PDA

View Full Version : 2005 Cubs = 2001-2004 Sox?


infohawk
01-10-2005, 10:19 AM
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.

OEO Magglio
01-10-2005, 01:35 PM
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.
Yup, I've been saying this for a while now.

gosox41
01-10-2005, 01:39 PM
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.
Offensively there's similarities, but I'd take the Cubs starting pitching for 2005 over what the Sox had in 2001-2004.


Bob

HomeFish
01-10-2005, 01:44 PM
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.

Hangar18
01-10-2005, 01:45 PM
Offensively there's similarities, but I'd take the Cubs starting pitching for 2005 over what the Sox had in 2001-2004.


Bob
YES, I would take that rotation in that League also.
YOu also have to take into consideration that the FLUBBIES went out and
FILLED holes they had throughout their lineup, either thru sheer LUCK
(marlins and pirates giving away players for bad minor-leaguers)
or thru sheer FISCAL POWER. Though the team doesnt have much to show
for it (They have a Goat), they still were in contention for 2 yrs in a row,
and that has resulted in UNPRECENDENTED ticket sales & popularity,
which has them laughing all the way to the bank (hear that Jerry?)
That organization is STILL riding off the Fumes of 1989 and 1998.
2003 & 2004 simply Icing on the Financial Cake.

Tekijawa
01-10-2005, 01:48 PM
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
I don't know if they have more than one guy that will put up more than 100 RBI though? And I haven't figured out which one of them the 100 RBI might go to

Ramierz?
Garciparra, maybe if he plays the whole season?
Sosa, nope...

I would say that they are the Bizzarro 2001-2004 White Sox, All Starting Pitching very little elsewhere...

jackbrohamer
01-10-2005, 01:50 PM
That article understates the value of Moises Alou who was the Flubs' most valuable offensive player last year, and they have not replaced him. And Clement despite his mediocre record kept the Scrubs in pretty much every game he started the first 3-4 months of the season.

OEO Magglio
01-10-2005, 02:00 PM
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
Buehrle>>>>>>>>>Wood

Ol' No. 2
01-10-2005, 02:04 PM
Buehrle>>>>>>>>>WoodAgreed. Wood is, quite possibly, the most overrated pitcher in all of baseball. In Buehrle's worst year he won as many games as Wood did in his best.

santo=dorf
01-10-2005, 02:08 PM
YES, I would take that rotation in that League also.
YOu also have to take into consideration that the FLUBBIES went out and
FILLED holes they had throughout their lineup, either thru sheer LUCK
(marlins and pirates giving away players for bad minor-leaguers)
or thru sheer FISCAL POWER. Though the team doesnt have much to show
for it (They have a Goat), they still were in contention for 2 yrs in a row,
and that has resulted in UNPRECENDENTED ticket sales & popularity,
which has them laughing all the way to the bank (hear that Jerry?)
That organization is STILL riding off the Fumes of 1989 and 1998.
2003 & 2004 simply Icing on the Financial Cake.
I wouldn't call it "luck." Both of those situations were salary dumps. I saw Hendry on local TV when he was in town for the USF dinner, and he said that when he went into the winter meetings of 2003, he wasn't looking for a first baseman, but because of the Marlins' situation (they were deciding between keeping either Lee or Castillo) they were able to get a good player for nothing.

dcb33
01-10-2005, 02:11 PM
Agreed. Wood is, quite possibly, the most overrated pitcher in all of baseball. In Buehrle's worst year he won as many games as Wood did in his best.But Kerry Wood struck out 20 batters once! That has to make him better than Buehrle!

maurice
01-10-2005, 02:19 PM
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:Even this pessimistic piece is overly generous, since the cubs have lost several productive players and failed to make any signficiant additions thus far. If cub nation had any sense, they'd be applying lots of heat.

Their offense is worse than last year, since they subtracted their most productive offensive player (and also a halfway-decent IF) without signing a reasonable replacement. Barring a major resurgence by Prior and Wood, their pitching also is worse. They subtratcted a very good starting pitcher and a pretty good relief pitcher. They still have no closer and little bullpen depth.

Fortunately for the Trib, their "fans" don't believe in accountability.

34 Inch Stick
01-10-2005, 02:37 PM
I do not know how Cubs fans are not absolutely up in arms that the Cubs did not make a bigger move for Beltran. Sammy is there for one more year. All they would have to do is suck up an abnormally large payroll for one year. During that one year they can expect to draw huge numbers as the Cubs are likely to be a contender. After that one year is up they would be left with two great, athletic outfielders and a star that could pick up the mantle that Sosa left off.

We may complain about JR but pound for pound the Cubs are just as cheap of an organization.

Tekijawa
01-10-2005, 02:57 PM
I do not know how Cubs fans are not absolutely up in arms that the Cubs did not make a bigger move for Beltran. Sammy is there for one more year. All they would have to do is suck up an abnormally large payroll for one year. During that one year they can expect to draw huge numbers as the Cubs are likely to be a contender. After that one year is up they would be left with two great, athletic outfielders and a star that could pick up the mantle that Sosa left off.
On the surface you can think this, but when you look at how many big pay raises will be comming down the pike in the next few years for them, you have to think that, MAN I would much rather keep Prior, Zambrano, and Wood(who's been on one year contracts forever). I think Prior becomes a FA next year with his wierd contract, Patterson isn't that Far behind, I believe Zambrano Starts Arbitration next year.... Most of the Money from Sammy and Alou will be going to these players and that Contract that Ramirez signed last year... it may look like they have a ton of cash right now, but you have to think like a GM for this one, Hendry is probably Glad that Beltran didn't take his low ball offer!

Mohoney
01-10-2005, 03:00 PM
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
Not in the bullpen!

maurice
01-10-2005, 03:01 PM
Hendry is probably Glad that Beltran didn't take his low ball offer!No doubt. I'm sure he made the offer to save face with cub fans, knowing full well that there was no way Beltran would accept. The whole thing reeks of JR's BS "offer" to Ventura.

Mohoney
01-10-2005, 03:03 PM
Agreed. Wood is, quite possibly, the most overrated pitcher in all of baseball. In Buehrle's worst year he won as many games as Wood did in his best.
Buehrle in 2004: 16-10
Wood and Prior COMBINED in 2004: 14-13

Prior and Wood will rebound, but with that bullpen, I don't see either one of them winning more than Buehrle or Garcia. In fact, call me back when Wood wins more than 14 games.

gosox41
01-10-2005, 03:52 PM
On the surface you can think this, but when you look at how many big pay raises will be comming down the pike in the next few years for them, you have to think that, MAN I would much rather keep Prior, Zambrano, and Wood(who's been on one year contracts forever). I think Prior becomes a FA next year with his wierd contract, Patterson isn't that Far behind, I believe Zambrano Starts Arbitration next year.... Most of the Money from Sammy and Alou will be going to these players and that Contract that Ramirez signed last year... it may look like they have a ton of cash right now, but you have to think like a GM for this one, Hendry is probably Glad that Beltran didn't take his low ball offer!

Wood has one more year left on his contract. He signed a 3 year/$30 mill contract before last season.


Bob