PDA

View Full Version : Has it ever occured that the Sox lineup is OVERRATED!


ssang
05-01-2003, 12:10 PM
Has anyone ever given a thought to the fact that maybe the Sox hitters are just not as good as everyone thinks? I mean, we've changed hitting coaches before and the only thing that remains consistent is that our offense plays corpseball. Quite honestly, the Sox have way too many right handed, power oriented bats in the lineup. The lack of lefties and speed will keep the Sox from producing on a regular basis. There will be days when we hit (usually when Garland pitches and we're down 9-1), but overall I think we overrated the White Sox lineup. So in all, we will finish around .500 as the Twins and Royals battle for the top spot in the division.

CHISOXFAN13
05-01-2003, 12:13 PM
I agreed with you until you got to the last sentence.

What exactly have the Twins done this season?

And have the Royals beat anyone with a winning record yet? They aren't exactly playing good baseball right now.

Iwritecode
05-01-2003, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by ssang
So in all, we will finish around .500 as the Twins and Royals battle for the top spot in the division.

You mean the Royals who have just lost three in a row and aren't gaining any ground on the Sox?

You mean the Twins who haven't been able to beat anyone but the Tigers and Devil Rays???

It's still fairly early and the bats WILL wake up eventually. The Royals and Twins aren't exactly running away with this division yet. If the Sox are still playing corpseball in July, then we can start worrying...

MetalliSox
05-01-2003, 12:58 PM
The only thing the Twins are good at is watching their guy get beaned, then standing at the edge of the dugout.
They're a bunch of sissies who will never charge the mound. They'd get stomped.

SoxxoS
05-01-2003, 01:08 PM
Unfortunately, we need a change. Whether that be Ward on Manuel, we need a fire. It is unfortunate because these guys contracts can't get them going, so we need something to happen within the organization to get this team going.

ssang
05-01-2003, 02:31 PM
Although the Twins are playing porrly and the Royals have actually lost a few games recently, I look at things as a pessimist because, well, we're talking about the White Sox here. So my natural reaction to their (once agian!) uninspired play to assume that they will be out of the hunt by June 1st.

lowesox
05-01-2003, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Unfortunately, we need a change. Whether that be Ward on Manuel, we need a fire. It is unfortunate because these guys contracts can't get them going, so we need something to happen within the organization to get this team going.

I agree. LEt's start with Ward.

lowesox
05-01-2003, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by KonerkosHip
The only thing the Twins are good at is watching their guy get beaned, then standing at the edge of the dugout.
They're a bunch of sissies who will never charge the mound. They'd get stomped.

I Agree enthusiastically.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-01-2003, 08:55 PM
Okay, how is this for top spin...

The A.L. Central Division of 2003 is shaping up as a bunch of midgets, not unlike the A.L. West Division of 1983.

Just like the '83 Sox avoided getting buried early in the season, the '03 Sox are playing just well enough to keep any of the other midgets from mounting much of a lead.

The Sox made one crucial trade in 1983 to break the lethargic play that was ruining the season: Julio Cruz for Tony Bernazard. The rest is history, the team getting hot in June, winning 98 games, and setting a record for winning margin over the rest of the midgets in the old A.L. West.

Could history repeat itself in 2003?

:jerry
"I like the idea of a trade. I just love tinkering with the lineup!"

:ohno
"The shake up we had in mind was in the manager's seat, you numbskull!"

MRKARNO
05-01-2003, 10:21 PM
it's not a matter of how people "rate" the sox offense, it's more a matter of that we've seen much better than we're seeing right now and we want to see the sox hitting that we're used to seeing considering we did not lose anyone significant from the end of last year. In fact, we gained players Jimenez, Rios, Crede (sort of), etc.

Bisco Stu
05-01-2003, 10:25 PM
The 83 Sox won 99 games.

fuzzy_patters
05-02-2003, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by ssang
Has anyone ever given a thought to the fact that maybe the Sox hitters are just not as good as everyone thinks? I mean, we've changed hitting coaches before and the only thing that remains consistent is that our offense plays corpseball. Quite honestly, the Sox have way too many right handed, power oriented bats in the lineup. The lack of lefties and speed will keep the Sox from producing on a regular basis. There will be days when we hit (usually when Garland pitches and we're down 9-1), but overall I think we overrated the White Sox lineup. So in all, we will finish around .500 as the Twins and Royals battle for the top spot in the division.

Most of the hitters are back from the team that scored the third most runs in baseball last year. Yeah, that team is probably overrated.

ssang
05-02-2003, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
Most of the hitters are back from the team that scored the third most runs in baseball last year. Yeah, that team is probably overrated.

I am so sick of hearing how we were the 3rd ranked offense last year. How many of the runs came in blowouts on thw winning or losing end? How many runs were scored in clutch situations? How many of the runs came after we were out of the race? My point is that when the Sox need the big hits, sacrifices, etc., they just don't some through. So yes the offense is overrated!

capn12
05-02-2003, 08:48 PM
http://images.fotki.com/v13/photos/3/32705/111626/dude20flamed-vi.jpg

duke of dorwood
05-02-2003, 09:41 PM
That they are overrated has been mentioned here before. The pitching is not overrated. Its about as expected on the whole.

Lip Man 1
05-02-2003, 10:49 PM
They were the 3rd ranked offense last year.....with respect so what?

That was then this is now, that 3rd ranked offense went 81-81 showing clearly that the Sox had other deficient areas.

