a bit much.

TDog
09-06-2010, 06:39 PM
If they don't win the division, it will probably be because they haven't won enough games.

Hartman
09-06-2010, 06:39 PM
We can't beat the Twins

and

I am doubtful that the Twins will lose another ballgame this year

oeo
09-06-2010, 06:54 PM
We can't beat the Twins

and

I am doubtful that the Twins will lose another ballgame this year

Just look at the Padres on how quickly things can turn. They were 25-11 after the All Star Break, and are now 25-21 just 10 games later.

I'm not saying the Twins are going to collapse like the Padres (would be incredible, but don't see it coming), but it just goes to show you that you shouldn't take too much from the "right now." One week you're on cloud nine, the next you can't buy a victory...the joys of baseball.

I just hope a)The Sox don't get complacent with their recent play, because they can definitely improve and very easily could be 1-6, 2-5 on this road trip and b)The Twins DO get complacent, because they're winning much in the way we are...just squeaking them out, getting some lucky bounces. I think it's more likely that the Twins do since they're the ones ahead, but who knows? Usually the Twins are the ones playing from behind, so it's really tough to say how they will react when the roles are reversed. I mean, we know they can come back and snatch a division away, they've done it before, but can they hold off a charging team? As soon as (hopefully) a couple games come off the lead, it starts getting out there that they're collapsing and it's just a bunch of head games the rest of the way for them.

Ranger
09-06-2010, 06:55 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

In simple terms, yes. But more specifically:

1) 5-10 vs Twins, including 2 blown games.
2) Inconsistent starting pitching in April and May.
3) Crappy situational hitting in April and May.

Bottom line, they were a bad team until June. If they lose the division with 93-95 wins, it'll be tough to take.

Once June rolled around, everything really did come together. The pitching finally started to click (though the pen had always been there). With all the groaning about the lack of DH, the offense has been more than productive enough to be a winning team. Obviously, they were excellent in June overall, but since June 29, they have the best team average and OBP in the majors. They're also the second best team in baseball in SLG and runs scored. Offense wasn't the problem in August...pitching was.

whitesoxfan
09-06-2010, 06:57 PM
Getting off to a slow start. That's really the number one reason why.

Bad play against the lesser teams in the league didn't help either but not starting to play until June is what really bit this team in the rear end.

Noneck
09-06-2010, 06:59 PM
If they don't win the division, it will probably be because they haven't won enough games.


Or that Minnesota won too many games.

tstrike2000
09-06-2010, 07:02 PM
The short of it, because those are the ones we'll remember.

To me, the dreadful play the first 60 games of the season is the bigger problem.

The Sox bullpen was solid for 110 games, had a dreadful two weeks in August, and has now reverted to good form the last couple weeks.

The Sox haven't had a single blowout victory on this trip. Every game has been tight, and the bullpen has been nails in six out of the seven wins.

Just goes to show there's probably no wrong answer as to why the Sox didn't win the division, if it ends up being that. Being crap, 9.5 games back, and not taking care of the Toons and KC before the winning streak will probably be the main reason with the bullpen situation of the last 6 weeks will probably be looked at more as a reason as to why the Sox didn't stay in first. Lately, it's because Gardenhose has been working is magic voodoo tricks and they won't lose.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2010, 07:23 PM
Should be full teal, and the biggest reason is health. Not just Thome, but Quentin and Konerko.

Would Thome be having this year with the Sox? Highly unlikely, because he would have been used a whole lot more and likely would have had health flare ups. Reason he's been so good is he's been able to stay healthy because he didn't have to play as much.

Would Konerko be having the year he's having? I'm going to say no again, because he's been able to take time off from first base. The biggest key to Konerko's year this year is health. He's been healthy all year up until right now. You can't say the same the last few years, especially in 2008.

Would Quentin have 82 RBI's? Maybe, again, if he stayed as relatively healthy as he has this year. He'd be playing RF everyday, and a bad one at that, so unlikely he doesn't end up pulling more muscles, maybe even breaking a couple legs the way he plays out there.

As bad as Jones and Kotsay have been this year on the stat sheet, they've certainly given us some advantages as well that we wouldn't have with Thome. I think possibly the biggest advantage of having Thome would be that the Twins would NOT have him right now. Saying Thome would have us in first place right now is a bit much.

The ideal situation would have been to platoon Thome and Jones. Thome would DH against most RHP. Against LHP, Quentin would DH and Jones would play RF.

Want to give Paulie a breather? Have him DH against a RHP and let Teahen play first. (Teahen hurt? That's a problem that cannot be predicted, but we had Viciedo down on the farm.) This also has the added benefit of giving Thome more rest. Problem solved.

Oh, and Paulie gets more fastballs with Thome hitting behind him. Maybe Paulie has even better numbers if Thome - instead of Kotsay - is protecting him.

Also, opposing managers have more to think about with Thome as a pinch-hitting threat. With Kotsay and his ZERO hits against LHP, that is an automatic decision: leave the LHP in the game because Kotsay is an automatic out against LHP.

We didn't need Kotsay. No rational argument exists for Kotsay over Thome.

EDIT: Also, Jones has DH-ed ten times this year. Why? Whenever he starts, he should be in the outfield. Why waste your second-best defensive outfielder - who isn't a primary starter - as the DH once, much less TEN TIMES?

My point is that if Kotsay was NOT on the team, and Thome was, and Ozzie simply used Thome as the usual (but not always) DH against RHP, Quentin actually would have DH-ed MORE than he has now. This is how you divide the DH starts in an 162-game season:

Thome: 70 (all against RHP)
Quentin: 55 (all against LHP; this is significantly more "rest" at DH than he's gotten this year)
Paulie: 25 (mostly against RHP, allowing Teahen [or Viciedo if injury to Teahen] to play first; Paulie has DH-ed 21 times so far this season)
Rios: 6 (whenever)
Pierre: 6 (whenever)
Jones ends up with at least 67 starts in the OF; plus substitutions when TCQ, Pierre and Rios don't DH but simply get a game off; plus many appearances as the late-inning defensive replacement.)

This results in better production from the DH spot, better defense in the outfield because Jones is out there more often, slightly more rest and protection for TCQ and equal rest and protection for Paulie.

oeo
09-06-2010, 07:28 PM
The ideal situation would have been to platoon Thome and Jones. Thome would DH against most RHP. Against LHP, Quentin would DH and Jones would play RF.

That situation would have lasted until early May when Andruw fell back to Earth. Then Thome would have gotten all the time.

And that was definitely not the 'ideal' situation before the season. Most everyone, including myself, thought Jones was a waste of space. If Thome was coming here, he was coming here to be the everyday DH. And as an everyday DH the last couple years, he hasn't come close to the numbers he has in limited time this year.

EDIT: Also, Jones has DH-ed ten times this year. Why? Whenever he starts, he should be in the outfield. Why waste your second-best defensive outfielder - who isn't a primary starter - as the DH once, much less TEN TIMES?

Unless you're going to bring the dates and the health of everyone on the team at the time, including Andruw, this is nothing more than yakking. Though, I'm going to guess that most of those starts came in April when he was quite productive. Lately, Jones has been in RF when he plays with Quentin DH'ing.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2010, 07:42 PM
That situation would have lasted until early May when Andruw fell back to Earth. Then Thome would have gotten all the time.

Yeah, instead we got Kotsay "all the time." And we had a mediocre May. And Kotsay has been bad all year. For most of the year, his batting average and OPS have been Brian Anderson-esque.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2010, 07:49 PM
And that was definitely not the 'ideal' situation before the season. Most everyone, including myself, thought Jones was a waste of space. If Thome was coming here, he was coming here to be the everyday DH. And as an everyday DH the last couple years, he hasn't come close to the numbers he has in limited time this year.

So let me get this straight.

You think choosing Kotsay over Thome was a good move for several reasons, one of which is because Ozzie would have overused Thome?

So KW had to deny Ozzie a superior weapon (Thome) because Ozzie might overuse it, and instead give him an inferior weapon (Kotsay), to protect Ozzie from himself?

Maybe Ozzie would have overused Thome because, I don't know, maybe Thome can hit better than Kotsay?

LoveYourSuit
09-06-2010, 07:59 PM
1) DH - Any plan would have been better than the plan up until now. Also look at the Thome factor which we let get away. Thome right now is the difference between both teams. Sox plus Thome would be in 1st place Twins minus Thome in second place

2) Attitude in April and May as if those games do not count

3) Bullpen implosion here late

4) Down offensive years from guys you expected to play at very high levels (AJ and Beckham). Quentin's average sucks too, add him to that list.

5) Peavy and Gavin early in the year. They sucked bad. No blaming the Peavy injury since Jackson has been as good if not better than him. But Peavy and Gavin were a disaster early in the year.

DirtySox
09-06-2010, 07:59 PM
So let me get this straight.

