PDA

View Full Version : *Official* 9-6-04 Post Game White Sox Winner!


Brian26
09-06-2004, 04:56 PM
Grilli with the win. Cotts and Adkins pitched their behind off.

7.5 games out, with 6 left against the Twins.

Just believe.

SomebodyToldMe
09-06-2004, 04:59 PM
Adkins has been kicking serious boo-tay lately.

This is getting interesting.

idseer
09-06-2004, 05:01 PM
Grilli with the win. Cotts and Adkins pitched their behind off.

7.5 games out, with 6 left against the Twins.

Just believe.
i do believe. it's just that i believe we're out of it! :smile:

mealfred13
09-06-2004, 05:01 PM
Can you say 4 game winning streak? Here's to hoping we sweep our roadtrip and kick some Minny ass.....I feel the hope!

daveeym
09-06-2004, 05:03 PM
They're just teeing us up for the crushing blow.

owensmouth
09-06-2004, 05:05 PM
Grilli got the win, tho I'm not sure how he did it. We have a fifth starter with a winning record? Unheard of.

StockdaleForVeep
09-06-2004, 05:06 PM
i wonder if another "sox are winning, i like the sox now" bandwagon will begin

Brian26
09-06-2004, 05:06 PM
Grilli showed more composure today in pitching out of jams than Garland has in the past 3 years.

mdep524
09-06-2004, 05:07 PM
Though it's still probably going to fall into the "too little too late" category, it sure is nice to see the Sox win. :smile: We have a chance for our first 5-game winning streak all season tomorrow, that is a positive.


Related note: Anyone still want Soriano on the Sox after his pitiful performance today? I know it's just one game, but still. Yikes.

idseer
09-06-2004, 05:09 PM
Anyone still want Soriano on the Sox after his pitiful performance today? I know it's just one game, but still. Yikes.
absolutely not! but it would be just like the sox to say they're going to change the way things are done here yet go right out and get a guy with some power and NOTHING ELSE!

Mohoney
09-06-2004, 05:11 PM
Grilli showed more composure today in pitching out of jams than Garland has in the past 3 years.
A man of my own heart.

Nice way to name-drop Garland as a piece of poo.

JB98
09-06-2004, 05:12 PM
Though it's still probably going to fall into the "too little too late" category, it sure is nice to see the Sox win. :smile: We have a chance for our first 5-game winning streak all season tomorrow, that is a positive.


Related note: Anyone still want Soriano on the Sox after his pitiful performance today? I know it's just one game, but still. Yikes.
I made this point in the other thread. Those who want Soriano on the Sox were right. He would fit right in on this team. :cool:

fusillirob1983
09-06-2004, 05:12 PM
7.5 games looks like a lot, but the 6 games left against Minnesota still make it very very possible, even if people think the Sox have played like crap the past month. Maybe a couple guys will start stepping up finally.

DumpJerry
09-06-2004, 05:13 PM
I'm resisting the thoughts of post-season play. I guess that is what 30+ years of abuse will do to a fan....dash all hopes.

Would be nice, of course, but I'm not holding my breath (yet).

DickAllen72
09-06-2004, 05:13 PM
Related note: Anyone still want Soriano on the Sox after his pitiful performance today? I know it's just one game, but still. Yikes.

I'll take "Pea Pod" over Soriano at 2B any time!

Mohoney
09-06-2004, 05:18 PM
I'll take "Pea Pod" over Soriano at 2B any time!
I'm willing to give him the 2B job next year, too. Just PLEASE teach him how to steal a base.

DickAllen72
09-06-2004, 05:28 PM
I'm willing to give him the 2B job next year, too. Just PLEASE teach him how to steal a base.

Too bad we don't play the Mariners any more this season--he could watch how Ichiro steals bases. Maybe he should watch tapes of Ichiro stealing!
:smile:

Soxzilla
09-06-2004, 05:32 PM
:bandance:

THIS IS AWESOME! Let's keep it going guys!

Contreras on the bump tommorow against old man river. Let's take him to the house!:supernana:

Erik The Red
09-06-2004, 05:40 PM
Though it's still probably going to fall into the "too little too late" category, it sure is nice to see the Sox win. :smile: We have a chance for our first 5-game winning streak all season tomorrow, that is a positive. Make that our 2nd 5-game winning streak. The 1st was when we took the last 2 of the home series against the scrubs and then swept at the Metrodome.