Lip

lowesox
05-02-2003, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by ssang
I am so sick of hearing how we were the 3rd ranked offense last year. How many of the runs came in blowouts on thw winning or losing end? How many runs were scored in clutch situations? How many of the runs came after we were out of the race? My point is that when the Sox need the big hits, sacrifices, etc., they just don't some through. So yes the offense is overrated!

I think its possible that this is an argument a lot of fans would make about their teams. The simple fact is its easier to score when the pressure's off and harder score when its on. It doesn't matter how the runs came - finishing third offensively is good.

fuzzy_patters
05-03-2003, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Okay, how is this for top spin...

The A.L. Central Division of 2003 is shaping up as a bunch of midgets, not unlike the A.L. West Division of 1983.

Just like the '83 Sox avoided getting buried early in the season, the '03 Sox are playing just well enough to keep any of the other midgets from mounting much of a lead.

The Sox made one crucial trade in 1983 to break the lethargic play that was ruining the season: Julio Cruz for Tony Bernazard. The rest is history, the team getting hot in June, winning 98 games, and setting a record for winning margin over the rest of the midgets in the old A.L. West.

Could history repeat itself in 2003?

:jerry
"I like the idea of a trade. I just love tinkering with the lineup!"

:ohno
"The shake up we had in mind was in the manager's seat, you numbskull!"



Actually, this year reminds me a lot of 2000. Everybody seems to think that team played better than this team early in the season, but that's not what I remember at all. I believe that team fluctuated between being mediocre and bad from the second week of April until May 15. Just like this team is doing now.

Neither KC or Minny has been able to bury the Sox, yet. That's the same mistake that Cleveland made in 2000. They let the Sox hang within 4-5 games during their cold spell, and they paid for it. KC getting swept by Boston is playing right into the Sox' hands. KC is playing above themselves while the White Sox are playing like crap, and the Royals have let the Sox remain only 4.5 back with 5 months to play.

So what do the Sox need to do to win the division? I believe the Sox need a few dramatic moments to bring them together as a team. The defining moment for the 2000 Sox was the 5/15 homer by Jeff Abbott to beat the Twins. That team never looked back after that and had Cleveland buried by mid-summer. Could we see more of the same in 2003?

ssang
05-03-2003, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters


So what do the Sox need to do to win the division? I believe the Sox need a few dramatic moments to bring them together as a team. The defining moment for the 2000 Sox was the 5/15 homer by Jeff Abbott to beat the Twins. That team never looked back after that and had Cleveland buried by mid-summer. Could we see more of the same in 2003?


I see nothing that would suggest that we will even come close to the 2000 season. So to answer that last question, I 'm gonna go with a NO!

BKozi
05-03-2003, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by ssang
I am so sick of hearing how we were the 3rd ranked offense last year. How many of the runs came in blowouts on thw winning or losing end? How many runs were scored in clutch situations? How many of the runs came after we were out of the race? My point is that when the Sox need the big hits, sacrifices, etc., they just don't some through. So yes the offense is overrated!

That makes no sense. I would rather have the third ranked offense regardless of the record then the Tiger's offense with 1/2 the team hitting under .200. The total offense (runs, batting average, rbi's, etc.) is the best way of determining the POTENTIAL of an offense. Going through slumps, botched bunts and sacrifices, and not getting clutch hits are a sign of bad coaching and fundamentals. If you have a third ranked offense, it shows that they can put up big scores, out-slug teams, and get clutch hits, they just aren't doing it consistently.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-03-2003, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters
Actually, this year reminds me a lot of 2000. Everybody seems to think that team played better than this team early in the season, but that's not what I remember at all. I believe that team fluctuated between being mediocre and bad from the second week of April until May 15. Just like this team is doing now.


Your memory is failing you. The Sox went 17-8 in April of 2000, sitting in first place with a 2 game lead. They went into a tailspin in early-May when several key players were serving suspensions. However they NEVER fell out of first place all the way to the end of the season.

In contrast, the 1983 Sox were early season underachievers. They finished April with a record of 8-10, in sixth place--but get this--only 3 games out of first place. The A.L. West was a complete joke.

The '83 Sox didn't get hot until late-June when they went 13-4. They finally reached first place on July 18 and never looked back, winning the division by a record 20 games.

The '00 Sox got off to a fast start and could never be confused with the current pile of mediocrity. OTOH, the '83 team was clearly playing beneath their talent level during the early part of the season. We can only hope a shake up (like the Julio Cruz trade of 6/15/83) has a similar effect on these mopes.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-03-2003, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Your memory is failing you. The Sox went 17-8 in April of 2000, sitting in first place with a 2 game lead. They went into a tailspin in early-May when several key players were serving suspensions. However they NEVER fell out of first place all the way to the end of the season.

In contrast, the 1983 Sox were early season underachievers. They finished April with a record of 8-10, in sixth place--but get this--only 3 games out of first place. The A.L. West was a complete joke.

The '83 Sox didn't get hot until late-June when they went 13-4. They finally reached first place on July 18 and never looked back, winning the division by a record 20 games.

The '00 Sox got off to a fast start and could never be confused with the current pile of mediocrity. OTOH, the '83 team was clearly playing beneath their talent level during the early part of the season. We can only hope a shake up (like the Julio Cruz trade of 6/15/83) has a similar effect on these mopes.

Oh yeah, one other similiarity between the '83 Sox and the current team:

We hosted the all-star game in '83, too.

:gulp: