PDA

View Full Version : Gammons on next years Angels/Marlins


ChiWhiteSox1337
10-27-2003, 12:42 AM
On sportscenter, one of the guys asked him, "who do you think will be the angels/marlins team next year?" Gammons said the White Sox if they can bring Colon back with the 3 year deal that has been mentioned here on WSI. He thought that KW woulld be able to work with what he has this year and that the white sox are a very exciting team to watch. Funny though because Kurkijan said he was predicting a scrubs-red sox ws next year even though I remember reading an article here saying that he thought it would be the white sox-scrubs.

MRKARNO
10-27-2003, 12:46 AM
Every week these guys are gonna predict something else to appease a different fan base

SoxxoS
10-27-2003, 12:47 AM
Gammons picking us is like the death knoll...

ma-gaga
10-27-2003, 12:53 AM
bah... these guys know nothing. The tie between the Angels and the Marlins is the ability to hit singles, run the bases aggressively, play defense, and pitch the snot out of the ball. National League ball at it's best.

I'd say the most "Angels/Marlins" type of team out there is the Indians (they should be a year away) , or ... the Angels again. It's too bad Oakland can't get the singles hitters/stolen base stealers to cause havok. They have the pitching and the defense.

cheeses_h_rice
10-27-2003, 01:06 AM
Probably any one of 15-20 teams could be the Angels/Marlins of 2004...you can never predict who's going to get hot at just the right time, and have just the right mix of postseason studs.

crector
10-27-2003, 03:58 AM
I'd say the most "Angels/Marlins" type of team out there is the Indians (they should be a year away) , or ... the Angels again. It's too bad Oakland can't get the singles hitters/stolen base stealers to cause havok. They have the pitching and the defense. [/B]


2 things:

1: The Indians are a joke and will not contend for anything higher than 3rd place in the Central Division for the forseeable future.

2: In the book, Moneyball, the infalliable GM of the A's talks about how stealing bases are allegedly a bad idea since it raises the risk of a player getting thrown out. Also, he has a preference for guys who aim for extra base hits over singles and higher batting averages. As long as he's in charge at Oakland, the A's will not have those single hitters and base stealers to cause the Marlins-style havoc to propel that team deeper into the playoffs.

jeremyb1
10-27-2003, 04:17 AM
Originally posted by ma-gaga
bah... these guys know nothing. The tie between the Angels and the Marlins is the ability to hit singles, run the bases aggressively, play defense, and pitch the snot out of the ball. National League ball at it's best.

I'd say the most "Angels/Marlins" type of team out there is the Indians (they should be a year away) , or ... the Angels again. It's too bad Oakland can't get the singles hitters/stolen base stealers to cause havok. They have the pitching and the defense.

The problem with a singles hitting team is that batting average is not a consistent statistic. There is a great deal of luck involved in hitting singles in that it relies largely on where the ball lands and where the defender is positioned. If you hit it where they aint you can get a lot of singles but you can't luck into home runs or walks so easily. If you look at the Angles this season a large part of their problem was that they didn't hit at the same clip as last season.

Also, its incredibly problematic to base one's analysis of winning clubs solely on the team which wins the world series. To argue that the Marlins are the definitive team to model one's team after opposed to the A's or Giants simply because the Marlins won the world series and the other two teams lost in the first round is completely illogical. You don't win 95+ games in the regular season by accident and a 5 game series isn't exactly the best test of a team's value. The goal should be to get to the playoffs with the best team possible and then hope for the necessary luck to perform well in the playoffs.

voodoochile
10-27-2003, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by ChiWhiteSox1337
On sportscenter, one of the guys asked him, "who do you think will be the angels/marlins team next year?" Gammons said the White Sox if they can bring Colon back with the 3 year deal that has been mentioned here on WSI. He thought that KW woulld be able to work with what he has this year and that the white sox are a very exciting team to watch. Funny though because Kurkijan said he was predicting a scrubs-red sox ws next year even though I remember reading an article here saying that he thought it would be the white sox-scrubs.

I wonder if this report has something to do with Colon turning down the money the Sox offered on the theory that they desperately need him back and will up the offer.

ma-gaga
10-27-2003, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
The problem with a singles hitting team is that batting average is not a consistent statistic. There is a great deal of luck involved in hitting singles in that it relies largely on where the ball lands and where the defender is positioned. If you hit it where they aint you can get a lot of singles but you can't luck into home runs or walks so easily. If you look at the Angles this season a large part of their problem was that they didn't hit at the same clip as last season.

Also, its incredibly problematic to base one's analysis of winning clubs solely on the team which wins the world series. To argue that the Marlins are the definitive team to model one's team after opposed to the A's or Giants simply because the Marlins won the world series and the other two teams lost in the first round is completely illogical. You don't win 95+ games in the regular season by accident and a 5 game series isn't exactly the best test of a team's value. The goal should be to get to the playoffs with the best team possible and then hope for the necessary luck to perform well in the playoffs.

I'm on board the OBP/DIPS bus, but I can't ignore what's happened the last two years. Both the Angels and Marlins are the definition of the anti-SABR team. They swing at anything near the plate, have speed on the basepaths, pitch and catch the ball. I agree, batting average is not a consistant stat. You need to have 4 or 5 guys "hot" for the entire year to maintain that kind of offense, be lucky to avoid injury, and in general have a couple of career years.

There is no easy plan, like Oakland laid out, and Boston executed. You have to get lucky. But having a good pitching staff, and the defense to support it is "plan-able". Option 2, is to shell out $165MM on 7 OPS machines and 4 All-star starting pitchers, and have the BEST reliever in post-season history. And skimp everywhere else. That's a good plan too, they almost won! Just not so realistic...

I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying: A lot of luck is involved, and trying to figure out which team is going to get 'lucky' in 2004 is essentially like spinning a roulette wheel between 15-20 candidates.

To the previous caller who called Cleveland "a joke". If they stay the course, as long as they don't cave to public pressure, they'll have a good team at the end of 2004. They have the pieces in place, they just need to develop. IMO, KC is more of a joke than Cleveland. They have no pitching plan, they got luckier than hell this year to finish above 0.500, due to their above average offense. If they lose Beltran, they are toast. The only way they 'contend' next year, is if they sign two legitimate 200 inning starters... We'll see.

guillen4life13
10-27-2003, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by crector
2 things:

1: The Indians are a joke and will not contend for anything higher than 3rd place in the Central Division for the forseeable future.

I don't really agree. The Indians, IMO, are going to be a powerhouse... a dynasty again, and their run will start within the next three years. They have a young, promising core of players, and their farm system, of what I know, is stacked with promise. Shapiro has done a good job with it.

The way the Sox are looking, they themselves aren't going to be contenders for the forseeable future. The Twinkies lost Stewart, Guardado and Hawkins, as well as Gomez, Orosco, and Hawking. Reed and Rogers still can opt for free agency. They're losing valuable players, especially in Hawkins and Guardado.

And, I think the Royals were a fluke. We all know Detroit's situation. Cleveland's chances don't look too bad anymore, all of a sudden. Not 2004, but 2005 or 2006 will be the beginning of a new Cleveland dynasty. Book it.

SoxxoS
10-27-2003, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
I don't really agree. The Indians, IMO, are going to be a powerhouse... a dynasty again, and their run will start within the next three years. They have a young, promising core of players, and their farm system, of what I know, is stacked with promise. Shapiro has done a good job with it.

I have heard that song and dance before...

I think the Sox are currently supposed to be in their "dynasty" years.

guillen4life13
10-27-2003, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
I have heard that song and dance before...

I think the Sox are currently supposed to be in their "dynasty" years.

The difference is that the Indians have brass who have consistently seemed to know what they're doing. We've had Schu and KW, and a less than $60 payroll. The Indians have shown themselves willing to pay good money for a good product on the field. On top of that, this time they're building a more fundamentally sound team. The teams they had before had extremely powerful lineups. Thome, Ramirez, the Alomars, Belle, Baerga, Vizquel, Lofton, Williams, Burks among others. Great offensive club. They didn't have much pitching to back it up (they had Hershiser at the tail end of his career, then what? Nagy? Ogea? Colon, yes, but Colon hadn't tapped his potential) We're still stuck with this guy:

:reinsy
You can't really mean me, can you!?!?

crector
10-27-2003, 11:39 PM
The Indians have different ownership now and a different GM. Times have changed. Cleveland has gone from the powerhouse to the doghouse.

Ventura23Fan
10-28-2003, 03:33 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
Gammons picking us is like the death knoll...
The kiss of death. Right after the question was posed and before Gammons responded I was thinking to myself, "Please say anyone but the White Sox."