StepsInSC
09-06-2004, 05:58 PM
7.5 games looks like a lot, but the 6 games left against Minnesota still make it very very possible, even if people think the Sox have played like crap the past month. Maybe a couple guys will start stepping up finally.
No, its not "very very possible".

Only a sweep of the Minny series would make it remotely possible, yet alone "very very possible".

JoseCanseco6969
09-06-2004, 06:26 PM
I dont understand why people dont want Soriano. Judy is garbage and I think soriano is gonna practice his butt off in the offseason to get his defense back on track. I'd do the deal in a heartbeat regarless of his performance today.

Iguana775
09-06-2004, 06:48 PM
i wonder if another "sox are winning, i like the sox now" bandwagon will begin
hey, about your sig, it's a guarentee that davis will have a lower number. even Ichiro will have a lower number.

misty60481
09-06-2004, 06:49 PM
I agree Soriano looked terrible today but he has the tools to be a star--I think we should try to get him if possible--I like those 24 HRs just think how many in the Cell----

CubsfansareDRUNK
09-06-2004, 06:50 PM
:bandance:

THIS IS AWESOME! Let's keep it going guys!

Contreras on the bump tommorow against old man river. Let's take him to the house!:supernana:
YEAH! LOL! good job sox keep it up

misty60481
09-06-2004, 06:55 PM
Tomorrow is good test--tough lefty Rogers if we can beat him I think our confidence will go way up--so far these last wins are against a terrible Seattle team and Texas played bad today if we can beat Rogers we are starting to go in right direction---I hope---

MRKARNO
09-06-2004, 06:55 PM
7.5 games looks like a lot, but the 6 games left against Minnesota still make it very very possible, even if people think the Sox have played like crap the past month. Maybe a couple guys will start stepping up finally.
We have about a 1-2 percent chance of pulling this division out at this point, but hey, the closer we get, the higher our chances get, but no team in the division play era has come back from 2.5 games out or greater of any playoff spot at the beginning of september to win a playoff spot

Aidan
09-06-2004, 07:21 PM
I agree Soriano looked terrible today but he has the tools to be a star--I think we should try to get him if possible--I like those 24 HRs just think how many in the Cell----Exactly. I'm shocked that people would rather have Garland over Soriano. Soriano could hit .300 with 40+ homers for the White Sox and playing home games at the Cell. He wouldn't be a good leadoff man though because he strikes out too much and walks too little. However, he could be a good #2 hitter for us.

Brian26
09-06-2004, 07:47 PM
We have about a 1-2 percent chance of pulling this division out at this point, but hey, the closer we get, the higher our chances get, but no team in the division play era has come back from 2.5 games out or greater of any playoff spot at the beginning of september to win a playoff spot
Huh? You sure about that stat, Karno? No team has ever overcome a 2.5 game lead to win a playoff spot? That can't be true. I was just quoting some numbers two days ago how the Mariners came back from 11 games out on August 24th to beat the Angels in 1995.

JB98
09-06-2004, 07:47 PM
Exactly. I'm shocked that people would rather have Garland over Soriano. Soriano could hit .300 with 40+ homers for the White Sox and playing home games at the Cell. He wouldn't be a good leadoff man though because he strikes out too much and walks too little. However, he could be a good #2 hitter for us.

My perspective on this issue has nothing to do with Garland. I just couldn't be more opposed to having Soriano on the Sox, regardless of who we'd be giving up to get him. You saw all the holes in his game today. He's an all-or-nothing hitter. Defensively, he's abysmal, and he commands a high salary. Aren't we trying to get away from this type of player? Sure, Soriano has tools. So does Joe Borchard.

I'm not saying we shouldn't trade Garland for Soriano. Rather, I'm contending that we shouldn't trade for Soriano period. I can live with a Harris/Uribe platoon at 2B next year. It's the left side of the infield I'm worried about, in particular SS. We need to find a guy who can hit at the top of the order and play good defense for that spot. Soriano is just another right-handed power hitter to me. We already have enough of those with CLee, PK and Frank.

Now, if we were talking about Garland for Mike Young, I'd be singing a different tune. Unfortunately, Texas would have to be high on crack to make that deal.

fusillirob1983
09-06-2004, 08:31 PM
Is this only the 2nd or 3rd year they're having an unbalanced schedule too?

Dan H
09-06-2004, 08:43 PM
Grilli with the win. Cotts and Adkins pitched their behind off.

