PDA

View Full Version : Anyone else getting that 2003 feeling?


pudge
09-03-2012, 12:07 PM
I've had it since about mid-August, so the sweep by the Tigers didn't do much but reinforce it. If I recall, Sox were up a couple games on the Twins heading into 2003. They had made some decent moves getting Carl Everett and Robbie Alomar, Esteban Loaiza was a shocking ace/all-star, and the team looked destined for the post-season if they could hold off Minnesota. Of course we all know they proceeded to get whooped by the Twins in Sept. and miss the post-season. The only difference being the expectations at the start of that season were much higher than 2012, but the feeling is similar.

delben91
09-03-2012, 12:16 PM
Let's see what happens in the next week, with the Sox at home. Detroit has played much better at home than on the road this week. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Sox take 3/4 in that series.

Sox have routinely followed great stretches of play with horrible stretches, and vice versa. This past week, the starting pitching was absent except Axelrod's start, and the offense went into a team-wide funk. Odds are neither of those conditions continues like this for the next month, when either has occurred earlier in the year, the team has bounced back each time.

pudge
09-03-2012, 12:52 PM
Let's see what happens in the next week, with the Sox at home. Detroit has played much better at home than on the road this week. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Sox take 3/4 in that series.

Sox have routinely followed great stretches of play with horrible stretches, and vice versa. This past week, the starting pitching was absent except Axelrod's start, and the offense went into a team-wide funk. Odds are neither of those conditions continues like this for the next month, when either has occurred earlier in the year, the team has bounced back each time.

Good points, this season has been far more of a roller coaster, and they do seem to follow a bad streak with a good one. Would have loved to have kept some distance and pressure on the Tigers, but hey I'm a Sox fan, hard to NOT think the ship is sinking.

guillensdisciple
09-03-2012, 12:53 PM
When I get that feeling, 2003 feeling.

ChicagoG19
09-03-2012, 01:08 PM
I am not in panic mode yet as they are still tied for first, but the next 11 days are crucial with a long home stand and 4-game series with the Tigers at the tail end.

Frontman
09-03-2012, 01:18 PM
No, I'm just concerned that the Sox have learned to win at home and lose on the road; almost exact opposite what they were to start the season.

I have faith in this team. We played Detroit without Dunn. AJ is in a slump, and Paulie's a walking wounded player right now.

In Ozz....erm, Robin I trust!!! :wink:

kittle42
09-03-2012, 01:35 PM
If you mean constipation, yes.

Konerko05
09-03-2012, 01:39 PM
I think I am getting my 2003 and 2004 feelings mixed up.

LITTLE NELL
09-03-2012, 01:51 PM
18 games left with Minny, KC, and the Indians. Need to win at least 12 with those guys, split with the Tigers and the Rays and take 1 from LAA. That gets us to 89 wins, right now I think it wins the division. If we can somehow take 3 from Detroit and 3 from TB then we are in for sure. Confidence level right now is not high but this team manages to pick it up after hitting the skids, can they do it again? I hope so.

tsoxman
09-03-2012, 02:18 PM
I've had it since about mid-August, so the sweep by the Tigers didn't do much but reinforce it. If I recall, Sox were up a couple games on the Twins heading into 2003. They had made some decent moves getting Carl Everett and Robbie Alomar, Esteban Loaiza was a shocking ace/all-star, and the team looked destined for the post-season if they could hold off Minnesota. Of course we all know they proceeded to get whooped by the Twins in Sept. and miss the post-season. The only difference being the expectations at the start of that season were much higher than 2012, but the feeling is similar.
If you check, the Sox also had the same 2 game lead in 2003- 2 games that they had yesterday at this time.

MushMouth
09-03-2012, 02:37 PM
are you trying to give me nightmares?

Lip Man 1
09-03-2012, 02:43 PM
In 2003 the Sox were two up on the Twins with 15 to go and had won the first two games of the four game series with Minnesota at home.

That second win however marked the Jose Paniagua affair...the rest as they say is history as the Sox lost the final five head to head meetings with Minnesota.

Justin Morneau was quoted as saying (and this has never been confirmed) that early in the showdown series at Minnesota a Sox runner at first looked at him and said, "congratulations...on winning the division..." :rolleyes:

Lip

jdm2662
09-03-2012, 03:05 PM
No, the Sox were never more than two games ahead in the standings for more than one day in 2003. Yes, we can complain about fading down the stretch we want. The fact remains, the 2003 Sox were pretty crappy until the end of July. Had they actually decided to start the season in April, they win the division easily.

If anything, if the Tigers fail to win the division, they can blame themselves. They didn't even get over .500 until the 4th of July.

DickAllen72
09-03-2012, 03:06 PM
I'm getting that Barton Fink feeling.

jdm2662
09-03-2012, 03:07 PM
In 2003 the Sox were two up on the Twins with 15 to go and had won the first two games of the four game series with Minnesota at home.

That second win however marked the Jose Paniagua affair...the rest as they say is history as the Sox lost the final five head to head meetings with Minnesota.

Justin Morneau was quoted as saying (and this has never been confirmed) that early in the showdown series at Minnesota a Sox runner at first looked at him and said, "congratulations...on winning the division..." :rolleyes:

Lip


Moreneau is also a grade A tool and has never hid his hatred for the White Sox. Even if he did say it, I don't believe it happened.

soltrain21
09-03-2012, 03:08 PM
No. It has nothing to do with this year. Or any other year.

Moses_Scurry
09-03-2012, 03:21 PM
Feels more like 2008 to me. Hopefully it ends the same way but without the need of a game 163.

Lip Man 1
09-03-2012, 03:24 PM
JDM:

Which is why I said it's never been confirmed.

And depending on how this turns out the 2012 Sox might be saying (instead of, 'if only we played well from the start' as in your reference to the 2003 team), 'if only we could beat the Royals, if only we hadn't lost four games to two clubs who (probably) lost 100 games...'

Lip

OldRomanPizza
09-03-2012, 03:34 PM
Im only getting a 2008 feeling, with Comerica Park being the new Metrodome. Also, like Minnesota did that year, the 2012 Tigers decide to lose to bad teams when it looks like they have a chance to pull away.

Brian26
09-03-2012, 03:37 PM
Moreneau is also a grade A tool and has never hid his hatred for the White Sox. Even if he did say it, I don't believe it happened.

This came up a long time ago. Wasn't the consensus that it was Carl Everett that said that to Morneau?

jdm2662
09-03-2012, 03:43 PM
JDM:

Which is why I said it's never been confirmed.

And depending on how this turns out the 2012 Sox might be saying (instead of, 'if only we played well from the start' as in your reference to the 2003 team), 'if only we could beat the Royals, if only we hadn't lost four games to two clubs who (probably) lost 100 games...'

Lip

It's a long season. There are many factors to why you don't win enough games. This isn't football where one or two games can make or break your season. To me, playing like crap for the first three months of the season is much more of a factor than nitpicking a couple of random series. It's already been stated on this board many times the Sox have a better record against sub-.500 teams than the Tigers. Yet, this fact gets brushed aside because it goes against certain people's opinions.

And no, as much as people want to believe that infamous ninth inning brought the Twins back to life, the Twins had Brad Radke and Johan Santana pitching for them the next two games. Both magically pitched well and they won both games. Then, they just got hot. You know what? They still would've gotten hot if the ninth inning went smooth, despite what Hawk or anyone else believes.

This isn't Little League when a little team gets confidence against the big bad team. They are professional athletes that play 162 games a year. Things change as often as the wind blows. One inning doesn't change things. The Sox didn't even get to .500 until July 22nd and were as little as two games over on August 17th. Looking at the overall picture does more for me than nitpicking a couple of instances. But, that doesn't mean they still didn't have a great chance. They could've taken care of business over the long hall, and they could've won more than 90 games.

jdm2662
09-03-2012, 03:45 PM
This came up a long time ago. Wasn't the consensus that it was Carl Everett that said that to Morneau?

I have no idea. But, like I said, consider the source. I don't believe it for a second, and he has a history of making snide comments about the White Sox.

October26
09-03-2012, 03:48 PM
are you trying to give me nightmares?

:rolling:

Hitmen77
09-04-2012, 09:03 PM
Yes.

Brian26
09-04-2012, 09:30 PM
I'm getting that 2007 feeling tonight.

TheOldRoman
09-04-2012, 10:10 PM
And no, as much as people want to believe that infamous ninth inning brought the Twins back to life, the Twins had Brad Radke and Johan Santana pitching for them the next two games. Both magically pitched well and they won both games. Then, they just got hot. You know what? They still would've gotten hot if the ninth inning went smooth, despite what Hawk or anyone else believes.

This isn't Little League when a little team gets confidence against the big bad team. They are professional athletes that play 162 games a year. Things change as often as the wind blows. One inning doesn't change things.
You are essentially arguing that momentum doesn't exist. Your premise is false. Did that inning pump life into the Twins? Maybe not. Starting that inning or the very next day, the Twins suddenly caught fire and couldn't lose. We see it every year when the Sox go on hot streaks in which it seems like they can't lose. We saw it when the Rockies caught fire in 2007, won 21 of 22 down the stretch, then won the first seven playoff games to make the World Series. Unfortunately for them, the clock struck midnight when they had 10 days off before the World Series, and they got swept. Were they that talented? 28 out of 29 talented? No, but they had a crap load of momentum.

