PDA

View Full Version : @)!*(@%^*(!) Jayson Stark!


MRKARNO
03-30-2003, 11:47 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stark_jayson/1531411.html

The White Sox may have Colon and Mark Buerhle -- but they have defense, chemistry and pitching-depth issues.

He just shrugs off the sox as non-factors. Add another "expert" to the list with Gammons and others like him (Harold Reynolds should join it as well). Hey moderators, could we get a Stark picture on that list?

Our defense is ok at best, but we turn a good amount of double plays.

Chemistry problems?? Frank Thomas seems to be on his behavior so far this year. Maybe with the steroid testing incident, but I think that this so-called "problem" has been overblown about the sox.

Pitching depth issues? We have good depth, it just is unproven depth. Garland is very underrated. Wright might be a fluke. He can be very dissapointing at times. I also think that everyone wants to deny Esteban Loaiza for some reason. If he's good, he's good. Maybe they hate him? Our bullpen might be one of the best and most underrated in the majors.

In september, when (hopefully) the Twins are struggling and the Sox look the best in the AL (hopefully), we can be making fun of Stark.

Sweet revenge for us Sox fans would be to see the Twins finish behind Kansas City (Whose hitting has BIG potential, can't say the same about their pitching). We finally get to prove that the Sox are a great team starting tomorrow, so go SOX GO!

:thankgod

WinningUgly!
03-30-2003, 11:56 PM
:peehttp://msn.espn.go.com/i/columnists/stark_jayson_m.jpg

TheBigHurt
03-31-2003, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!
:peehttp://msn.espn.go.com/i/columnists/stark_jayson_m.jpg

oweeeeee feels so good thats just what we needed!!!!! :)

Lip Man 1
03-31-2003, 12:44 AM
Guys:

I'm sorry but with respect to your opinions I don't have a problem with what those folks are saying.

Far to often in the recent past the Sox have self destructed because of those very same issues and areas.

Past is prologue until the Sox prove otherwise.

The starting pitching is limited and unproven. Wright's injury further clouds the issue. It is simply unreasonable to expect people like Rauch and Stewart to save the situation by winning ten to twelve games. Do you realize how hard it is to win consistently in the big leagues? It's tough for a veteran let alone for a rookie. If it happens...great... but you simply can't "count" on it happening. For the Sox to win the division let alone go far in the playoffs, that's a lot to "hope" for.

Good teams don't have to "hope" for things to fall into place, they expect it to come to pass. The Sox could have added a number of pitchers, reasonably priced, to increase the depth to six or seven (Sports Illustrated this week quoted many baseball people as saying a team "better" have that many quality pitchers today if they expect to win..) They chose not to and that could turn out to be a major mistake. They decided 53 million dollars for a payroll was enough (while the Twins were topping them!)

The defense is mediocre at best, like Harold Reynolds said on ESPN's program tonight he would have picked the Sox to win the division and go far in the playoffs but the defense simply can't "catch the ball" (his words), hasn't for "three years," and you "can't keep giving teams four outs in an inning." I don't see what's wrong with his statement.

As far as the chemistry, the facts show that for the last two seasons problems have surfaced with this team. I'm not blaming anybody (i.e. Wells, Thomas, Parque, Clayton, Konerko) I'm just saying a fact's a fact. Things happened, they were reported and the situation seemed to get worse.

Peter Gammons correctly (in my opinion) said that the Twins starting pitching was deeper and they had the best bullpen in the league, that's why he expected them to win a "close" race (his words) with the Sox.

I don't think the media is "dissing" or not considering the Sox. They are, but we've still got to many question marks to say with certaintly that we're going to win it. The twins simply seem more of a solid choice right now.

Six months is a long time, maybe the Sox will prove them wrong. I wouldn't take things so personally though. The Sox are getting the respect due them based on what they've done on the field the past two seasons. If they win, they'll certainly get more.

Lip

Lip Man 1
03-31-2003, 01:21 AM
Also I've heard this line of reasoning before and I'm not sure I understand the correlation.