You think choosing Kotsay over Thome was a good move for several reasons, one of which is because Ozzie would have overused Thome?

So KW had to deny Ozzie a superior weapon (Thome) because Ozzie might overuse it, and instead give him an inferior weapon (Kotsay), to protect Ozzie from himself?

Maybe Ozzie would have overused Thome because, I don't know, maybe Thome can hit better than Kotsay?

His argument is a silly bunch of hypotheticals. Clearly, Thome and Konerko would be having terrible years if they weren't allowed to rest this much. Therefore, the Kotsay is necessary.

Frater Perdurabo
09-06-2010, 08:16 PM
His argument is a silly bunch of hypotheticals. Clearly, Thome and Konerko would be having terrible years if they weren't allowed to rest this much. Therefore, the Kotsay is necessary.

:rolling:

You'd think some of the Ozzpologists were contortionists, given the mental gymnastics they will do just to defend Ozzie.

A question for the Ozzpologists: Is it possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision?

A second question: If it is possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision, is it possible for us mere mortals to recognize it?

DirtySox
09-06-2010, 08:27 PM
:rolling:

You'd think some of the Ozzpologists were contortionists, given the mental gymnastics they will do just to defend Ozzie.

A question for the Ozzpologists: Is it possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision?

A second question: If it is possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision, is it possible for us mere mortals to recognize it?

I'm not sure if Oeo is an Ozzpologist, but I think it's quite silly to conclude that Thome's presence on this team would hurt Konerko. Even if both JT and PK were having lesser years together, I would take that any day over option Kotsay.

spawn
09-06-2010, 08:57 PM
Minnesota was the better team? :shrug:

SephClone89
09-06-2010, 08:59 PM
minnesota was the better team? :shrug:

+1

TommyJohn
09-06-2010, 09:01 PM
Minnesota was the better team? :shrug:
Wrong! It's because the White Sox are being run by a bunch of incompetent boobs, morons, cheapstakes, dumbasses, fools, jerks, jokes and jackasses. Shame on you for suggesting otherwise.

spawn
09-06-2010, 09:03 PM
Wrong! It's because the White Sox are being run by a bunch of incompetent boobs, morons, cheapstakes, dumbasses, fools, jerks, jokes and jackasses. Shame on you for suggesting otherwise.
My bad...what the hell am I thinking giving credit to the other team? :tongue: :redneck

GoGoCrede
09-06-2010, 09:24 PM
My bad...what the hell am I thinking giving credit to the other team? :tongue: :redneck

Jeez, are you new?
:) :)

spawn
09-06-2010, 09:28 PM
Jeez, are you new?
:) :)
Long time lurker, first time poster. :wink:

GoGoCrede
09-06-2010, 09:35 PM
Long time lurker, first time poster. :wink:

:rolling: And you've been a Sox fan your whole life, stumbled onto this site by accident....

spawn
09-06-2010, 09:37 PM
:rolling: And you've been a Sox fan your whole life, stumbled onto this site by accident....
How'd you guess????? :redneck

TDog
09-06-2010, 10:01 PM
Or that Minnesota won too many games.

That's another way to look at it. The White Sox and Twins are fairly evenly matched, really. The Twins have won more one-run games, which really is the difference considering the Twins' one-run wins against the Sox.

The Twins have a better lineup. The Sox have better pitching. The White Sox have better pitchers in their bullpen, but the Twins have been more successful to date. White Sox fans might focus on some Twins luck -- a popup in the dome in St. Petersburg that hit the ceiling to win a game, the Rangers stupid baserunning in two games leading to one-run losses this weekend. If the Rays continue to lose, the White Sox have a chance at catching up to them for the wild card, though.

The Twins have lost Morneau, but the White Sox lost Peavy.

It isn't a matter of plugging in stats. I don't see how Thome would have made a difference in April or May, especially considering that Kotsay had a better May than Thome. In June and July, the White Sox won in spite of not having DH production.

One thing I like that Guillen is doing this year is that he seems to be rotating his players better this year, giving them more rest. That might be why the Sox have begun September so well. The bullpen ended up being overworked anyway, despite getting less use than the bullpens of other contenders. But Jenks and Thornton have come back strong after nagging injuries. Sale has been pitching well. Linebrink has been more dependable this year, and he has ended up needing to be with Santos hitting a wall and Putz sitting out.

This is a very good White Sox team. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's built. They didn't give up after a miserable start. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's managed. The team has very good chemistry. They are a lot better than a lot of people here give them credit for being. If they don't catch the Twins or the Rays (while staying ahead of the Red Sox), that doesn't mean they're not a very good team.

WhiteSox5187
09-06-2010, 10:03 PM
I'm not sure if Oeo is an Ozzpologist, but I think it's quite silly to conclude that Thome's presence on this team would hurt Konerko. Even if both JT and PK were having lesser years together, I would take that any day over option Kotsay.

The only thing that Kotsay brings over Thome is that Kotsay can spell Paulie at first base and Thome can't, so you could give Paulie some rest without losing him from the lineup. That's the only reason.

DirtySox
09-06-2010, 10:48 PM
The only thing that Kotsay brings over Thome is that Kotsay can spell Paulie at first base and Thome can't, so you could give Paulie some rest without losing him from the lineup. That's the only reason.

Yep. I'm sure that the rest aspect has helped to some extent, just not enough to justify punting at DH for the majority of the season.

WhiteSox5187
09-06-2010, 10:54 PM
Yep. I'm sure that the rest aspect has helped to some extent, just not enough to justify punting at DH for the majority of the season.

I agree, I think that the idea of not having a guy who can do anything but DH (like Thome) getting something like 600 ABs was a good idea, but the guys they used left a lot to be desired.

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:24 PM
This.

Wow that covers everything....

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:28 PM
What you said plus our shabby record vs the Twins. If we win the thing, Kenny has given us two big pieces to help: Jackson and Manny.


And he tried to retain Thome but gave in to his manager's absurd DH by committee nonsense. Maybe the biggest mistake he's made since being GM.

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:30 PM
Too many losses to inferior teams. You have to have that killer instinct no matter who you are playing. No playing down to the level of competition.

Amen, I say to thee.
The intelligencia have taken over tonight.

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:34 PM
right on the money....

the blown lead stuff is all on Jenks, big time...IMHO...as good as he was at times, that's as bad as he was at times...and it disrupted the entire bullpen.
off course

I can think of about 4 walkoffs off the top of head....that puts us in first

no 9th inning productivity has put games into extras when there was no reason for them to be in extras...and that all goes back to the lack of the viable run producer for most of the year

Guillen's overall handling of the bullpen is atrocious.
Using 3 pitchers needlessly to get 9 outs really took its toll.

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:37 PM
This thread is premature and will be ridiculed when we clinch at home against Cleveland on the last Saturday of the season.

have you seen the 2011 schedule already?

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:39 PM
I pray the Sox win this year so I don't have to read that name every day this offseason.

Blame your manager's insistence.

TaylorStSox
09-06-2010, 11:43 PM
AJ, Jenks, Beckham, TCQ, Teahan and Peavy all playing well below expectations certainly has not helped.

oeo
09-06-2010, 11:43 PM
Yeah, instead we got Kotsay "all the time." And we had a mediocre May. And Kotsay has been bad all year. For most of the year, his batting average and OPS have been Brian Anderson-esque.

So let me get this straight.

You think choosing Kotsay over Thome was a good move for several reasons, one of which is because Ozzie would have overused Thome?

So KW had to deny Ozzie a superior weapon (Thome) because Ozzie might overuse it, and instead give him an inferior weapon (Kotsay), to protect Ozzie from himself?

Maybe Ozzie would have overused Thome because, I don't know, maybe Thome can hit better than Kotsay?

What exactly was your argument? You said the "ideal" situation was to platoon Andruw and Thome. I responded saying that wouldn't have lasted. Now you come back with some bull**** about Kotsay?

I'm saying, I don't think there's any way to prove we would have a better record with Thome. In fact, we may have the same two aging 1B and DH that we've seen the past few years.

His argument is a silly bunch of hypotheticals. Clearly, Thome and Konerko would be having terrible years if they weren't allowed to rest this much. Therefore, the Kotsay is necessary.

It's all hypothetical, including your opinion, what else would it be? :?:

Clearly, though, Thome and Konerko have not been able to stay healthy in the past 3 years. You saw it yourself, you apparently choose to ignore it. And I never said "terrible" years, but that's convenient of you to rattle off BS.

I'm not sure if Oeo is an Ozzpologist, but I think it's quite silly to conclude that Thome's presence on this team would hurt Konerko. Even if both JT and PK were having lesser years together, I would take that any day over option Kotsay.