Sometimes big moments pump life into teams. Sometimes teams catch breaks and things start going right for them. Momentum is with the next day's starting pitcher, but sometimes teams get on crazy rolls. Sometimes there is a singular moment that ignites the fire. So maybe it's not supportable to argue that the Paniagua inning turned the season around, but it's just as asinine to smugly shout down people for arguing that it did.

Lip Man 1
09-04-2012, 10:31 PM
Roman:

Well stated.

Lip

sullythered
09-04-2012, 10:32 PM
Man, I wish. I was 50 lbs. lighter and didn't have a bald spot in 2003... Oh, you mean the Sox? No. One has nothing to do with the other.

WhiteSox5187
09-04-2012, 10:50 PM
To me this feels more like 2008, a banged up team just stumbling to the finish and trying to hold on to first place for dear life.

thomas35forever
09-04-2012, 11:02 PM
To me this feels more like 2008, a banged up team just stumbling to the finish and trying to hold on to first place for dear life.
Sounds about right. I'd rather not back into the postseason if that's indeed where we're headed.

soltrain21
09-05-2012, 06:08 AM
Not buying that the league has figured out Quintana. He has just ran out of gas. We've squeezed a lot out of little this year on that pitching staff.

pudge
09-05-2012, 09:28 AM
Man, I wish. I was 50 lbs. lighter and didn't have a bald spot in 2003... Oh, you mean the Sox? No. One has nothing to do with the other.

A couple people have posted that one has nothing to do with the other - not sure where my original post stated it did. Making a comparison to two seasons and saying they have similarities doesn't mean one year is somehow impacting another year.

I like the '08 comparisons as well. The shambles this rotation is in right now where they can score eight runs and still lose to the Twins is fairly concerning.

jdm2662
09-05-2012, 10:15 AM
You are essentially arguing that momentum doesn't exist. Your premise is false. Did that inning pump life into the Twins? Maybe not. Starting that inning or the very next day, the Twins suddenly caught fire and couldn't lose. We see it every year when the Sox go on hot streaks in which it seems like they can't lose. We saw it when the Rockies caught fire in 2007, won 21 of 22 down the stretch, then won the first seven playoff games to make the World Series. Unfortunately for them, the clock struck midnight when they had 10 days off before the World Series, and they got swept. Were they that talented? 28 out of 29 talented? No, but they had a crap load of momentum.

Sometimes big moments pump life into teams. Sometimes teams catch breaks and things start going right for them. Momentum is with the next day's starting pitcher, but sometimes teams get on crazy rolls. Sometimes there is a singular moment that ignites the fire. So maybe it's not supportable to argue that the Paniagua inning turned the season around, but it's just as asinine to smugly shout down people for arguing that it did.

EVERY team goes on at least one hot and cold streak during a baseball season. Of course, the better teams have more hot streaks. My point was, one bad inning doesn't make a season. Also, whenever something bad happens, it seems to be easy to have a scapegoat and blame him. I look at the ENTIRE picture. The Sox had a miserable three months to the season, and really didn't start playing good ball until the end of July. The entire season matters, not just one game or series.

The Twins weren't the first or last team to score a bunch of meaningless runs in a blowout. Hell, the Sox did it last night. Does that mean they willl be on fire now? Not likely. Their starting pitching has issues. But, if the starters magically get it together, then they will be in good shape. Johan Santana was a pretty damn good pitcher before injuries and Brad Radke was a solid veteran. They would've pitched just the same had they not had a big ninth inning just like they would've went on a hot streak. Had the Sox decided to play good baseball in the beginning of the year, it was moot. but, they didn't so shame on them.

TomBradley72
09-05-2012, 10:26 AM
Based on winning percentage- this team is slightly ahead of the 1991, 1982, 2003, 1992, 1985 and 1996 teams that won 85-87 games- slightly behind the 2010, 2008, 1977 and 2006 teams that won 88-90 games.
1972 White Sox had a .565 winning pct (translates to 92 wins- but shortened season due to strike).

All decent teams that were in the race at some point- but (for the most part) did not have the pitching to get across the finish line (excluding 2008- Game 163).

It kind of surprised me that we're behind 2010 right now and I had forgotten how the 1996 team blew the wild card in the last month of the season.

TheOldRoman
09-05-2012, 11:17 AM
EVERY team goes on at least one hot and cold streak during a baseball season. Of course, the better teams have more hot streaks. My point was, one bad inning doesn't make a season. Also, whenever something bad happens, it seems to be easy to have a scapegoat and blame him. I look at the ENTIRE picture. The Sox had a miserable three months to the season, and really didn't start playing good ball until the end of July. The entire season matters, not just one game or series.

The Twins weren't the first or last team to score a bunch of meaningless runs in a blowout. Hell, the Sox did it last night. Does that mean they willl be on fire now? Not likely. Their starting pitching has issues. But, if the starters magically get it together, then they will be in good shape. Johan Santana was a pretty damn good pitcher before injuries and Brad Radke was a solid veteran. They would've pitched just the same had they not had a big ninth inning just like they would've went on a hot streak. Had the Sox decided to play good baseball in the beginning of the year, it was moot. but, they didn't so shame on them.I don't disagree with anything you say here, per se. It seems like you think people are using the Paniagua moment as an excuse, like "If only Manuel had used someone else there, we would have won the division." I don't see Lip arguing that, and I certainly have never heard Hawk use that as an excuse. The only time Hawk might have mentioned it would be talking about momentum and sparks. I remember watching that game live, and it sure seemed like a turning point when it happened. Some people think that it was a turning point that sent the Twins on a roll and had the Sox thinking "here we go again." Regardless, it's all speculation.

Lip Man 1
09-05-2012, 12:36 PM
Tom:

The 96 club blew the post season spot because (like in 2003) the 5th starters were **** and the bullpen was worse. It set the record (since broken by the Orioles) for the most blown save chances in a season.

Scheuler (like in 2000) did nothing to help the pitching staff at the deadline (getting Tony Castillo a few weeks later in a waiver deal) and was blasted by Tony Phillips and Roberto Hernandez in The Sporting News over it.

1996 saw the Sox 40-23 on June 12th...they finished with 85 wins.

Another Sox team that had a hole in an area that wasn't fixed, opponents exploited it and the Sox were playing golf in October.

Lip

downstairs
09-05-2012, 01:17 PM
I'm not in panic mode, but I'm dissapointed the Sox are moving themselves out of Wild Card contention... especially with the expanded wild card.

TomBradley72
09-05-2012, 07:05 PM
Tom:

The 96 club blew the post season spot because (like in 2003) the 5th starters were **** and the bullpen was worse. It set the record (since broken by the Orioles) for the most blown save chances in a season.

Scheuler (like in 2000) did nothing to help the pitching staff at the deadline (getting Tony Castillo a few weeks later in a waiver deal) and was blasted by Tony Phillips and Roberto Hernandez in The Sporting News over it.

1996 saw the Sox 40-23 on June 12th...they finished with 85 wins.

Another Sox team that had a hole in an area that wasn't fixed, opponents exploited it and the Sox were playing golf in October.

Lip

Completely agree Lip- alot of missed opportunities in the Schueler era due to his relentless loyalty to "great" prospects like Scott Ruffcorn, etc.

1992 was a killer to me as well- Guillen goes down with an injury- Schueler does nothing- then Grebeck goes down- Schueler does nothing- we end up with dog**** Esteban Beltre- which then leads to Dale Sveum off the scrap heap. Still had a decent season- even without a legitimate shortstop most of the season.

bigdommer
09-06-2012, 07:44 AM
No. That 2003 Twins team was very ordinary. Their pitching was average to below average, with that being Santana's first year as a starter. I believe Corie Koskie and Doug Mienkievitz (sp) were their best hitters.

This Tiger team has arguably 2 of the 5 hitters in the league, undoubtedly the best pitcher in the league, and another guy who is 2nd in the league in strikeouts.

If the 2012 Sox don't win, it will be because half of their opening day staff is on the shelf. Think about it. Their staff consists of: a first year starter who is a converted reliever, a veteran who has not pitched more than 111 innnings since 2008, a rookie in his 3rd organization who started the year in AA which was his highest level ever, and a midseason acquisition who had a 5 plus ERA.

I think Robin has done a great job and every time we have a lapse, he picks this team up off the mat. I don't know if we are as good as the Tigers, but we are up 1 with 26 to play. And if we hang on, I like our chances as we have two strong arms in the rotation and a deep pen.

SOXSINCE'70
09-06-2012, 10:44 AM
Im only getting a 2008 feeling, with Comerica Park being the new Metrodome.

Kaufman Stadium is a runner up.The Sox have trouble winning there as well.:(:

Zisk77
09-06-2012, 11:04 AM
Completely agree Lip- alot of missed opportunities in the Schueler era due to his relentless loyalty to "great" prospects like Scott Ruffcorn, etc.

1992 was a killer to me as well- Guillen goes down with an injury- Schueler does nothing- then Grebeck goes down- Schueler does nothing- we end up with dog**** Esteban Beltre- which then leads to Dale Sveum off the scrap heap. Still had a decent season- even without a legitimate shortstop most of the season.


This, with a disgruntled Ozzie Smith wanting to be traded because LaRussa was benching him for Royce Clayton. :o::?:

jdm2662
09-06-2012, 11:10 AM
This, with a disgruntled Ozzie Smith wanting to be traded because LaRussa was benching him for Royce Clayton. :o::?:


:?:

LaRussa was still with Oakland.