PDA

View Full Version : Streaky - By The Numbers:


Lip Man 1
09-18-2010, 08:49 PM
When you start summing up the season, these may be of some relevance.

I don't know if I can remember a more crazy, schizoid White Sox club in my life. "Inconsistent" doesn't do this team, this year any justice:

April 5 through June 8: 24-33
June 9 through July 30: 34-11
July 31 through August 29: 11-17
August 30 through September 6: 7-0
September 7 through September 18: 2-9

Now throw in an 11 game winning streak, a nine game winning streak and a seven game winning streak.

Don't forget three four game losing streaks and a (for now) five game one and you have one seriously strange team.

Lip

tsoxman
09-18-2010, 09:18 PM
And with all of the post all star break meltdowns, I have seen enough. There is not a whole lot about this team that makes me look forward to 2011. The Tigers have more promise than we do.

WhiteSox5187
09-19-2010, 12:02 AM
And with all of the post all star break meltdowns, I have seen enough. There is not a whole lot about this team that makes me look forward to 2011. The Tigers have more promise than we do.

I couldn't disagree more, we're going to have one of the best starting rotations next year and are strong up the middle (especially if AJ is re-signed). That's a very good place to start. Now whether or not we can fix the holes that need to be fixed is another question, but we have a very solid base for next year.

soltrain21
09-19-2010, 12:12 AM
I couldn't disagree more, we're going to have one of the best starting rotations next year and are strong up the middle (especially if AJ is re-signed). That's a very good place to start. Now whether or not we can fix the holes that need to be fixed is another question, but we have a very solid base for next year.

We had a good rotation this year too...? Floyd needs to turn the corner and Danks has to stop giving up so many early runs.

Huisj
09-19-2010, 12:43 AM
And with all of the post all star break meltdowns, I have seen enough. There is not a whole lot about this team that makes me look forward to 2011. The Tigers have more promise than we do.

I also disagree about the Tigers. They are a team that is going to have to work hard to avoid a big and possibly difficult rebuilding mode. They are hanging on to mediocrity this year by having a bunch of role players do a decent job of filling in as starters. Their rotation is not deep either at this point. CF is set for them with Jackson, and obviously 1B with Cabrera too, but there aren't a lot of set spots in the lineup after that.

3B- Inge is getting old, is a good defender but a very inconsistent hitter. Also, is he a FA?
SS- Peralta says he wouldn't mind coming back, but he's not very good anymore.
2B- Rhymes has looked useful over the last month or so, but he's 27 and was never a real highly thought of prospect. Sizemore seems to be talented but without much in the way of results until he homered today. Guillen is old and bad and just had microfracture knee surgery.
C- Not much here.
RF, LF- Boesch was crazy for the first two months and isn't actually that good. Ordonez is old and fragile. Raburn is a role/platoon guy at best who can play good here and there but is not a good fulltime starter.
SP- Verlander is good, Scherzer looks pretty good, Porcello might be decent eventually but who knows with a guy that young. Bonderman looks about through. Galarraga had a nice shutout earlier this year, but that's about it. Not a deep rotation at all.

Even with a big offseason, it's hard to see that being a better ballclub than the Sox going into 2011.

Dan H
09-19-2010, 02:47 AM
[QUOTE=Lip Man 1;2623908]When you start summing up the season, these may be of some relevance.

I don't know if I can remember a more crazy, schizoid White Sox club in my life. "Inconsistent" doesn't do this team, this year any justice:

April 5 through June 8: 24-33
June 9 through July 30: 34-11
July 31 through August 29: 11-17
August 30 through September 6: 7-0
September 7 through September 18: 2-9

Now throw in an 11 game winning streak, a nine game winning streak and a seven game winning streak.

Don't forget three four game losing streaks and a (for now) five game one and you have one seriously strange team.

It actually sums this team's performance since the World Series. Great first half of '06, terrible second half. Losing season in '07, division title in '08. Losing season in '09 and a combination of everything in 2010. The team has talent but it doesn't mesh together into a true winning form.

There is one thing that is consistent about the White Sox: their melt downs against the Twins.

All that can be said about the White Sox is that they still cannot become an elite American League franchise. They have success and then fall back to the middle of the pack. It has been that way since the late '60's. And I don't see it changing any time soon.

captain54
09-19-2010, 03:12 AM
All that can be said about the White Sox is that they still cannot become an elite American League franchise. They have success and then fall back to the middle of the pack. It has been that way since the late '60's. And I don't see it changing any time soon.

with maybe the exception of 94' following the 93' Division Champs....we'll never know how far the 94' Sox could have gone...some say the 94' Sox were better than the 93' version and could have gone all the way

tsoxman
09-19-2010, 06:11 AM
with maybe the exception of 94' following the 93' Division Champs....we'll never know how far the 94' Sox could have gone...some say the 94' Sox were better than the 93' version and could have gone all the way
I am not sure about that...Cleveland was charging very hard at us at the time. We were a playoff team for sure, but an AL pennant was not a lock.

tsoxman
09-19-2010, 06:19 AM
I couldn't disagree more, we're going to have one of the best starting rotations next year .......
I cringe every time I hear that type of proclamation (reminds me of 1984 when Hoyt, Bannister, Dotsun, Burns and Seaver were supposed to be a the second coming.