Did you read it, at all? Konerko's biggest problem the last few years has been health. Yes, he's having a career year this year, but it's still all made possible due to the fact that he's been healthy all year. If he was dinged up, he could easily move into DH for a couple days. He could take time off to keep himself fresh. He's 34 years old, these things matter.

Thome hasn't been able to stay healthy, either. These are facts, and you watched it the last few years. Were they magically going to both be healthy and put up these monster seasons?

I agree with the move of not bringing Thome back. I would have liked to see someone else, and Kenny would have as well.

I just think it's funny that a lot of you keep going on about this to say 'I told you so.' Hilarious considering you were mostly off the mark on the offense as a whole. But that one spot, why not just keep bringing it up?

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:45 PM
Should be full teal, and the biggest reason is health. Not just Thome, but Quentin and Konerko.

Would Thome be having this year with the Sox? Highly unlikely, because he would have been used a whole lot more and likely would have had health flare ups. Reason he's been so good is he's been able to stay healthy because he didn't have to play as much.

Would Konerko be having the year he's having? I'm going to say no again, because he's been able to take time off from first base. The biggest key to Konerko's year this year is health. He's been healthy all year up until right now. You can't say the same the last few years, especially in 2008.

Would Quentin have 82 RBI's? Maybe, again, if he stayed as relatively healthy as he has this year. He'd be playing RF everyday, and a bad one at that, so unlikely he doesn't end up pulling more muscles, maybe even breaking a couple legs the way he plays out there.

As bad as Jones and Kotsay have been this year on the stat sheet, they've certainly given us some advantages as well that we wouldn't have with Thome. I think possibly the biggest advantage of having Thome would be that the Twins would NOT have him right now. Saying Thome would have us in first place right now is a bit much.

Well, it's the main reason why the Twins are in first place now.
You keep the missing point.
Whether Thome would have been a full time DH or just a Smokey Burgess type PH, is not the point.
Management left him out there for their only real competition to grab.

Rudy Law
09-06-2010, 11:47 PM
The Sox EASILY be in 1st right now, or in a dead heat...

Let's say the Sox DON'T end up winning the Central..what do you think would be the main reasons why?

here are my thoughts

1)lack of LH power/RBI guy anywhere in the lineup
2)no production from DH
3)inconsistency of Jenks, and no moves to address the closer issue in the offseason
4)injury to Peavy



Left- Handed power bat is not a reason... I think that the concept of needing a left handed power bat is an overrated concept in baseball... Who was the LH power in 2005? Carl Everett? When you got pitchers that can get guys out it doesn't matter where the rbi come from.

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:51 PM
The ideal situation would have been to platoon Thome and Jones. Thome would DH against most RHP. Against LHP, Quentin would DH and Jones would play RF.

Want to give Paulie a breather? Have him DH against a RHP and let Teahen play first. (Teahen hurt? That's a problem that cannot be predicted, but we had Viciedo down on the farm.) This also has the added benefit of giving Thome more rest. Problem solved.

Oh, and Paulie gets more fastballs with Thome hitting behind him. Maybe Paulie has even better numbers if Thome - instead of Kotsay - is protecting him.

Also, opposing managers have more to think about with Thome as a pinch-hitting threat. With Kotsay and his ZERO hits against LHP, that is an automatic decision: leave the LHP in the game because Kotsay is an automatic out against LHP.

We didn't need Kotsay. No rational argument exists for Kotsay over Thome.

EDIT: Also, Jones has DH-ed ten times this year. Why? Whenever he starts, he should be in the outfield. Why waste your second-best defensive outfielder - who isn't a primary starter - as the DH once, much less TEN TIMES?

My point is that if Kotsay was NOT on the team, and Thome was, and Ozzie simply used Thome as the usual (but not always) DH against RHP, Quentin actually would have DH-ed MORE than he has now. This is how you divide the DH starts in an 162-game season:

Thome: 70 (all against RHP)
Quentin: 55 (all against LHP; this is significantly more "rest" at DH than he's gotten this year)
Paulie: 25 (mostly against RHP, allowing Teahen [or Viciedo if injury to Teahen] to play first; Paulie has DH-ed 21 times so far this season)
Rios: 6 (whenever)
Pierre: 6 (whenever)
Jones ends up with at least 67 starts in the OF; plus substitutions when TCQ, Pierre and Rios don't DH but simply get a game off; plus many appearances as the late-inning defensive replacement.)

This results in better production from the DH spot, better defense in the outfield because Jones is out there more often, slightly more rest and protection for TCQ and equal rest and protection for Paulie.


Ding Ding Ding...post of the season!

mcsoxfan
09-06-2010, 11:54 PM
:rolling:

You'd think some of the Ozzpologists were contortionists, given the mental gymnastics they will do just to defend Ozzie.

A question for the Ozzpologists: Is it possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision?

A second question: If it is possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision, is it possible for us mere mortals to recognize it?


Ozzpolgists...what a great name....I love it!!

Rdy2PlayBall
09-06-2010, 11:57 PM
A question for the Ozzpologists: Is it possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision?

A second question: If it is possible for Ozzie The Great to make a bad decision, is it possible for us mere mortals to recognize it?
1) No
2) Why even ask when he can't be wrong?....

End test, A+ for me

doublem23
09-06-2010, 11:58 PM
Guillen's overall handling of the bullpen is atrocious.
Using 3 pitchers needlessly to get 9 outs really took its toll.

That's absolutely not true at all, the Sox bullpen has thrown minimal innings and none of the pitchers on this team, especially the critical guys, are anywhere near the league lead in terms off IP or appearances. Thornton and Putz just broke down, Jenks has had some health problems the last few years, so that's no shock, and Sergio is likely feeling the double whammy of never having pitched before 2009 and never having played a full season in September. No wonder the kid is wearing down.

You can lay some decisions at Ozzie's feet and demand an explanation, but the bullpen is absolutely not one of them.

mcsoxfan
09-07-2010, 12:02 AM
That's another way to look at it. The White Sox and Twins are fairly evenly matched, really. The Twins have won more one-run games, which really is the difference considering the Twins' one-run wins against the Sox.

The Twins have a better lineup. The Sox have better pitching. The White Sox have better pitchers in their bullpen, but the Twins have been more successful to date. White Sox fans might focus on some Twins luck -- a popup in the dome in St. Petersburg that hit the ceiling to win a game, the Rangers stupid baserunning in two games leading to one-run losses this weekend. If the Rays continue to lose, the White Sox have a chance at catching up to them for the wild card, though.

The Twins have lost Morneau, but the White Sox lost Peavy.

It isn't a matter of plugging in stats. I don't see how Thome would have made a difference in April or May, especially considering that Kotsay had a better May than Thome. In June and July, the White Sox won in spite of not having DH production.

One thing I like that Guillen is doing this year is that he seems to be rotating his players better this year, giving them more rest. That might be why the Sox have begun September so well. The bullpen ended up being overworked anyway, despite getting less use than the bullpens of other contenders. But Jenks and Thornton have come back strong after nagging injuries. Sale has been pitching well. Linebrink has been more dependable this year, and he has ended up needing to be with Santos hitting a wall and Putz sitting out.

This is a very good White Sox team. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's built. They didn't give up after a miserable start. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's managed. The team has very good chemistry. They are a lot better than a lot of people here give them credit for being. If they don't catch the Twins or the Rays (while staying ahead of the Red Sox), that doesn't mean they're not a very good team.

Is this what's meant by an Ozzpologist?
Sure sounds like one to me.
The Sox with better management decisions on and off the field would be in first place by a wide margin given the personnel losses substained by the Twins. A 40 year old guy is the difference maker, c'mon.

mcsoxfan
09-07-2010, 12:07 AM
1) No
2) Why even ask when he can't be wrong?....

End test, A+ for me

And this is why Reinsdorf will own this team forever because of fans like this.
If anyone is stupid enough to hire Guillen as their manager after his tenure here, I'll be shocked.
He's a public relations nightmare.

Rdy2PlayBall
09-07-2010, 12:09 AM
And this is why Reinsdorf will own this team forever because of fans like this.
If anyone is stupid enough to hire Guillen as their manager after his tenure here, I'll be shocked.
He's a public relations nightmare.I would have never thought a post like that would have required teal.

Also, a winning record and a World Series title doesn't look too bad on a coaching resume.

doublem23
09-07-2010, 12:11 AM
And this is why Reinsdorf will own this team forever because of fans like this.
If anyone is stupid enough to hire Guillen as their manager after his tenure here, I'll be shocked.
He's a public relations nightmare.http://www.theospot.net/pictures/misc/francis.jpg

SBSoxFan
09-07-2010, 12:13 AM
Over the long haul, it's hard to fault a team that wins 90+ games, unless you feel they underachieved. I don't get that feeling. Clubs also don't have the luxury, like fans, of replaying the season with a different set of initial conditions. Would the Sox have been better with Thome? Without Peavy? Would the Twins be better with Morneau? These are questions that can't be answered, yet, most of the folks who post here and suggest such things are sure they're right.

