PDA

View Full Version : Phil Rogers: "Colon Trade a Twin Killing"


Unregistered
01-15-2003, 10:23 PM
Rogers' newest article insists the Sox are now the team to beat in the Central.
a sample:No, there are no certainties in baseball, and it wouldn't be interesting if there were. But considering that the White Sox outscored the rest of the Central in 2002 and since have turned their pitching staff into a strength, they should be heavy favorites.

Don't confuse the Colon trade with the David Wells and Todd Ritchie flops. This one is totally different. Rogers Article (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-030115rogers,0,4914374.column?coll=cs%2Dhome%2Dhea dlines)

gogosoxgogo
01-15-2003, 10:26 PM
I couldn't agree more. It looks like we may be the top team in the AL Central going into the 2003 season. I think last year was a great year for the Twins, and I give them the respect they deserve... however, I don't think they will be able to reproduce that level of sucess in 2003. Let's win this division Pale Hose!

Bisco Stu
01-15-2003, 11:19 PM
Winning the division means nothing. As a Mets/White Sox diehard, for me, only playoff victories count. With Mark and Barty, we will win our first postseason series since 1917.

And if the Angels can win the WS, there's no reason we can't.

Flubs about to be left in the dust...

voodoochile
01-15-2003, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by Bisco Stu
Winning the division means nothing. As a Mets/White Sox diehard, for me, only playoff victories count. With Mark and Barty, we will win our first postseason series since 1917.

And if the Angels can win the WS, there's no reason we can't.

Flubs about to be left in the dust...

I will feel VERY comfortable in any 5 game set knowing we can get 3 starts from Buehrle and Colon and in a 7 game set, they could start 5 of them. I'd say we've got a poor mans Johnson/Schilling, but if B&B can pitch up to their expectations, then I really won't feel that poor...

WhiteSoxWinner
01-15-2003, 11:44 PM
Colon has given us something we haven't had in the past, a top two that can match up with most any other top teams in the league. This is an excellent move and totally changes the dynamic of the Central. Gotta be excited now!!

Bucktown
01-16-2003, 01:20 AM
Originally posted by Bisco Stu
Winning the division means nothing. As a Mets/White Sox diehard, for me, only playoff victories count. With Mark and Barty, we will win our first postseason series since 1917.

And if the Angels can win the WS, there's no reason we can't.

Flubs about to be left in the dust...
Didn't the Sox win a Post Season Series in 1959?

fuzzy_patters
01-16-2003, 01:33 AM
Didn't the Sox win a Post Season Series in 1959?

No, the AL champion White Sox were defeated by the Los Angeles Dodgers in the World Series, and Divisional Play did not start until the 1960's (68?).

VeeckAsInWreck
01-16-2003, 01:33 AM
Originally posted by Bucktown
Didn't the Sox win a Post Season Series in 1959?

No, back then all the teams in the AL were in ONE division, so you had to finish in First or it was wait till next year. The League championship series didn't start until 1969.
If there was an Eastern & Western division back then, The Sox and Yanks would have had some classic playoff series. But hey, who is to say that they won't this year! :gulp: Damn am I happy!

MetalliSox
01-16-2003, 09:17 AM
Let's not get carried away with this "Sox should be the favorites" talk.
Twinkies are going to have a HEALTHY Joe Mays, Veteran Rick Reed, Radke, and then some very good young guys like Santana. I overlooked the TWins the last two seasons. I'm not doing so again.

moochpuppy
01-16-2003, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
No, the AL champion White Sox were defeated by the Los Angeles Dodgers in the World Series, and Divisional Play did not start until the 1960's (68?).

Actually the Division series didn't start until 1995 with the first season that included 3 divisions and 1 wildcard team. From 1969 to 1993 the two division winners played in a championship series (best of 5 till 1984, then in 1985 started to be best of 7).

34 Inch Stick
01-16-2003, 10:55 AM
I can't believe they didn't delete you saying we've got a poor man's Johnson.

Dadawg_77
01-16-2003, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by moochpuppy
Actually the Division series didn't start until 1995 with the first season that included 3 divisions and 1 wildcard team. From 1969 to 1993 the two division winners played in a championship series (best of 5 till 1984, then in 1985 started to be best of 7).

I think he was talking about the ifrst place team of each divison playing each other in the LCSes.

Honestly, I think we have two pitchers that are better then anyone the twins have.

hold2dibber
01-16-2003, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
I think he was talking about the ifrst place team of each divison playing each other in the LCSes.

Honestly, I think we have two pitchers that are better then anyone the twins have.

I completely agree with that - but the Twins' rotation is deeper. Plus, I think Santana might turn out to be a real monster this year. If Mays is healthy and Milton pitches consistently, they have a damn good rotation.

gosox41
01-16-2003, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by gogosoxgogo
I couldn't agree more. It looks like we may be the top team in the AL Central going into the 2003 season. I think last year was a great year for the Twins, and I give them the respect they deserve... however, I don't think they will be able to reproduce that level of sucess in 2003. Let's win this division Pale Hose!

This sounds familiar. Oh wait, I heard it in 2001 after the Sox got David Wells and in 2002 when are pitchers and Frank were finally going to be healthy. Let's hope it finally holds true in 2003, but the Sox don't seem to play the role of favorites too well. Underacheivers and Chokers yes, but never favorites.

Bob

moochpuppy
01-16-2003, 11:40 AM
:giangreco

"It doesn't matter who you get or how better you may be, I'll still have empty blue seats to show to all of Chicagoland."

fuzzy_patters
01-16-2003, 11:46 AM
Actually the Division series didn't start until 1995 with the first season that included 3 divisions and 1 wildcard team. From 1969 to 1993 the two division winners played in a championship series (best of 5 till 1984, then in 1985 started to be best of 7).

I didn't say the Division Series started in the 60s. I said division play did (ie, the Sox will have an .800 winning percentage within division play in 2003).

moochpuppy
01-16-2003, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
I didn't say the Division Series started in the 60s. I said division play did (ie, the Sox will have an .800 winning percentage within division play in 2003).

My bad fuzzy. I saw the word Divisional and immediately thought Divisional playoffs.

Foulke You
01-16-2003, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by KonerkosHip
Let's not get carried away with this "Sox should be the favorites" talk.
Twinkies are going to have a HEALTHY Joe Mays, Veteran Rick Reed, Radke, and then some very good young guys like Santana. I overlooked the TWins the last two seasons. I'm not doing so again.


Couldn't agree more. While I feel very good about our chances for postseason play, the Twins (as much as I hate them) are still the defending Central champions and I'm not underestimating them.

RKMeibalane
01-16-2003, 08:09 PM
Spring Training hasn't even started yet. Let's hold off on the predictions. Every time the Sox are expected to contend, something happens. Everyone here knows what I mean.