Really, next year....I would not count on Jake Peavy at all...Floyd is a head case....Danks is good, but seems to hit a wall at the all star break...Buehrle battles you, but is nowhere near what he was five years ago...Jackson is pretty good, though seems to have consitency issues.

Dan H
09-19-2010, 09:39 AM
with maybe the exception of 94' following the 93' Division Champs....we'll never know how far the 94' Sox could have gone...some say the 94' Sox were better than the 93' version and could have gone all the way

The most frustrating thing is that we can only speculate about 1994. We do know the '90's went the same way as the '80's. Start with great promise, win a division title and then fall off the face of the earth for the remainder of the decade. It's gets tiresome for many Sox fans. It doesn't seem to get tiresome for Jerry Reinsdorf.

LITTLE NELL
09-19-2010, 09:54 AM
Don't forget we have a hard time with American League teams, 64-66 against the AL.
The team also lacked the killer instinct, 2 road trips come to mind. In early August we beat Detroit 3 out of 4 at Comerica then drop 3 of 4 to the Orioles where we forgot to hit.
The last road trip was another example, we sweep Cleveland and Boston then go into Detroit and drop 3 of 4.

LITTLE NELL
09-19-2010, 10:15 AM
[QUOTE=.

All that can be said about the White Sox is that they still cannot become an elite American League franchise. They have success and then fall back to the middle of the pack. It has been that way since the late '60's. And I don't see it changing any time soon.

The reason for that is that the team is always being built to win about 85 or 86 wins with hope of everybody on the roster having a career year and then winning over 90 games.
When was the last time the Sox went out and signed a big name free agent?

SI1020
09-19-2010, 10:21 AM
I cringe every time I hear that type of proclamation (reminds me of 1984 when Hoyt, Bannister, Dotsun, Burns and Seaver were supposed to be a the second coming.

Really, next year....I would not count on Jake Peavy at all...Floyd is a head case....Danks is good, but seems to hit a wall at the all star break...Buehrle battles you, but is nowhere near what he was five years ago...Jackson is pretty good, though seems to have consitency issues. Even I fell for it hook, line, and sinker this year that the Sox had a really great rotation. It's not.

Hitmen77
09-21-2010, 09:01 AM
When you start summing up the season, these may be of some relevance.

I don't know if I can remember a more crazy, schizoid White Sox club in my life. "Inconsistent" doesn't do this team, this year any justice:

April 5 through June 8: 24-33
June 9 through July 30: 34-11
July 31 through August 29: 11-17
August 30 through September 6: 7-0
September 7 through September 18: 2-9

Now throw in an 11 game winning streak, a nine game winning streak and a seven game winning streak.

Don't forget three four game losing streaks and a (for now) five game one and you have one seriously strange team.

Lip

Those streak numbers are buoyed by a 15-3 record in Interleague play and going 6-1 in late July vs. the hapless Mariners.

Other than that, the only noteworthy streaks are taking 9 of 10 vs Tex, LAA, and KC in early July and then winning 7 in a row (including sweeps of last place Cle and struggling Bos) earlier this month.

The reality is that this team isn't very good. Streaks happen. Even the last place 1976 team won 10 games in a row.

doublem23
09-21-2010, 09:11 AM
The most frustrating thing is that we can only speculate about 1994. We do know the '90's went the same way as the '80's. Start with great promise, win a division title and then fall off the face of the earth for the remainder of the decade. It's gets tiresome for many Sox fans. It doesn't seem to get tiresome for Jerry Reinsdorf.

And how does the 2000-2009 decade fit in your little paradigm?

Oh that's right it doesn't, obviously, so better not mention it.

palehozenychicty
09-21-2010, 09:21 AM
I couldn't disagree more, we're going to have one of the best starting rotations next year and are strong up the middle (especially if AJ is re-signed). That's a very good place to start. Now whether or not we can fix the holes that need to be fixed is another question, but we have a very solid base for next year.

I'm not really a believer in AJ. I love him, but when a catcher starts sliding, they rarely come back.

DrCrawdad
09-21-2010, 09:23 AM
Terribly inconsistent offense, productive only in streaks. The Bullpen though is my biggest concern. The Sox just keep trotting Linebrink out there when it's beyond a question whether he's useful. He's collecting a big check. The Sox won't eat the contract by simply releasing him. They just keep using him and he just keeps (inhaling). But it's not just Linebrink, there are question marks all over the BP.

WhiteSox5187
09-21-2010, 11:44 AM
I'm not really a believer in AJ. I love him, but when a catcher starts sliding, they rarely come back.

Well, you know, except for the fact that he's hitting .300 since the All Star Break and has his average up to .270 now.

Hitmen77
09-22-2010, 11:56 AM
When you start summing up the season, these may be of some relevance.

I don't know if I can remember a more crazy, schizoid White Sox club in my life. "Inconsistent" doesn't do this team, this year any justice:

April 5 through June 8: 24-33
June 9 through July 30: 34-11
July 31 through August 29: 11-17
August 30 through September 6: 7-0
September 7 through September 18: 2-9

Now throw in an 11 game winning streak, a nine game winning streak and a seven game winning streak.

Don't forget three four game losing streaks and a (for now) five game one and you have one seriously strange team.

Lip

You get a mention from Mark Gonzales in his mailbag:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-100919-white-sox-mailbag,0,2683848.story?page=2

Railsplitter
09-22-2010, 01:53 PM
Inconsistency.

That's the 2010 White Sox in a nutshell.