I'm okay if the Sox don't win the division as long as they don't lose it. A 7-0 road trip so far shows they aren't going to lose it. They need to hold serve through Thursday. At that point, the balance of home vs. away games shifts to the Sox advantage. Beginning September 10th is when they'll need to make one final run. And if the Twins manage to hold on? Well, have fun losing in the first round of the playoffs.

palehozenychicty
09-07-2010, 12:16 AM
The Sox will not win this division because they took too long to put this team together. That's it.

Rdy2PlayBall
09-07-2010, 12:17 AM
True, which explains the first 2 months. If the Sox can get a good DH replacement, and maybe some more bullpen depth, I will be really excited for next year. Hopefully the team will gel more quickly.

MtGrnwdSoxFan
09-07-2010, 12:17 AM
And this is why Reinsdorf will own this team forever because of fans like this.
If anyone is stupid enough to hire Guillen as their manager after his tenure here, I'll be shocked.
He's a public relations nightmare.

Why not? He can be just the guy to spark a middling team.

As a "x's and o's" manager he may be average, but his major skill lies in the ability to motivate his players. Whether it's with a media/on-field outburst, defending them by placing the heat on himself, or anything else, one thing is for sure...his players will play hard for him. How many players on the Sox have said that they love playing for Ozzie?

Rdy2PlayBall
09-07-2010, 12:26 AM
Why not? He can be just the guy to spark a middling team.

As a "x's and o's" manager he may be average, but his major skill lies in the ability to motivate his players. Whether it's with a media/on-field outburst, defending them by placing the heat on himself, or anything else, one thing is for sure...his players will play hard for him. How many players on the Sox have said that they love playing for Ozzie?How many players NOT on the Sox have said that? I have definitely read around that players who were just traded to the Sox, or are just talking about the Sox in general, like Ozzie. I'm sure you can find many quotes saying "I'm excited to play for Ozzie."

TDog
09-07-2010, 01:55 AM
Is this what's meant by an Ozzpologist?
Sure sounds like one to me.
The Sox with better management decisions on and off the field would be in first place by a wide margin given the personnel losses substained by the Twins. A 40 year old guy is the difference maker, c'mon.

If you're so determined to be negative that you have to label me, so be it.

But, seriously, there is nothing wrong with the White Sox management.

Noneck
09-07-2010, 02:21 AM
That's another way to look at it. The White Sox and Twins are fairly evenly matched, really. The Twins have won more one-run games, which really is the difference considering the Twins' one-run wins against the Sox.

The Twins have a better lineup. The Sox have better pitching. The White Sox have better pitchers in their bullpen, but the Twins have been more successful to date. White Sox fans might focus on some Twins luck -- a popup in the dome in St. Petersburg that hit the ceiling to win a game, the Rangers stupid baserunning in two games leading to one-run losses this weekend. If the Rays continue to lose, the White Sox have a chance at catching up to them for the wild card, though.

The Twins have lost Morneau, but the White Sox lost Peavy.

It isn't a matter of plugging in stats. I don't see how Thome would have made a difference in April or May, especially considering that Kotsay had a better May than Thome. In June and July, the White Sox won in spite of not having DH production.

One thing I like that Guillen is doing this year is that he seems to be rotating his players better this year, giving them more rest. That might be why the Sox have begun September so well. The bullpen ended up being overworked anyway, despite getting less use than the bullpens of other contenders. But Jenks and Thornton have come back strong after nagging injuries. Sale has been pitching well. Linebrink has been more dependable this year, and he has ended up needing to be with Santos hitting a wall and Putz sitting out.

This is a very good White Sox team. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's built. They didn't give up after a miserable start. There isn't anything wrong with the way it's managed. The team has very good chemistry. They are a lot better than a lot of people here give them credit for being. If they don't catch the Twins or the Rays (while staying ahead of the Red Sox), that doesn't mean they're not a very good team.

My point was that no matter how good of a team the Sox are, the Twins so far have been better. You mention Morneau but forgot to mention Nathan. Imagine where the Sox would be now without Jenks no matter what people around here say about him. Also you remember how everyone said the Twins wont be anything in a new park? Well the players dont like the new park and are playing better than they did last year, which was a park that they supposedly built their team around.

I am proud of the Sox but so far they have not exceeded the expectations as much as the Twins have.

SCCWS
09-07-2010, 07:40 AM
My point was that no matter how good of a team the Sox are, the Twins so far have been better. You mention Morneau but forgot to mention Nathan. Imagine where the Sox would be now without Jenks no matter what people around here say about him. Also you remember how everyone said the Twins wont be anything in a new park? Well the players dont like the new park and are playing better than they did last year, which was a park that they supposedly built their team around.

I am proud of the Sox but so far they have not exceeded the expectations as much as the Twins have.


Cora for the great job he's done with Ramirez and Beckham?

Ramirez has definitely improved. But how much credit goes to Cora and how much to Omar?

Beckham has a long way to go. He had a very poor weekend in Boston. Jerry Remy, who does the Boston color and a former 2nd baseman, said Beckham tries hard but has a slow reaction to balls hit to the right side. He also said his fundamentals need a lot of work.

SBSoxFan
09-07-2010, 08:47 AM
My point was that no matter how good of a team the Sox are, the Twins so far have been better. You mention Morneau but forgot to mention Nathan. Imagine where the Sox would be now without Jenks no matter what people around here say about him. Also you remember how everyone said the Twins wont be anything in a new park? Well the players dont like the new park and are playing better than they did last year, which was a park that they supposedly built their team around.

I am proud of the Sox but so far they have not exceeded the expectations as much as the Twins have.

If you're going to lose a key player, it's probably easier to deal with if the loss happens prior to the start of the season.

Obviously, one would expect the Twins to be better with both Morneau and Nathan; however, that's not a given. The way the Twins have played without them makes you wonder whether those two are worth $26.25 M.

kobo
09-07-2010, 09:06 AM
Well, it's the main reason why the Twins are in first place now.
You keep the missing point.
Whether Thome would have been a full time DH or just a Smokey Burgess type PH, is not the point.
Management left him out there for their only real competition to grab.
One thing a lot of people forget is that the only reason Thome is having the season he is having is because Morneau is hurt. If Morneau stays healthy, Thome probably plays in about 50-70% less games.

The first 2 months of the season is what did this team in. I'm not going to blame the DH position because I still believe in the idea/approach KW and Guillen took to that position this year. As has been said many, many times, it was who they plugged in as DH that caused the plan to blow up. But I honestly believe that moving forward we are going to see less of the pure DH types and more of the flexible DH in the AL.

AlexRios51
09-07-2010, 09:41 AM
AJ, Jenks, Beckham, TCQ, Teahan and Peavy all playing well below expectations certainly has not helped.
WHAT??? We never had any expectations for Teahen:D:, well I didn't. He's at right about where I though he'd be.

asindc
09-07-2010, 09:44 AM
Because they don't win 4 more games than the Twinkies the rest of the way.

This is the most accurate answer given so far.

asindc
09-07-2010, 09:52 AM
Also because the Twins beat up on the division. Look at their record in interleague and against the AL east. This is the reason they never make noise in the playoffs. Not playing the royals and Indians in October.

That's because the Twinkees are built to let other teams lose to them consistently, rather than assertively win against quality competition. The Sox don't make a good name for themselves by losing to them as often as they do, but the fact remains that the recent-vintage Twinkees have been built to not lose a lot of games during the regular season, but not to win championships.

hi im skot
09-07-2010, 10:06 AM
Blame your manager's insistence.

:rolleyes:

Hitmen77
09-07-2010, 10:25 AM
1) Poor starting pitching in April and May
2) Inconsistent offense in April and May
3) Failure to sign a legitimate DH until September
4) Failure to win games against horrible clubs like Cleveland, KC, and Baltimore
5) Bullpen implosion in August
6) Peavy injury
7) Poor record and play versus the Twins

Excellent summary. On items 1 and 2 (poor play in April/May). If the Sox played even passable baseball the first two months, then they would have been able to weather their smaller downturn in August.

I know people will argue this back and forth until we're all blue in the face, but I think the lack of a legitimate bat for DH is a huge factor too considering how many 1 run games this team lost this year. I saw lots of at bats from Kotsay and Jones that ended with rally killing DPs, strikeouts, or ground outs to 2B.

Finally, I know that any game on the schedule counts the same as any other, but to me, the difference in this season so far are the two games we gave away to Minnesota on July 16 and 18. On 7/16, we gave up 5 unearned runs with 4 errors and lost 7-4. On 7/18, we had a 3 run lead and were 3 outs away from a sweep but Jenks had a total meltdown. That's it - a 4 game swing right there. If the Sox could have won those 2 games (which we pissed away), we'd be in 1st place right now.

