PDA

View Full Version : Reasons for Optimism


hold2dibber
04-17-2003, 08:29 AM
The Sox are now 8-6 for a .571 winning percentage, which is pretty good. This despite the following:

(1) Not a single one of the big boppers in the line-up (Thomas, Ordonez, Konerko, Lee) has gotten off to a hot start and two of them (Konerko and Lee) have been absolutely atrocious. But these are proven hitters - they will come around.

(2) The bullpen has been lousy; Koch has blown two saves in spectacular fashion and Gordon (until last night) has been a disaster.

(3) Danny Wright is out injured and Jon Rauch (who, prior to the Colon deal was slated to be the team's 4th starter) was so bad in ST that he didn't even make the team.

(4) Olivo is hitting about .050.

The saving grace has been the rotation. Really, out of 14 games, the Sox starters have pitched well enough to win 12 times. I have confidence that the bullpen and the offense will improve. If the pitching (and the defense, which has been decent) can keep it up, the team should be in pretty good shape (although lousy fundamentals and lack of intensity remain a problem).

TheBigHurt
04-17-2003, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
If the pitching (and the defense, which has been decent) can keep it up, the team should be in pretty good shape (although lousy fundamentals and lack of intensity remain a problem).

YUP, unfortunately your right....I really hope the intensity problem goes away it may be our biggest problem we have :angry:

BE GOOD

Iguana775
04-17-2003, 09:26 AM
yea, when the big boppers start to hit, the team will be a lot better off. The starting pitching has been a nice suprise. I saw yesterday that Burly and Loiza (sp?) are in the top 5 in the AL for ERA.

Procol Harum
04-17-2003, 09:45 AM
Hold2, I think I find more fodder in your post for "Reasons for Pessimism":

If I understand your argument correctly:

1.) If only our best hitters will start hitting consistently;

2.) If only we can only get our bullpen working;

3.) If only we can get two of our expected starters healthy and competent and up with the Big Club;

4.) If only our defense will improve;

5.) If we can get Miguel Olivo's batting average to at least make it onto the Interstate (.I-75);

6.) If only we can sharpen our fundamentals like baserunning;

7.) And, if we can pump up the team's intensity,

We should have a real shot at picking things up once our schedule becomes more difficult!

I'm downright ecstatic!! :o:

To paraphrase a saying they have down in the South: If my grandmother had certain anatomical features she could have been my grandfather--IF is a mighty big word.... :)

hold2dibber
04-17-2003, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by Procol Harum
Hold2, I think I find more fodder in your post for "Reasons for Pessimism":

If I understand your argument correctly:

1.) If only our best hitters will start hitting consistently;

2.) If only we can only get our bullpen working;

3.) If only we can get two of our expected starters healthy and competent and up with the Big Club;

4.) If only our defense will improve;

5.) If we can get Miguel Olivo's batting average to at least make it onto the Interstate (.I-75);

6.) If only we can sharpen our fundamentals like baserunning;

7.) And, if we can pump up the team's intensity,

We should have a real shot at picking things up once our schedule becomes more difficult!

I'm downright ecstatic!! :o:

To paraphrase a saying they have down in the South: If my grandmother had certain anatomical features she could have been my grandfather--IF is a mighty big word.... :)

Believe me, you don't have to try too hard to convince me that there are reasons for pessimism as well.

But what you fail to note is that even though the Sox have had the problems I (and you) have outlined, they're still 8-6, which while not great, is not too shabby. I mean, despite the Royals' incredible start, the Sox are still in striking distance. Consider, for example, the D-backs, who have had a lot of things go wrong (like the Sox), are in a division with a fast starter (like the Sox are), but are already 10 games out of first (unlike the Sox).

And, more importantly, several of the "if's" that you outline are, IMHO, more like "when's". Do you have any doubt that Carlos Lee, Paul Konerko and Frank Thomas are going to hit a bit better than the .200-ish averages all sport so far? Do you have any doubt that Miguel Olivo is going to hit better than .050? Do you have any doubt that Billy Koch will not blow half of his save opportunities and will not finish with an ERA over 7.00? That Flash Gordon will settle down? These are "when's," not "if's". There are still plenty of reasons for concern, but there are also plenty of reasons for optimism.

gosox41
04-17-2003, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
The Sox are now 8-6 for a .571 winning percentage, which is pretty good. This despite the following:

(1) Not a single one of the big boppers in the line-up (Thomas, Ordonez, Konerko, Lee) has gotten off to a hot start and two of them (Konerko and Lee) have been absolutely atrocious. But these are proven hitters - they will come around.

(2) The bullpen has been lousy; Koch has blown two saves in spectacular fashion and Gordon (until last night) has been a disaster.

(3) Danny Wright is out injured and Jon Rauch (who, prior to the Colon deal was slated to be the team's 4th starter) was so bad in ST that he didn't even make the team.

(4) Olivo is hitting about .050.

The saving grace has been the rotation. Really, out of 14 games, the Sox starters have pitched well enough to win 12 times. I have confidence that the bullpen and the offense will improve. If the pitching (and the defense, which has been decent) can keep it up, the team should be in pretty good shape (although lousy fundamentals and lack of intensity remain a problem).

What bother's me is that while the Sox are 8-6, they are 8-6 against 3 teams that finished about 120 games below .500 last season. Sure KC is hot and there might be something to their young starters, but the Sox veteran hitters need to start coming through. These are the teams that help inflate offensive stats, and while these guys hopefully won't struggle all season, I am concerned that some have shown no signs of coming out after 50 at bats and the situation hitting on this team sucks.

Bob

doublem23
04-17-2003, 11:30 AM
A .571 winning percentage translates into 92-93 wins over a full season. Unless Kansas City stays at their torrid pace for the full 162 or Minnesota suddenly stops sucking, I think that should be enough to win this division.

34 Inch Stick
04-17-2003, 11:55 AM
Minnesota 8-6 .571 winning percentage.

The Royals will be done in by there middle relief as the season goes on (Grimsley's arm may come off by about game 90).

I think Minnesota is in this one to stay.

gosox41
04-17-2003, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
A .571 winning percentage translates into 92-93 wins over a full season. Unless Kansas City stays at their torrid pace for the full 162 or Minnesota suddenly stops sucking, I think that should be enough to win this division.

You're assuming the Sox are going to keep the same winning % when the schedul gets tougher. Going into the season, the Sox had a tougher schedule then the Twins. After the first 18 games, the Sox schedule is that much tougher then the Sox. This was the Sox chance to get off to a fast start and gain a lead over the Twins. Instead we're tied.

Bob