7.5 games out, with 6 left against the Twins.

Just believe.
I want to believe but find that hard to do after the last two months. I just have a hard time believing they are going to go on the streak required to win this thing. So much has to happen, and for the Sox it usually doesn't.

santo=dorf
09-06-2004, 08:46 PM
I want to believe but find that hard to do after the last two months. I just have a hard time believing they are going to go on the streak required to win this thing. So much has to happen, and for the Sox it usually doesn't.The Twins went on an 11 game win streak including 5 straight over us back in the middle of September 2003. :mad: :angry:

I refuse to count us out.

MRKARNO
09-06-2004, 08:59 PM
Huh? You sure about that stat, Karno? No team has ever overcome a 2.5 game lead to win a playoff spot? That can't be true. I was just quoting some numbers two days ago how the Mariners came back from 11 games out on August 24th to beat the Angels in 1995. I am pretty sure about that stat. At that time, Seattle was only 3 out of the wild Card behind Texas and at the beginning of September, as the stat reads, Seattle was tied for the Wild Card. The M's comeback was great, but we were something like 9 games out of the nearest playoff spot as the month started. In order for us to win, we'd essentially have to spit in the face of history.

Here is the stat again, incase I did not make myself clear the first time:

No team that has more than 2.5 games out of a playoff spot at the beginning of September during the divisional play era has ever come back to make the playoffs.

fusillirob1983
09-06-2004, 09:00 PM
I'm glad someone else still thinks they have a chance. Is it likely they'll take the division? Maybe not, but it is possible. Until someone can show me a mathematical formula that the Sox are out of the race as of right now, I'm going to believe that they have a shot. I'm aware that 3 of their past 4 wins are against the Mariners, but who cares. All wins go in the same column.

chisox06
09-06-2004, 09:05 PM
The Twins went on an 11 game win streak including 5 straight over us back in the middle of September 2003. :mad: :angry:

I refuse to count us out..

All we can hope for is that the sox have a kick ass road trip. And if we can come into Minny 4-5 games out, then we can start watching intently. One day at a time, hope yes, but not much.

idseer
09-06-2004, 09:14 PM
funny thread.

i don't think even one person here would say it's impossible. if they were out 10 games with ten to go vs the leader .... it would not be impossible.

it's acting as if it's likely that is irrational.

why anyone in their right minds would suggest a team that is 8 games out with 25 to play and missing their 2 best players and gigantic holes everywhere can still win it, against a strong team that is healthy and with an excellent pitching staff and players who've been there the last 3 years is beyond me. i guarantee that if the roles were reversed with the twins and a twin fan were here spouting they will still win it, these same people would be laughing their heads off at the ridiculousness of the claim.

fusillirob1983
09-06-2004, 09:23 PM
If we had 0 games left with the Twins, I'd completely agree with you.

DumpJerry
09-06-2004, 09:27 PM
Ok, the truth of the matter is we don't know how the season will end. Sure, it is possible for us to overtake Minny, the math allows for it. So, does this mean we cancel our wedding and funeral plans for early October so we can watch Sox playoff games? Dunno.

Bottom line: stay tuned, it could get interesting.:D: :D: :D: :D:

By the way, I don't think the Flubs will do it. They're playing sub-.500 ball, the 'Stros are playing like a team possessed.....:bandance: :bandance:

idseer
09-06-2004, 09:35 PM
By the way, I don't think the Flubs will do it. They're playing sub-.500 ball as are the sox in the last 20 games. and the last 30 games. and the last 40 games ............. and the last 50 games.

but yeah ..... we'll suddenly turn into a contending team. no worries. :rolleyes:

MikeW
09-06-2004, 10:20 PM
Hey, if nothing else. Maybe, just maybe this thing will get interesting.:rolleyes:

Johnny Mostil
09-06-2004, 10:25 PM
Here is the stat again, incase I did not make myself clear the first time:

No team that has more than 2.5 games out of a playoff spot at the beginning of September during the divisional play era has ever come back to make the playoffs.
What is the "divisional play era"? The Mets were 5 games back on 9/1/69, according to baseball-reference.com

Johnny Mostil
09-06-2004, 10:34 PM
What is the "divisional play era"? The Mets were 5 games back on 9/1/69, according to baseball-reference.com
Also, Braves were 4.5 games back of Giants on 9/1/93. If, however, "divisional play era" is really the wild card era, then original statement about 2.5 game margin may be true.

rwcescato
09-06-2004, 11:12 PM
Though it's still probably going to fall into the "too little too late" category, it sure is nice to see the Sox win. :smile: We have a chance for our first 5-game winning streak all season tomorrow, that is a positive.