Those two blown losses to the Twins. If we had won just those two games, We would be up 0.5 game right now.

Not only that, that awful Jenks performance in the first of those two chokes killed all of the momentum our guys had. It was the worst thing at the worst possible time.

Agreed. The Twins were reeling before that and we helped jump-start their revival.

Hitmen77
09-07-2010, 10:36 AM
1) DH - Any plan would have been better than the plan up until now. Also look at the Thome factor which we let get away. Thome right now is the difference between both teams. Sox plus Thome would be in 1st place Twins minus Thome in second place


This decision that we didn't need Thome was a double whammy. First it weakened us because Thome has been much better than Kotsay this year and second because we gift-wrapped a huge bat to the Minnesota Twins.

Do you think the Twins are sorry they have Thome now? He's been looking pretty good for them....he had another big hit for them yesterday.

But, I know I know, Ozzie defenders (and I'm NOT in the "fire Ozzie" crowd) will just pretend that this wasn't his decision or that the Sox had many other viable DH options that fell through after they said no to Thome.

TDog
09-07-2010, 10:49 AM
My point was that no matter how good of a team the Sox are, the Twins so far have been better.

...

I left out Nathan because the Twins didn't have Nathan at the start of the season. And if they do have Nathan, their bullpen would be very difference because they wouldn't have taken on relief help in Capps and Fuentes. It wasn't as if Rauch replaced Nathan's production for long the way Thome has replaced Morneau's production. Thome isn't playing enough to have a strong season if Morneau is healthy. Similarly the White Sox came together when Teahen went down and the veteran signed to spend most of the time on the bench, comes in to solidifly third base.

The difference between the White Sox and the Twins isn't huge. They are actually fairly evenly matched. The White Sox have more power arms both in the starting rotation and the bullpen and are better built for the postseason, but the Twins aren't clearly a superior regular-season team.

The difference between the White Sox and Twins is that the Twins have won six of the eight one-run games against the White Sox, eight of the 15 games the two teams have played having been decided by one run. If the White Sox and Twins split those games, the White Sox are in first place. Even with Santos giving up the two-out seventh-inning grand slam to the first man he faced in Kansas City to tie the first game of a doubleheader in the first of three extra-inning road games. Even if ... fill in your blank for the worst loss of the season.

TheOldRoman
09-07-2010, 11:08 AM
Minnesota was the better team? :shrug:I completely disagree with that. I feel the Sox are the better team and this would be them handing the Twins another title. At least they aren't going down without a fight this time, though.
And this is why Reinsdorf will own this team forever because of fans like this.
If anyone is stupid enough to hire Guillen as their manager after his tenure here, I'll be shocked.
He's a public relations nightmare.I know! If only the fans were more critical, Reinsdorf would not only be forced to sell the team, he would cease being immortal.

khan
09-07-2010, 11:18 AM
If the SOX don't win the ALC, it may be due to reactive rather than proactive work on the part of the front office.

Waiting until September to fix what should have been fixed in January in terms of the lineup is reactive.

I can't fault the front office for Peavey's injury, but IMO, they had a decent contingency plan in Hudson/Torres/Harrell. But then, they again panicked and picked up perhaps the most expensive #4 or #5 SP in MLB that's not on the yankees. Again, this was panicky and reactive, as I believe that Hudson would have been a serviceable addition to the rotation.

Not having a 3rd LHP for the bullpen to START the year was reactive. [Hell, there was more MLB-ready depth at CATCHER than for the LH relievers to start the season.]


Having said this, if the SOX do win the ALC, some of these reactive moves will have contributed. I just prefer the front office to do the majority of their work in the offseason, not at the deadline.

Noneck
09-07-2010, 11:22 AM
The difference between the White Sox and Twins is that the Twins have won six of the eight one-run games against the White Sox, eight of the 15 games the two teams have played having been decided by one run. If the White Sox and Twins split those games, the White Sox are in first place. Even with Santos giving up the two-out seventh-inning grand slam to the first man he faced in Kansas City to tie the first game of a doubleheader in the first of three extra-inning road games. Even if ... fill in your blank for the worst loss of the season.

I feel as though one can not break down the reason to individual situations. The season has to be looked upon as a whole not snippets. And as i said, so far Minnesota have exceeded expectations.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts what a merry Christmas we would all have.

canOcorn
09-07-2010, 11:37 AM
Thome. (half teal)

No teal needed. Thome on the White Sox and not on the Twins, plus Kotsay playing in the pool with his kids clearly puts us up 5+ games at this point.

Ozzie gets an F for the roster he wanted and Kenny gets an F for letting Ozzie make roster decisions. Kenny needs to make the roster he wants or quit if he thinks that Ozzie has more power than him in the organization.

doublem23
09-07-2010, 11:51 AM
I completely disagree with that. I feel the Sox are the better team and this would be them handing the Twins another title. At least they aren't going down without a fight this time, though.

The Sox might peak higher (and even that is debatable), but this is baseball, it's about grinding out a marathon, not living and dying on hot and cold streaks, if the Twins win this thing its because they were a better, more consistent team. Not saying this Sox team is bad or they don't deserve a shot at the postseason, because I feel they do, but they dug themselves in holes twice already this season. Nobody to blame but themselves.

doublem23
09-07-2010, 11:53 AM
No teal needed. Thome on the White Sox and not on the Twins, plus Kotsay playing in the pool with his kids clearly puts us up 5+ games at this point.

I don't know if that's true or not. Take Thome away from the Twins and it hurts them, but anyone who has been paying attention to the Sox this season by now must know they win and die with their pitching. Maybe Minnesota is 8-9 games worse without Thome, but I don't neccessarily know if we'd be even 1 game better with him. Not saying Kotsasy wasn't a mistake, but offense has surprisingly not been this team's Achilles tendon when they're losing. Unless Big Jim has a secret talent as a lights out bullpen arm, I don't know if he'd be winning any more games for us.

FarmerAndy
09-07-2010, 11:54 AM
Because they don't win 4 more games than the Twinkies the rest of the way.

This is about the only solid, certain answer to the question.

captain54
09-07-2010, 12:08 PM
but anyone who has been paying attention to the Sox this season by now must know they win and die with their pitching.

but offense has surprisingly not been this team's Achilles tendon when they're losing. .

Let me just point out that all those bullpen meltdowns certainly didn't help matters, but how many games this year was the bullpen forced to
protect a tie or one run lead because the offense couldn't capitalize on scoring opportunities. That seemed to be a recurring theme this year.
Rally killing DP's and not driving guys in from third with less than two outs in abundance

captain54
09-07-2010, 12:40 PM
If the SOX don't win the ALC, it may be due to reactive rather than proactive work on the part of the front office.

Waiting until September to fix what should have been fixed in January in terms of the lineup is reactive.

I can't fault the front office for Peavey's injury, but IMO, they had a decent contingency plan in Hudson/Torres/Harrell. But then, they again panicked and picked up perhaps the most expensive #4 or #5 SP in MLB that's not on the yankees. Again, this was panicky and reactive, as I believe that Hudson would have been a serviceable addition to the rotation.

Not having a 3rd LHP for the bullpen to START the year was reactive. [Hell, there was more MLB-ready depth at CATCHER than for the LH relievers to start the season.]


Having said this, if the SOX do win the ALC, some of these reactive moves will have contributed. I just prefer the front office to do the majority of their work in the offseason, not at the deadline.

I couldn't agree more......Jenks was a question mark in spring training.

Garcia was a question mark in spring training and the Sox ended up getting lucky. Replacing the offense of Thome and Dye from 09 (at least half of 09), with Jones and Kotsay was a question mark.

maybe there's so much ego involved in the front office, they think that since they did it in 05' they can do it in any given year...who knows. Again, there'
also that bargain basement/lets wait till the last minute and get the best deal mentality we'll all know to grow to love

I think the idea of winging it and going with Jenks as the closer in 2010 despite all of the issues coming into the season could end up being a big deciding factor this year. Jenks was wildly streaky this year and inconsistent at best.

Granted there were other issues, but to come back from 9 1/2 games out is pretty remarkable. A shame to waste that effort because of a screwed up bullpen, the disruption the result of one guy.

Sad
09-07-2010, 12:52 PM
not beating Minnesota

Joliet_Sox
09-07-2010, 01:00 PM
1. pretty much all of April & June.
2. Thome's walk-off.
3. Peavy's injury.

TheOldRoman
09-07-2010, 01:13 PM
The Sox might peak higher (and even that is debatable), but this is baseball, it's about grinding out a marathon, not living and dying on hot and cold streaks, if the Twins win this thing its because they were a better, more consistent team. Not saying this Sox team is bad or they don't deserve a shot at the postseason, because I feel they do, but they dug themselves in holes twice already this season. Nobody to blame but themselves.I agree 100%, but I think the Sox drastically underachieved the first third of the season. They are also not as good as they were in June. The Sox would have no room to complain after losing the division, but I could certainly blame them for those two terrible months. All in all, I think the Sox are better than the Twins. The Sox have underachieved for much of the year, whereas the Twins haven't really. This should have been the Sox' for the taking.