Perhaps the stat folks can shed some light here since this could be a "chicken and an egg" kind of thing.

It's been mentioned again that the Sox defense has improved and part of that reasoning is because the Sox turn a "lot of double plays."

Allow me to play Devil's Advocate and mention that perhaps the Sox are turning more double plays (as opposed to say the Twins) because the Sox pitchers are allowing more base runners . Or that the Sox defense is booting more balls which allow more baserunners. Or that the Sox play on a grass field which slows down balls which perhaps leads to more double plays.

I just don't know if mentioning the number of double plays automatically means the defense has improved.

Lip

T Dog
03-31-2003, 01:35 AM
These predictions are very upsetting. The experts have put us in our place, and there is no reason for hope this season. Weren't they right when they picked the Angels last year?

jeremyb1
03-31-2003, 01:43 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Guys:

I'm sorry but with respect to your opinions I don't have a problem with what those folks are saying.

Far to often in the recent past the Sox have self destructed because of those very same issues and areas.

Past is prologue until the Sox prove otherwise.

The starting pitching is limited and unproven. Wright's injury further clouds the issue. It is simply unreasonable to expect people like Rauch and Stewart to save the situation by winning ten to twelve games. Do you realize how hard it is to win consistently in the big leagues? It's tough for a veteran let alone for a rookie. If it happens...great... but you simply can't "count" on it happening. For the Sox to win the division let alone go far in the playoffs, that's a lot to "hope" for.

Good teams don't have to "hope" for things to fall into place, they expect it to come to pass. The Sox could have added a number of pitchers, reasonably priced, to increase the depth to six or seven (Sports Illustrated this week quoted many baseball people as saying a team "better" have that many quality pitchers today if they expect to win..) They chose not to and that could turn out to be a major mistake. They decided 53 million dollars for a payroll was enough (while the Twins were topping them!)

The defense is mediocre at best, like Harold Reynolds said on ESPN's program tonight he would have picked the Sox to win the division and go far in the playoffs but the defense simply can't "catch the ball" (his words), hasn't for "three years," and you "can't keep giving teams four outs in an inning." I don't see what's wrong with his statement.

As far as the chemistry, the facts show that for the last two seasons problems have surfaced with this team. I'm not blaming anybody (i.e. Wells, Thomas, Parque, Clayton, Konerko) I'm just saying a fact's a fact. Things happened, they were reported and the situation seemed to get worse.

Peter Gammons correctly (in my opinion) said that the Twins starting pitching was deeper and they had the best bullpen in the league, that's why he expected them to win a "close" race (his words) with the Sox.

I don't think the media is "dissing" or not considering the Sox. They are, but we've still got to many question marks to say with certaintly that we're going to win it. The twins simply seem more of a solid choice right now.

Six months is a long time, maybe the Sox will prove them wrong. I wouldn't take things so personally though. The Sox are getting the respect due them based on what they've done on the field the past two seasons. If they win, they'll certainly get more.

well there's a difference between recognizing our team's faults and selectively ignoring other teams. i agree that the issues raised by stark are more or less legitimate but why turn a blind eye to the twins problems?

if you look at the twins rotation they have a 37 year old starter, a 38 year old starter, a pitcher coming off of off season surgery (lohse), and two pitchers who missed significant time last season. sure if one guy struggles they have santana but then what? the twins rotation is incredibly injury prone. why can't stark point that out?

all anyone will ever talk about is how the twins have good defense, relief pitching and team chemistry. all this is true but none of these aspects are important as starting pitching and hitting and the twins can only hope to sustain their production in those areas. it would be incredibly difficult to improve on their relief pitching from last season and injuries could contribute to a huge dropoff.

we've been through the issue of "rotation depth" a number of times now. i still fail to see what the sox could have done outside of signing a swingman such as daal or mendoza and its not clear the money was there to make those moves. signing jeff suppan to a major league deal was not an option unless we decided to deny another pitcher a starting spot.