Related note: Anyone still want Soriano on the Sox after his pitiful performance today? I know it's just one game, but still. Yikes.
If New York can get a miracle why can't Chicago. Go Sox
and whoever play the Twins.
Rich
:supernana:

Soxzilla
09-06-2004, 11:16 PM
funny thread.

i don't think even one person here would say it's impossible. if they were out 10 games with ten to go vs the leader .... it would not be impossible.

it's acting as if it's likely that is irrational.

why anyone in their right minds would suggest a team that is 8 games out with 25 to play and missing their 2 best players and gigantic holes everywhere can still win it, against a strong team that is healthy and with an excellent pitching staff and players who've been there the last 3 years is beyond me. i guarantee that if the roles were reversed with the twins and a twin fan were here spouting they will still win it, these same people would be laughing their heads off at the ridiculousness of the claim.
I'd hardly call this rotation EXCELLENT...

Johan Santana - 16-6 2.95 ERA (He's due for a schalacking, Esteban Loaiza? And we've schalacked him before)
Brad Radke - 10-7 3.59 ERA (We can hammer him, just as much as he can hammer us)
Carlos Silva - 10-8 4.56 ERA (Injury watch? and we own him)
Terry Mulhullond - 4-8 5.02 (Old spit and grease can be roughed)
Kyle Lohse - 7-11 5.52 (Cy lohse is one of the few crappy pitchers that doesnt own us)

And their bullpen can be beat (Nathan is tops, I admit that). And it looks like their young and talented lineup is finally, hopefully, maybe, feeling the wear and tear of a 162 game season...if we can make this a race in the next few weeks......anything is possible.

Now let's look at our rotation, beginning now...

Mark Buehrle - 13-8 4.12
Freddy Garcia - 10-10 3.84 (With sox 6-3 4.79)
Jose Contreras - 12-7 5.10 (With sox 4-2 3.92)
Jon Garland - 10-10 4.92
Jason Grilli - 1-1 6.48

I'd take ours in a heartbeat. Regardless of Santana.

MRKARNO
09-06-2004, 11:42 PM
I'd hardly call this rotation EXCELLENT...

Johan Santana - 16-6 2.95 ERA (He's due for a schalacking, Esteban Loaiza? And we've schalacked him before)
Brad Radke - 10-7 3.59 ERA (We can hammer him, just as much as he can hammer us)
Carlos Silva - 10-8 4.56 ERA (Injury watch? and we own him)
Terry Mulhullond - 4-8 5.02 (Old spit and grease can be roughed)
Kyle Lohse - 7-11 5.52 (Cy lohse is one of the few crappy pitchers that doesnt own us)

And their bullpen can be beat (Nathan is tops, I admit that). And it looks like their young and talented lineup is finally, hopefully, maybe, feeling the wear and tear of a 162 game season...if we can make this a race in the next few weeks......anything is possible.

Now let's look at our rotation, beginning now...

Mark Buehrle - 13-8 4.12
Freddy Garcia - 10-10 3.84 (With sox 6-3 4.79)
Jose Contreras - 12-7 5.10 (With sox 4-2 3.92)
Jon Garland - 10-10 4.92
Jason Grilli - 1-1 6.48

I'd take ours in a heartbeat. Regardless of Santana.
I dont know what you're on, but Santana is the best pitcher in the majors this year period while Garcia's been mediocre and hurt. He's pretty much inviceable at this point and there's zero reason to compare him to Loaiza. I agree with you about Radke and he's about equal to Buehrle this year. Contreras is way over Silva. Garland is about equal with Lohse and Grilli is about the same level as Mulholland. It's the Santana factor however that makes this team so good. I do agree though that if Santana starts to slump that the Twins could start to slide.

I also agree that anything is possible, but it would be unprecedented if we were able to do that and stuff like that never seems to happen to the White Sox. The chances are so low at this point that the White SOx are going to have to stretch this winning streak to about 8 or win 12 of 16 total for them to make a serious run and that will prove most difficult with 9 straight at Texas, Ana and Minny. The last 11 games being against Kansas City and Detroit make it a lot more realistic than most other teams that are 7.5 out and the fact that we have 6 more head to head with minnesota, but don't get your hopes up!