TDog
09-07-2010, 01:38 PM
I feel as though one can not break down the reason to individual situations. The season has to be looked upon as a whole not snippets. And as i said, so far Minnesota have exceeded expectations.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts what a merry Christmas we would all have.

The Twins have exceeded expectations, but as much as they are winning, they are only ahead of the White Sox because they have won the head-to-head matchups. The White Sox have exceeded WSI expectations, certainly.

But the games against the Twins have been a whole lot of snippets. There isn't one reason or even two reasons why the Sox lost so many one-run games. In his weakest month statistically, Mark Kotsay homered in one of the two White Sox one-run wins against the Twins. He had more total bases and as many hits as Thome in the one-run extra-inning loss that Thome won with a home run. There were games between the White Sox and Twins in which neither Kotsay or Thome played.

The question is why are the Twins ahead. Showing why requires an if. It isn't because the White Sox have an incompetent manager who burns out his bullpen by playing too many matchups. Gardenhire does more matching up than Guillen does and his bullpen has pitched more innings. It isn't that Guillen sacrifices too much. Gardenhire sacrifices almost as much as Guillen.

It would be nice to see Tampa Bay continue to slide (I haven't checked to see if they have any more series against Baltimore that they can lose, although it would be nicer to see the Twins experience the bullpen blip the White Sox did in August). As much as I don't want to see the Twins in the ALDS, both the White Sox and Twins are playing exceptional baseball now.

khan
09-07-2010, 01:41 PM
But the games against the Twins have been a whole lot of snippets. There isn't one reason or even two reasons why the Sox lost so many one-run games. In his weakest month statistically, Mark Kotsay homered in one of the two White Sox one-run wins against the Twins. He had more total bases and as many hits as Thome in the one-run extra-inning loss that Thome won with a home run. There were games between the White Sox and Twins in which neither Kotsay or Thome played.

Yes, and Mark Kotsay's contributions mirror Jim Thome's in the other ~130 games so far this season, right?

Nay, I stand corrected: Somehow you will show us how Mark Kotsay's markedly inferior stats over the course of the season are somehow BETTER than Thome's, and thus more important to the SOX, right?

DirtySox
09-07-2010, 01:50 PM
Yes, and Mark Kotsay's contributions mirror Jim Thome's in the other ~130 games so far this season, right?

Nay, I stand corrected: Somehow you will show us how Mark Kotsay's markedly inferior stats over the course of the season are somehow BETTER than Thome's, and thus more important to the SOX, right?

I'm with you.

The Kotsay arguments around here are getting moronic. Grasping desperately at straws trying to show his value over Thome (Or any competent DH) is the epitome of ridiculous. Kotsay has been sub replacement level at -0.5 WAR this year. Thome has been worth 2.9 WAR thus far.

Pointing out isolated incidents of success with Mark Kotsay isn't proving anything worthwhile. Over the course of the season, Mark Kotsay has been below serviceable at one of the easiest positions for a team to fill.

TheOldRoman
09-07-2010, 01:55 PM
I'm with you.

The Kotsay arguments around here are getting moronic. Grasping desperately at straws trying to show his value over Thome (Or any competent DH) is the epitome of ridiculous. Kotsay has been sub replacement level at -0.5 WAR this year. Thome has been worth 2.9 WAR thus far.

Pointing out isolated incidents of success with Mark Kotsay isn't proving anything worthwhile. Over the course of the season, Mark Kotsay has been below serviceable at one of the easiest positions for a team to fill.That shows nothing. It doesn't prove a thing. Has Thome been better than Kotsay this year? Yes. Is that stat relevant? Not at all. I could randomly assign numbers based on awesomeness, but that wouldn't prove who was better, either.

DirtySox
09-07-2010, 01:56 PM
That shows nothing. It doesn't prove a thing. Has Thome been better than Kotsay this year? Yes. Is that stat relevant? Not at all. I could randomly assign numbers based on awesomeness, but that wouldn't prove who was better, either.

Not getting into WAR with you again. It's relevant to many, just not you apparently.

khan
09-07-2010, 01:59 PM
That shows nothing. It doesn't prove a thing. Has Thome been better than Kotsay this year? Yes. Is that stat relevant? Not at all. I could randomly assign numbers based on awesomeness, but that wouldn't prove who was better, either.

I'd say that WAR is more relevant than some mental contortion to cite 2 or 3 games out of ~130 or so to support Kotsay's existance in the roster.


Whether you like stats, or if you want to get those damn kids off your lawn with their newfangled stats, at least you agree that Thome has been better than Kotsay. It's a start.

TheOldRoman
09-07-2010, 02:01 PM
I'd say that WAR is more relevant than some mental contortion to cite 2 or 3 games out of ~130 or so to support Kotsay's existance in the roster.


Whether you like stats, or if you want to get those damn kids off your lawn with their newfangled stats, at least you agree that Thome has been better than Kotsay. It's a start.Right, because anyone who disagrees with you is a tired old fogey. I guess I'm not smart enough to keep up with you. That must be it! For your information, there are many REAL statistics whch one could use to measure a player. WAR is not one of them.

khan
09-07-2010, 02:03 PM
Right, because anyone who disagrees with you is a tired old fogey. I guess I'm not smart enough to keep up with you. That must be it! For your information, there are many REAL statistics whch one could use to measure a player.
OK, name a few. I'd like to read your suggestions about this topic.

TheOldRoman
09-07-2010, 02:54 PM
OK, name a few. I'd like to read your suggestions about this topic.Batting average, OBP, hits, walks, doubles, triples, homers, runs, RBIs, stolen bases, slugging percentage, etc. Those are some actual measures of a player's performance.

khan
09-07-2010, 03:27 PM
Batting average, OBP, hits, walks, doubles, triples, homers, runs, RBIs, stolen bases, slugging percentage, etc. Those are some actual measures of a player's performance.

Some of these are useable, and some are not.

RBIs are a team stat, not an individual stat, to tell you the truth. More often than not, the player's RBI totals will be impacted by his team mates' abilities to get on-base ahead of him.

Batting average is, at a minimum, an individual stat. However, given the arbitrary nature of what is a hit/what is an error, this also has less utility than other numbers.


For WAR, here's a citation from the NYT:

http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/26/keeping-score-the-number-beyond-m-v-p-numbers/?scp=1&sq=%22The%20Number%20Beyond%20M.V.P.%20Numbers%20% 22&st=cse

..."For position players, WAR considers batting, base running (both base stealing and other advances), defense (fielding, throwing, double-play ability) and the player’s position. The position adjustment is perhaps the least understood and utilized. Different positions hit much differently..."


In any case, I still fail to see why you dislike WAR so much. Care to explain?

kufram
09-07-2010, 04:29 PM
We are in a serious and tight race for the division crown that gets to the playoffs that gets to the World Series and some people are still banging on about Thome/Kotsay/Jones. Get over it. It's yesterday's news.

We've won 8 games in a row and are playing games that matter. We have a team capable of taking this thing when many had them written off.... more than once this season.

THAT is the story. Seriously... let it go. Get over it... and yourselves.

sox1970
09-07-2010, 04:32 PM
We are in a serious and tight race for the division crown that gets to the playoffs that gets to the World Series and some people are still banging on about Thome/Kotsay/Jones. Get over it. It's yesterday's news.

We've won 8 games in a row and are playing games that matter. We have a team capable of taking this thing when many had them written off.... more than once this season.

THAT is the story. Seriously... let it go. Get over it... and yourselves.

A post from five hours from now. Cool.

kufram
09-07-2010, 04:38 PM
A post from five hours from now. Cool.


Accidental premonition.

jdm2662
09-07-2010, 04:48 PM
Is this seriously a question?

If the Sox don't win the division, it is because they would've won less games than the Twins.

What do I win?

kufram
09-07-2010, 04:51 PM
Is this seriously a question?

If the Sox don't win the division, it is because they would've won less games than the Twins.

What do I win?


A sanity clause.

Lip Man 1
09-07-2010, 05:31 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_He5bfLq5vq0/SzJsEF8YfVI/AAAAAAAABBc/-pKwG5ohrng/s320/aint%2Bno%2Bsanity%2Bclause.jpg

There isn't such a thing as a sanity clause!

Lip

TDog
09-07-2010, 05:46 PM
Yes, and Mark Kotsay's contributions mirror Jim Thome's in the other ~130 games so far this season, right? ...?

