PDA

View Full Version : ESPN Insiders-Neyer: "Is this Sox year?"


Flight #24
03-08-2005, 12:09 PM
For anyone with ESPN Insider, there's a Rob Neyer article with this title. Anyone got a recap? He's usually not a huge fan of KW's moves, but this certainly seems like a positive title.

Note to mods: If this should be in "what's the score" or even the roadhouse, pls move it.

Palehose13
03-08-2005, 12:11 PM
For anyone with ESPN Insider, there's a Rob Neyer article with this title. Anyone got a recap? He's usually not a huge fan of KW's moves, but this certainly seems like a positive title.

Note to mods: If this should be in "what's the score" or even the roadhouse, pls move it.

I don't have it, but he may be talking about the Red Sox and if he is...he's a year too late. :wink:

SOXintheBURGH
03-08-2005, 12:11 PM
I'm reading it now, hang on.


"What's it like to be a White Sox fan?
Really, I'd like to know. What's it like to follow a team that should be good every season, based on its inherent advantages? And is, sort of. Just not good enough. That must be frustrating. "

Kuzman
03-08-2005, 12:15 PM
I don't have it, but he may be talking about the Red Sox and if he is...he's a year too late. :wink:

nah, it says could this be the White Sox year? on the front page

SOXintheBURGH
03-08-2005, 12:16 PM
Actually it was a nice article. Talks about how the SOX finish in second place perpetually, how much the SOX suck in the playoffs, and how the focus this offseason and last years acquisitions in pitching. Good line from the article:



Since 1959, when they won two World Series games against the Dodgers, the White Sox have won three postseason games. Three postseason wins in 45 seasons. In those 45 seasons, only three teams the Senators/Rangers (1), the Rockies (1) and the Devil Rays (0) have failed to win more than three postseason games and none of those teams existed in 1959. Curse of the Bambino? Give me a break. Between the White Sox' general lack of success, their skinflint owner, the occasional relocation threats, and the last bad ballpark, when it comes to misery nobody's got anything on these Sox fans.

mweflen
03-08-2005, 12:16 PM
SITB, please cut and paste if you would.

mweflen
03-08-2005, 12:18 PM
"The last bad ballpark." Typical.

What about Oakland or St. Louis? Minnesota? Tampa Bay? Boston?

SOXintheBURGH
03-08-2005, 12:18 PM
SITB, please cut and paste if you would.

Article written by Rob Neyer, from espn.com Insider:


MOD EDIT:

Please do not post entire articles.

Flight #24
03-08-2005, 12:23 PM
Interesting, and IMO mostly fair. He neglects the bullpen (which should be very good), and the fact that while many teams have guys with ?s like Garland, Hernandez, Contreras, most have 1-2 of those guys AND a 5th starter that's either a complete unknown, or someone even worse.

So the Sox depth in pitching is an advantage that most don't have. But otherwise, not bad. Kudos to Rob for being one of the few to notice that while we downgraded in power from Lee to Pods, we upgraded at other positions and the O should overall be the same or better if Frank's healthy.

Ol' No. 2
03-08-2005, 12:25 PM
Typical Neyer.

Jermaine Dye is a slight improvement over Perez and Borchard.:?:

Garcia doesn't represent an upgrade since he was here for half of last season. (But the Twinks re-signing Radke and Santano do?):?:

More of the same :bs:

Iwritecode
03-08-2005, 12:25 PM
Since 1959, when they won two World Series games against the Dodgers, the White Sox have won three postseason games. Three postseason wins in 45 seasons. In those 45 seasons, only three teams – the Senators/Rangers (1), the Rockies (1) and the Devil Rays (0) – have failed to win more than three postseason games … and none of those teams existed in 1959.

Curse of the Bambino? Give me a break. Between the White Sox' general lack of success, their skinflint owner, the occasional relocation threats, and the last bad ballpark, when it comes to misery nobody's got anything on these Sox fans.

Wow, that's really depressing... :whiner:

MUsoxfan
03-08-2005, 12:31 PM
"The last bad ballpark." Typical.

What about Oakland or St. Louis? Minnesota? Tampa Bay? Boston?