MRKARNO
09-06-2004, 11:43 PM
What is the "divisional play era"? The Mets were 5 games back on 9/1/69, according to baseball-reference.com 1994 to present

A. Cavatica
09-06-2004, 11:55 PM
I'd take ours [rotation] in a heartbeat. Regardless of Santana.
#1 Santana (16-6, 2.95) vs Garcia (10-10, 3.84)
Santana is head and shoulders better than Garcia this year, which is no surprise as Santana's a leading Cy Young contender.

#2 Radke (10-7, 3.59) vs Buehrle (13-8, 4.12)
Radke and Buehrle are very similar pitchers. Radke may be a smidge more consistent, and his ERA's half a run lower, so give him a slight edge.

#3 Silva (10-8, 4.56) vs Contreras (12-7, 5.10)
Even. Subjectively, maybe a slight edge for Contreras, but Silva's ERA is half a run lower.

#4 Lohse (7-11, 5.52) vs Garland (10-10, 4.92)
Slight edge to Garland, but the last couple of years Lohse has been better.

#5 Mulholland (4-8, 5.02) vs Grilli (1-1, 6.48)
Big edge to Minnesota.

Minnesota's rotation is unquestionably better than ours at the #1 and #5 spots, and the other three spots are close and collectively even.

Johnny Mostil
09-07-2004, 12:04 AM
If, however, "divisional play era" is really the wild card era, then original statement about 2.5 game margin may be true.
This doesn't appear true, either. On 9/1/01, the Cardinals were three games behind the Cubs, then the wild card leader, and six games in back of the Astros. They fell 7 back of the Astros on 9/2 (remaining 3 in back of the Cubs as well), but ended the season tied with the Astros (with the Astros winning the division on a tiebreaker) and 5 games ahead of the Cubs. So, in the month of September, they made up 8 on the Cubs and 7 on the Astros.

Johnny Mostil
09-07-2004, 12:09 AM
1994 to present
Checked them all. Only exception seems to be '01 Cards.

MRKARNO
09-07-2004, 12:21 AM
Checked them all. Only exception seems to be '01 Cards.
The Cards were 2 games out heading into play on 09/01/01.

Johnny Mostil
09-07-2004, 12:24 AM
The Cards were 2 games out heading into play on 09/01/01.
How exactly are you defining this "rule"? The Cards were 3 games out after play on 9/1. They were 3 games out after play on 9/2. Yeah, the difference between 3 and 2.5 is rather trivial, but 3 is still greater than 2.5. Plus the fact they made up 8 games on the Cubs (finishing 5 games ahead of them) by the end of the season, and n of this sample is less than 10, leads me to believe this ain't exactly an iron-clad law of physics we're discussing.

Frankfan4life
09-07-2004, 12:31 AM
I want to believe but find that hard to do after the last two months. I just have a hard time believing they are going to go on the streak required to win this thing. So much has to happen, and for the Sox it usually doesn't.I couldn't have said it better. Our luck just doesn't run in this direction. The Sox generally have to have a dominating season to win the division. This just isn't a comeback type team. Alas.

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 01:35 AM
#1 Santana (16-6, 2.95) vs Garcia (10-10, 3.84)
Santana is head and shoulders better than Garcia this year, which is no surprise as Santana's a leading Cy Young contender.

#2 Radke (10-7, 3.59) vs Buehrle (13-8, 4.12)
Radke and Buehrle are very similar pitchers. Radke may be a smidge more consistent, and his ERA's half a run lower, so give him a slight edge.

#3 Silva (10-8, 4.56) vs Contreras (12-7, 5.10)
Even. Subjectively, maybe a slight edge for Contreras, but Silva's ERA is half a run lower.

#4 Lohse (7-11, 5.52) vs Garland (10-10, 4.92)
Slight edge to Garland, but the last couple of years Lohse has been better.

#5 Mulholland (4-8, 5.02) vs Grilli (1-1, 6.48)
Big edge to Minnesota.

Minnesota's rotation is unquestionably better than ours at the #1 and #5 spots, and the other three spots are close and collectively even.
I disagree.

Of course I would definitely give the santana edge over anyone in our rotation, but since you put garcia in the 1 spot. I'll use him...

Santana > Garcia - Santana is a cy young candidate, can't top that, unless your schilling.