No, they don't. But if you look at the games that would have been won if Jim Thome were playing you have to take away the games where Kotsay's offense was the difference. In April and May when the Sox needed more offense, Thome probably wouldn't have mattered because he got off to a slow start and in the lineup where no one was hitting, the Sox would have pitched around Thome, who doesn't swing at balls outside of the strike zone. It isn't as if Thome would have come up with the bases loaded often in April and May, and if he had walked, it isn't as if the hitters who followed him would have driven him home from first.

Actually, Kotsay had a better May than Thome did. In June and July, Thome wouldn't have won more games for the Sox because the Sox didn't lose many. In August, Kotsay was hitting well, and it wasn't offense that the White Sox were lacking.

It isn't a matter of plugging numbers and averages in and getting wins and losses out.

GoSox2K3
09-07-2010, 05:55 PM
We are in a serious and tight race for the division crown that gets to the playoffs that gets to the World Series and some people are still banging on about Thome/Kotsay/Jones. Get over it. It's yesterday's news.

We've won 8 games in a row and are playing games that matter. We have a team capable of taking this thing when many had them written off.... more than once this season.

THAT is the story. Seriously... let it go. Get over it... and yourselves.

um, the whole point of the thread is to ask what people think would be the main reason if we don't win the Central. Sorry, but this includes decisions and performances that happened IN THE PAST this year.

Whether you agree with the decision to not bring back Thome or not, it is on the table for discussion as a factor that some people might believe impacted our success this year.

Why don't you get over yourself and actually read the thread title before telling others to "get over yourselves". :rolleyes:

mweflen
09-07-2010, 06:28 PM
RE: the original post -


1. :ozzie

2. :KW

sullythered
09-07-2010, 06:36 PM
RE: the original post -


1. :ozzie

2. :KW

Well, we're gonna be a 90ish win team. So if Kenny is at fault, then Ozzie has done a hell of a job.

Everybody bitched about the team that Kenny put together, then Ozzie led them to a pretty good damn season. So either they both did OK, or one did bad and the other did good. You can't have it both ways.

Frontman
09-07-2010, 07:12 PM
The main reason the Sox might not win the Central is.......




.....the Twins won more games.

'nuff said.

Gavin
09-07-2010, 07:21 PM
Freddy Garcia, our bastion at #4 (#5?) somehow didn't have the ability to have what it takes to be consistent and injury-free throughout the season.

CLUBHOUSE KID
09-07-2010, 10:19 PM
The fact they didn't start playing baseball until June.

This isn't a main reason, but their their suckiness against AL Central teams hurt (although they just swept the Indians, so their luck may be changing). Also, their inability to win in Minnesota.

These are the biggest reasons why. Those NL teams really helped the White Sox.

sullythered
09-07-2010, 10:35 PM
It's because we're probably about a 90 win team, and (despite everybody's preseason predictions) this division will take about 96 to win.

kufram
09-08-2010, 02:35 AM
um, the whole point of the thread is to ask what people think would be the main reason if we don't win the Central. Sorry, but this includes decisions and performances that happened IN THE PAST this year.

Whether you agree with the decision to not bring back Thome or not, it is on the table for discussion as a factor that some people might believe impacted our success this year.

Why don't you get over yourself and actually read the thread title before telling others to "get over yourselves". :rolleyes:

I read the thread title and the thread. I'm making my comment. That is, in the heat of a thrilling run by both the White Sox and the Twins, to pay attention to what happened months ago or even weeks ago IN CASE WE LOSE is such a poor use of time. I'm thinking of winning NOW. Forgive me.

khan
09-08-2010, 11:47 AM
No, they don't. But if you look at the games that would have been won if Jim Thome were playing you have to take away the games where Kotsay's offense was the difference. In April and May when the Sox needed more offense, Thome probably wouldn't have mattered because he got off to a slow start and in the lineup where no one was hitting, the Sox would have pitched around Thome, who doesn't swing at balls outside of the strike zone. It isn't as if Thome would have come up with the bases loaded often in April and May, and if he had walked, it isn't as if the hitters who followed him would have driven him home from first.
Holy **** is this a lot of spin!

No matter HOW you contort your mind to defend the team at every turn, Thome has had a better season, with MORE positive contributions than Kotsay. This means that there have been more games in which Thome did more for his team than Kotsay did for his.

Actually, Kotsay had a better May than Thome did. In June and July, Thome wouldn't have won more games for the Sox because the Sox didn't lose many.
Yes, let's ignore Thome's superior April, June, July, August and September. [Let's also ignore the reality that KW had to stoop to picking up a bad guy to FIX this error.]

Congradulations! You just made the same silly post as your previous "three game" post, only you plugged in 1 month, while ignoring parts of 5 other months!

I'm wondering: You're going so far out of your way to defend KW/OG. Are you related to someone in the organization, or do you work for the SOX? [I honestly don't mean to insult you or any of your kin, if this is the case; Your comments are so out there that it suggests to me that you may be connected to someone with the SOX.]


It isn't a matter of plugging numbers and averages in and getting wins and losses out.
Sure. But it IS a matter of plugging in superior players, and getting better TEAM performance out. It IS a matter of seeing a season in it's ENTIRETY, not contorting your mind to cherry-pick 3 games out of 138 or one month out of six.

SI1020
09-08-2010, 12:04 PM
That shows nothing. It doesn't prove a thing. Has Thome been better than Kotsay this year? Yes. Is that stat relevant? Not at all. I could randomly assign numbers based on awesomeness, but that wouldn't prove who was better, either. I'm an older fan, and we as a generation are sometimes criticized for not getting with the program concerning the stats revolution. As for me, I've done my best to look at all of them and make up my own mind. In my case I spent a good bit of time seeing whose WAR was what down through the years. Before I bore anyone further I'd say WAR is far from irrelevant and I think the difference in Thome's and Kotsay's WAR is very telling. I can understand not wanting Thome back, I can't for the life of me understand why some go into pretzel like contortions to defend the indefensible. The Sox DH situation pre Manny cost them.

russ99
09-08-2010, 01:51 PM
The main reason the Sox might not win the Central is.......

.....the Twins won more games.

'nuff said.

+1. So sick of all the finger pointing. I'm happy we have a team with a good record and in contention the last month of the season.

doublem23
09-08-2010, 03:12 PM
+1. So sick of all the finger pointing. I'm happy we have a team with a good record and in contention the last month of the season.

You can be happy and still be upset over lost opportunities. You don't have to be a monotonous robot only capable of seeing the world black and white.

Hey, I'm happy the Sox are keeping it interesting, but they've had plenty of chances to be up in this division race, some out of their control (bullpen arm injuries in late August) and some in their control (giving Mark Kotsay and Andruw Jones the majority of DH PA).

soxfan1965
09-15-2010, 02:12 PM
Here's the view from Minnesota: http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/blogs/102953054.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUo8cyaiUiD3aPc:_Yyc: aUHDYaGEP7eyckcUs

Twin's Bret Boone 2005 == Sox Manny 2010 =>

Lot of Twins fans comment about Manny situation too.

TheOldRoman
09-15-2010, 02:13 PM
You can be happy and still be upset over lost opportunities. You don't have to be a monotonous robot only capable of seeing the world black and white.

Hey, I'm happy the Sox are keeping it interesting, but they've had plenty of chances to be up in this division race, some out of their control (bullpen arm injuries in late August) and some in their control (giving Mark Kotsay and Andruw Jones the majority of DH PA).Does not compute.

Rikirk
09-15-2010, 03:12 PM
A-We are the Twins B****
B-No clutch hitting especially with bases loaded.
C-Inconsistant pitching.

jdm2662
09-15-2010, 03:37 PM
You can also include the Twins 40-16 record since the All-Star Break. The next best in the AL is the Rays at 33-23.

asindc
09-15-2010, 03:45 PM
You can also include the Twins 40-16 record since the All-Star Break. The next best in the AL is the Rays at 33-23.

Posted in another thread:

A little tidbit that might illuminate the debate (or not). Post-AS break records for the top six teams in the AL to this point:

SOX: 30-27
NYY: 31-25
TAM: 33-23
TEX: 30-25
MIN: 40-16
BOS: 30-27

Make of it what you will.

ewokpelts
09-15-2010, 04:13 PM
1. manager
2. general manager
3. dh
4. bullpen
5. closer

voodoochile
09-16-2010, 12:27 AM
Okay, here are the main reasons (IMO) that the Sox failed to get over the hump this year...



The starting pitching was not as good as advertised. The loss of Peavy and the stress that put on the rest of the guys to step up to a higher rung on the ladder hurt. Buehrle has been consistent but unspectacular. Floyd and Danks have both had roller coaster seasons. Floyd in particular started poorly and is ending poorly. Freddie did prove that he cannot be relied on for a full season. I think some of these issues are caused by wear and tear as Ozzie has had to push the starters extra hard at crucial times due to...
The Bullpen which has as many live arms and strong pitchers as any I can recall has had an injury plagued second half. Though most of the pitchers who have pitched have shown signs of being solid bullpen pieces, too much stress has been put on too few arms due to injuries to Putz, Thornton, Bobby and others. Some of the arms that could have filled the gaps have been subsequently injured also (Threets).