we brought nine potential starters into camp which equates to pretty decent depth in my opinion. if we need another pitcher its not as though we're without options. we have rauch at AAA and malone supposedly made some adjustments and threw very well this spring. trading for a pitcher is always an option. teams strive for depth but very few teams have a strong major league starter waiting in the wings in the event that a player gets hurt and no one has two.

the twins have better starting depth than us if one pitcher goes down but what if a second pitcher goes down?

maurice
03-31-2003, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
we brought nine potential starters into camp which equates to pretty decent depth in my opinion. if we need another pitcher its not as though we're without options. we have rauch at AAA and malone supposedly made some adjustments and threw very well this spring. trading for a pitcher is always an option. teams strive for depth but very few teams have a strong major league starter waiting in the wings in the event that a player gets hurt and no one has two.

I agree for the most part. However, I don't think we can count on Malone at this point. He may be ready by the end of the year, but he took a huge step backwards last year and has a lot to prove at AAA.

Nonetheless, until a season-ending injury is announced, the Sox have seven candidates for five rotation spots, not counting Malone. Therefore, we will not need to add a starter until and unless three of the seven need surgery or suck worse than a major-league fifth starter should (which is pretty bad). While this is possible, it will take a month or more to determine. At that point, the Sox will still have their current excess of talented outfielders and relief pitchers to trade for an adequate starter . . . or maybe even a real good one.

Keep in mind that $2 million dollars of unspent budget money will get you a $2 million dollar player in the pre-season, a $4 million (approximately) player at the All-Star break, and an even higher paid player around the trade deadline, because another team already will have paid half or more of the new player's salary.

gosox41
03-31-2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
well there's a difference between recognizing our team's faults and selectively ignoring other teams. i agree that the issues raised by stark are more or less legitimate but why turn a blind eye to the twins problems?

if you look at the twins rotation they have a 37 year old starter, a 38 year old starter, a pitcher coming off of off season surgery (lohse), and two pitchers who missed significant time last season. sure if one guy struggles they have santana but then what? the twins rotation is incredibly injury prone. why can't stark point that out?

all anyone will ever talk about is how the twins have good defense, relief pitching and team chemistry. all this is true but none of these aspects are important as starting pitching and hitting and the twins can only hope to sustain their production in those areas. it would be incredibly difficult to improve on their relief pitching from last season and injuries could contribute to a huge dropoff.

we've been through the issue of "rotation depth" a number of times now. i still fail to see what the sox could have done outside of signing a swingman such as daal or mendoza and its not clear the money was there to make those moves. signing jeff suppan to a major league deal was not an option unless we decided to deny another pitcher a starting spot.

we brought nine potential starters into camp which equates to pretty decent depth in my opinion. if we need another pitcher its not as though we're without options. we have rauch at AAA and malone supposedly made some adjustments and threw very well this spring. trading for a pitcher is always an option. teams strive for depth but very few teams have a strong major league starter waiting in the wings in the event that a player gets hurt and no one has two.

the twins have better starting depth than us if one pitcher goes down but what if a second pitcher goes down?

Two quick points:

1. I expect the Twins offense to improve as the hitters mature. May not be as good as the Sox, but better then last season.

2. Last year, Radke and mays missed a combined 30 starts and the team still won 94 games. Just something to remember when saying the Twins pitchers are injury prone.

Bob

hold2dibber
03-31-2003, 01:27 PM
The Sox and the Twins are both good teams, but both have flaws as well. I think it will be a dog fight all year, but I don't begrudge anyone who thinks the Twins will best the Sox since I think that is just as likely as the Sox besting the Twins. And, in fact, as the defending AL Central champs, I think the Twins are rightfully the favorite.

Dan H
03-31-2003, 02:14 PM
I agree with hold2dibber. The Twins have to be the favorite until each team proves different. My optimism for the Sox is cautious because there is a big drop off after the first two starters. I like Jose Valentin for many reasons, but I have nightmares of another one of his throws sailing into the stands. If I see the Sox winning the close games where overall execution really counts, I'll feel a lot better.