Radke = Buehrle - This is a push right now, Buehrle can be unstoppable, but he can also be hittable, but rarely does he ever get knocked around like radke has the ability to do. Buehrle is going to keep you in the game a good portion of the time, moreso than brad, imo.

Contreras > Silva - Ugh, silva has been awful in the sox series, and awful basically since his incredibly start. Whereas contreras has been consistently damn good since he joined the white sox. This is an easy pick. Not too mention silva is fighting injuries as we speak.

Garland > Lohse - Garland may be bad, but lohse is terrible. The man's era is hilting towards 6 the more games we play this season, sure, maybe garlands might be too. But he's had back to back decent outings (Garland has), I think this will be judy's turnaround. Lohse just got knocked around badly by kc....

Mulhullond > Grilli - Grilli other than that one inning against the indians has thrown some DAMN good ball. But since the sample size is so thin, I'm obviously giving the nod to terry, who can deal. But who can also get knocked around.

idseer
09-07-2004, 08:53 AM
I'd hardly call this rotation EXCELLENT...

Johan Santana - ........... etc. etc ...........

I'd take ours in a heartbeat. Regardless of Santana.
and this is why i can't take you seriously.
you have no regard for facts.

i said minnesota had a much better staff than the sox. check this out:

sox - 1203 innings - 422 bb's - 830 k's - 1.42 whip - 4.82 era
twins 1254 innings - 356 bb's - 954 k's - 1.32 whip - 4.04 era

the twins have the second most effective staff in the american league. the sox are in the lower 2nd half.

you'd take our's in a heartbeat? then you choose to lose in a heartbeat.

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 02:34 PM
and this is why i can't take you seriously.
you have no regard for facts.

i said minnesota had a much better staff than the sox. check this out:

sox - 1203 innings - 422 bb's - 830 k's - 1.42 whip - 4.82 era
twins 1254 innings - 356 bb's - 954 k's - 1.32 whip - 4.04 era

the twins have the second most effective staff in the american league. the sox are in the lower 2nd half.

you'd take our's in a heartbeat? then you choose to lose in a heartbeat.Your stats are meaningless when coupled together because johan santana raises them all significantly. Other then santana and radke, I don't like the twins rotation at all. The twins also don't play in COORs 2.0, so your point is moot.

EDIT - Do these stats also include the god awful performances from the danny wrights, felix diazs and arnie munozs?

idseer
09-07-2004, 05:14 PM
Your stats are meaningless when coupled together because johan santana raises them all significantly. Other then santana and radke, I don't like the twins rotation at all. The twins also don't play in COORs 2.0, so your point is moot.

EDIT - Do these stats also include the god awful performances from the danny wrights, felix diazs and arnie munozs?holy cow!

i guess they're meaningless only because they clearly show how wrong you are.

the FACT is there are over 200 innings of BETTER pitching than santana, so don't try to suggest he's so far and away from everyone else he alone brings the team up anymore than any ace pitcher brings his team up.

and yes, they include all the pitchers stats .... including the god aweful performances from lohse, greisinger, fultz, mulholland ...etc.
you can't pick and choose who to not count to make your slanted facts work.

and it doesn't matter you don't like the twins rotation. they are clearly superior to the sox pitching staff! you want to pull the wool over your own eyes that's your business but don't try to tell me the sox have even CLOSE to a comparable staff to the twins.


and btw ... if you want to throw out santana and radke then we also throw out buehrle and garcia. twins pitching STILL kicks the sox ass!

A. Cavatica
09-07-2004, 09:03 PM
Radke = Buehrle - This is a push right now, Buehrle can be unstoppable, but he can also be hittable, but rarely does he ever get knocked around like radke has the ability to do. Buehrle is going to keep you in the game a good portion of the time, moreso than brad, imo.

Peter Gammons on Radke: "He is a beacon of consistency and pounding the strike zone (19 walks all season). His 10-7 record is no indication of his performance, and he leads the league in quality-start percentage."


Contreras > Silva - Ugh, silva has been awful in the sox series, and awful basically since his incredibly start. Whereas contreras has been consistently damn good since he joined the white sox. This is an easy pick. Not too mention silva is fighting injuries as we speak.

Don't look now, but Contreras just gave up 8 ER in 1 2/3 innings. There's a reason the Yankees were so desperate to move him.

idseer
09-07-2004, 09:12 PM
Don't look now, but Contreras just gave up 8 ER in 1 2/3 innings. There's a reason the Yankees were so desperate to move him.
and he's given up 18 runs in his last 17 2/3 innings. assuming he loses tonight he'll be 1 - 3 in those games. maybe this wasn't the steal so many thought it was.