That's pretty much it. I am not disappointed in the offense. I think it's been good enough. This team was supposed to win with pitching and hasn't. Some of that was foreseeable because some of the key pieces have had injury problems in the past or are getting older (Peavy, Freddie, Buehrle, Bobby, Thornton and Putz). I think the Kotsay/Jones platoon was the right idea but the wrong people, but those issues pale in comparison to the inconsistencies and injuries to 4 of the 5 starters and all of the back end of the bullpen. Yes, I'd like to see a serious DH or a better bench platoon to allow the rotating DH to be effective, but it all comes down to the pitching this year and that hasn't lived up to its billing.

I want to give a shoutout to TDog for first pointing this out back in late April/early May. He was right then and it has continued to be the problem as the season has progressed save for one solid two month stretch when the team was winning at a high clip.

The Twinkies got redhot at the right time. The Sox couldn't keep pace. I think this team can be back fighting for the divison again in 2011 with very few changes (and hopefully the return of Paulie).

I won't be shocked if Danks is traded, possibly for a 3B or a C and honestly that doesn't bother me. I like Danks, but will take my chances with Peavy Floyd, Buehrle, Jackson and Garcia next year. I also won't be shocked to see Bobby traded for prospects or nontendered, but if he is brought back, I can't see him getting a raise and wouldn't be shocked either if he finally signs a multiyear deal (3/18) and think the Sox would consider doing it.

It was fun while it lasted, but even a diehard optimist like me can see the writing on the wall. The chances on the Sox winning the division now are so remote as to be unbettable.

Go Sox, 2011!

TommyJohn
09-16-2010, 07:45 AM
Okay, here are the main reasons (IMO) that the Sox failed to get over the hump this year...



The starting pitching was not as good as advertised. The loss of Peavy and the stress that put on the rest of the guys to step up to a higher rung on the ladder hurt. Buehrle has been consistent but unspectacular. Floyd and Danks have both had roller coaster seasons. Floyd in particular started poorly and is ending poorly. Freddie did prove that he cannot be relied on for a full season. I think some of these issues are caused by wear and tear as Ozzie has had to push the starters extra hard at crucial times due to...
The Bullpen which has as many live arms and strong pitchers as any I can recall has had an injury plagued second half. Though most of the pitchers who have pitched have shown signs of being solid bullpen pieces, too much stress has been put on too few arms due to injuries to Putz, Thornton, Bobby and others. Some of the arms that could have filled the gaps have been subsequently injured also (Threets).
That's pretty much it. I am not disappointed in the offense. I think it's been good enough. This team was supposed to win with pitching and hasn't. Some of that was foreseeable because some of the key pieces have had injury problems in the past or are getting older (Peavy, Freddie, Buehrle, Bobby, Thornton and Putz). I think the Kotsay/Jones platoon was the right idea but the wrong people, but those issues pale in comparison to the inconsistencies and injuries to 4 of the 5 starters and all of the back end of the bullpen. Yes, I'd like to see a serious DH or a better bench platoon to allow the rotating DH to be effective, but it all comes down to the pitching this year and that hasn't lived up to its billing.

I want to give a shoutout to TDog for first pointing this out back in late April/early May. He was right then and it has continued to be the problem as the season has progressed save for one solid two month stretch when the team was winning at a high clip.

The Twinkies got redhot at the right time. The Sox couldn't keep pace. I think this team can be back fighting for the divison again in 2011 with very few changes (and hopefully the return of Paulie).

I won't be shocked if Danks is traded, possibly for a 3B or a C and honestly that doesn't bother me. I like Danks, but will take my chances with Peavy Floyd, Buehrle, Jackson and Garcia next year. I also won't be shocked to see Bobby traded for prospects or nontendered, but if he is brought back, I can't see him getting a raise and wouldn't be shocked either if he finally signs a multiyear deal (3/18) and think the Sox would consider doing it.

It was fun while it lasted, but even a diehard optimist like me can see the writing on the wall. The chances on the Sox winning the division now are so remote as to be unbettable.

Go Sox, 2011!

An analysis of what went wrong without bitterness, vitriol, ****s, demands to fire the moron manager, moron GM, cheap ass owner, complaints that Thome would have them headed to the World Series? Thank you.

Hitmen77
09-16-2010, 09:56 AM
To me, the main reason is our face-to-face record vs. the Twins. PERIOD. Yes, there are underlying offense, pitching, bullpen debates. But, in the end, if the Sox played .500 ball vs. the Twins we'd be right up there right now.

I don't care where people side on the DH debate or the keep/fire Ozzie, Kenny, Walker, etc. debate, I think the Sox have some long, hard questions to ask themselves this offseason. Why is our rotation not as good as expected? Why is the offense dreadful in April/May year after year? (and don't say "cold weather" because the opponents play in the same weather) Why can't we produce more home-grown talent?

According to another thread here, the Sox have an estimated $85 million committed to current players if you count arbitration eligible but NOT counting free agents (PK, AJ). That's a lot of money for players currently under the Sox control.

Once 2010 is over, it's history.....I want the Sox to focus on winning in 2011 but that salary commitment for most of the same guys who brought us 2010 is troubling.

Over all, I think the Sox biggest problem at this point is their poor farm system. The inability to produce much talent is catching up with them as they aren't NYY or Bos and can't just throw more and more money at veterans for each hole we have. Yes, the Sox have Beckham and now Sale. But other successful AL Central teams produce more from their farm system.

Domeshot17
09-16-2010, 10:04 AM
I think lack of leadership throughout the year was a major factor. Not even JUST Ozzie, but no one, not 1 player, really stepped up and would win us games outside PK. In 2005, it was Joe Crede, who can forget his game tying homer then game winning homer vs. Cleveland. That was the game I knew everything was going to be alright in 2005.

The 2010 Sox never had anyone step up single handedly when facing adversity. They either succeeded, or failed, entirely as a team. The rotation never had a stopper, the bullpen never had a go to guy to prevent a slump, and the offense never had a player carry it on its back. Konerko was consistently good, but for example, we never got the Carlos Gonzalez or Troy Tulowitzki STEPPING UP that Colorado is now. I think this was clearly seen the way this team just layed down and crumbled the last 2 games. They were expecting to lose.

voodoochile
09-16-2010, 11:11 AM
An analysis of what went wrong without bitterness, vitriol, ****s, demands to fire the moron manager, moron GM, cheap ass owner, complaints that Thome would have them headed to the World Series? Thank you.

You mean people aren't doing that? :o:

Tragg
09-16-2010, 11:16 AM
Nothing.
It's just bad luck this year.
Bunting, loading up with declining veterans, picking DHs based on their defensive abilities, and not using young players, especially in the heat of a pennant race, is the way to go.
We'll get em next year.

tstrike2000
09-16-2010, 11:37 AM
:whiner:

Dan H
09-16-2010, 03:56 PM
To me, the main reason is our face-to-face record vs. the Twins. PERIOD. Yes, there are underlying offense, pitching, bullpen debates. But, in the end, if the Sox played .500 ball vs. the Twins we'd be right up there right now.

I don't care where people side on the DH debate or the keep/fire Ozzie, Kenny, Walker, etc. debate, I think the Sox have some long, hard questions to ask themselves this offseason. Why is our rotation not as good as expected? Why is the offense dreadful in April/May year after year? (and don't say "cold weather" because the opponents play in the same weather) Why can't we produce more home-grown talent?

According to another thread here, the Sox have an estimated $95 million committed to current players if you count arbitration eligible but NOT counting free agents (PK, AJ). That's a lot of money for players currently under the Sox control.

Once 2010 is over, it's history.....I want the Sox to focus on winning in 2011 but that salary commitment for most of the same guys who brought us 2010 is troubling.

Over all, I think the Sox biggest problem at this point is their poor farm system. The inability to produce much talent is catching up with them as they aren't NYY or Bos and can't just throw more and more money at veterans for each hole we have. Yes, the Sox have Beckham and now Sale. But other successful AL Central teams produce more from their farm system.

I agree with a great deal in this post. The starting pitching was supposed to be so great and it wasn't. Floyd and Danks have potential but they are not there yet. Otherwise, the starting pitching was good at times but certainly not dominant.

The slow starts are puzzling as well. Fans didn't want to panic in April or even May. But you can't just throw away a third of the season and expect to contend. The Sox dug themselves a big hole and even that great streak couldn't save them.

The team does have to ask itself some hard questions. The Twins did get hot and how will the Sox compete against them next year?

I have doubts about next year. One or two minor changes are not going to change this team. It should be an interesting off season.