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 09:33 PM
holy cow!

i guess they're meaningless only because they clearly show how wrong you are.

the FACT is there are over 200 innings of BETTER pitching than santana, so don't try to suggest he's so far and away from everyone else he alone brings the team up anymore than any ace pitcher brings his team up.

and yes, they include all the pitchers stats .... including the god aweful performances from lohse, greisinger, fultz, mulholland ...etc.
you can't pick and choose who to not count to make your slanted facts work.

and it doesn't matter you don't like the twins rotation. they are clearly superior to the sox pitching staff! you want to pull the wool over your own eyes that's your business but don't try to tell me the sox have even CLOSE to a comparable staff to the twins.


and btw ... if you want to throw out santana and radke then we also throw out buehrle and garcia. twins pitching STILL kicks the sox ass!
They ARE meaningless because they throw pitchers in there that ARENT EVEN A PART OF THIS DISCUSSION!

If you like the twins so much, why don't you go be a twins fan. I dont know how you can say that the back three of silva-lohse-mulhulland are better than the back three of contreras-garland-grilli. Give me a break.

And cavatica, what that article fails to mention is that radke may not WALK people, he can get knocked around, and DOES. He has a .292 clip against him, giving up 203 hits through 190 innings. I never said he can't pitch fantastic, I think he can't go out there and dominant teams moreso than Buehrle, but I think teams can figure him out easier than buehrle, who is a damn good damage control pitcher and can keep the sox in the ballgame damn near every night. They may not be "quality" starts, but any game we are in, is a good one. Take tonites game for example.

Anyways ID, we are talking about those 10 guys, we aren't talking about diaz, griesenger, munoz, wright, stewart, fultz and whoever elses crap is contained within those stats.

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 09:35 PM
and he's given up 18 runs in his last 17 2/3 innings. assuming he loses tonight he'll be 1 - 3 in those games. maybe this wasn't the steal so many thought it was.
:chickenlittle

And I bet a few weeks ago you were saying..."Wait guys, we can't judge a guy on only a few starts!"

Now that he's had 2 "bad" outings your jumping on the hate bandwagon. Get a life.

idseer
09-07-2004, 09:37 PM
Anyways ID, we are talking about those 10 guys, we aren't talking about diaz, griesenger, munoz, wright, stewart, fultz and whoever elses crap is contained within those stats.
no we aren't. we were talking about the team pitching. I know ... I brought it up!
YOU spun it down to 10 pitchers.

idseer
09-07-2004, 09:40 PM
And I bet a few weeks ago you were saying..."Wait guys, we can't judge a guy on only a few starts!"

Now that he's had 2 "bad" outings your jumping on the hate bandwagon. Get a life.
and you'd lose that bet. and i don't hate him at all. i just suggested a maybe.

what's caught in your craw? :?:

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 09:44 PM
no we aren't. we were talking about the team pitching. I know ... I brought it up!
YOU spun it down to 10 pitchers.
I was the one that started the comparison! Who made the initial post about the starting rotation comparison? I believe I did. So quiet it. Your wrong.

Do you want me to post career eras? Dont make me prove how right I am.

idseer
09-07-2004, 09:51 PM
I was the one that started the comparison! Who made the initial post about the starting rotation comparison? I believe I did. So quiet it. Your wrong.

Do you want me to post career eras? Dont make me prove how right I am.
are you being obtuse on purpose? you looking to get this thrown into the roadhouse? i brought up the fact that the twins pitching was much better. you "responded' trying to prove me wrong. you're not interested in a factual discussion. you wanna play games.

i will no longer continue talking with a dolt.

Soxzilla
09-07-2004, 09:54 PM
are you being obtuse on purpose? you looking to get this thrown into the roadhouse? i brought up the fact that the twins pitching was much better. you "responded' trying to prove me wrong. you're not interested in a factual discussion. you wanna play games.

i will no longer continue talking with a dolt.
LOL whatever. I brought up the rotation and said their bullpen was much better than ours. I wasn't arguing with you in the FIRST place. I was stating my own personal belief that there ROTATION wasn't as attractive as ours. Then YOU saw fit to argue it. Shut up, seriously. If you want to dig yourself a hole with me, do it in chat.