By "last bad ballpark" he means it was the last stadium built before the "new model" ballparks were built....Camden, Comerica, Miller....etc. I have to agree with him. Comiskey park in 1991 was an experiment gone very wrong

mdep524
03-08-2005, 12:33 PM
Article written by Rob Neyer, from espn.com Insider:
...
The White Sox do have some pretty good pitching prospects in the minors, but none is ready to help the big club in 2005. Which leaves this team in the same position as another dozen or so around the majors -- they could be good if two or three pitchers are a lot better than we think they'll be. But how often does that actually happen? Pitchers get hurt, and wind up disappointing us far more often than they surprise us. The 2005 White Sox are a decent team, as usual, and if the Twins should stumble, the Sox have as good a chance as anybody. But it's been a while since the Twins stumbled, and there's no reason to think this is the year.
Hmmm, actually not a bad article. Very realistic- not the kool-aid-laiden optimism of some of us but not the uninformed, superficial neglect, indifference and negativity that we've mostly seen from national media so far. Flight, you're right about the bullpen, I guess its not sexy enough to talk about, but it is a significant strength that is constantly ignored.

Otherwise, I think he hits the nail on the head in this last paragraph- if Garland, El Duque and ESPECIALLY Contreras exceed expectations, the Sox will be a force to be reckoned with. Otherwise, we have to make a move for a starter (Ben Sheets?) or hope for a Twins collapse. The Cardinals pitchers GREATLY exceeded expectations last year, and they won over 100 games en route to the World Series. But like Neyer says, its just as easily and just as often goes the other way.

Fake Chet Lemon
03-08-2005, 12:43 PM
He nailed Frank Thomas being the key to this club scoring a lot of runs, I was impressed. He is right.

mweflen
03-08-2005, 12:55 PM
Typical Neyer.

Jermaine Dye is a slight improvement over Perez and Borchard.:?:


I actually agree with him here, because he is saying Dye represents a slight improvement over 1/3 Maggs, 1/3 Timo and 1/3 Borchard. If you add Maggs' solid numbers to Timo and Joe (cumulative .238 23 HR 97 RBI in 696 AB), you probably end up a little short of what Dye will likely produce (.270/25/100?).

MeanFish
03-08-2005, 12:59 PM
I actually agree with him here, because he is saying Dye represents a slight improvement over 1/3 Maggs, 1/3 Timo and 1/3 Borchard. If you add Maggs' solid numbers to Timo and Joe (cumulative .238 23 HR 97 RBI in 696 AB), you probably end up a little short of what Dye will likely produce (.270/25/100?).

More specifically, you end up a little short of what Dye did at the Net last year: (.265/23/80). Those numbers should almost certainly go up though.

mdep524
03-08-2005, 01:01 PM
Typical Neyer.

Jermaine Dye is a slight improvement over Perez and Borchard.:?:

Garcia doesn't represent an upgrade since he was here for half of last season. (But the Twinks re-signing Radke and Santano do?):?:

More of the same :bs:
You're right about the Dye comment, that is ridiculous. But Neyer still concludes that the Sox are going to score a fair number of runs. Enough to win, certainly. I really think he nails the starting pitching situation.

the gooch
03-08-2005, 01:03 PM
"In 2000, the White Sox posted the best record in the American League. They probably weren't the best club; the A's and Mariners were probably a bit better when you consider strength of schedule."

am i wrong in thinking the unbalanced schedule began after the 2000 season?
and we lost by 4 games in '03.

"there's no reason to think this is the year." -looks like he answered his own question.

MisterB
03-08-2005, 01:04 PM
Jermaine Dye is a slight improvement over Perez and Borchard.:?:


All Sox RF 2004:
.256/.315/.414, 22 hr, 96 rbi

Dye's career averages per 162 games:
.272/.334/.463, 25 hr, 95 rbi

I was surprised we got that many RBIs out of RF last year. I guess Borchard playing out there made it seem a lot worse than it was.

Flight #24
03-08-2005, 01:07 PM
All Sox RF 2004:
.256/.315/.414, 22 hr, 96 rbi

Dye's career averages per 162 games:
.272/.334/.463, 25 hr, 95 rbi

I was surprised we got that many RBIs out of RF last year. I guess Borchard playing out there made it seem a lot worse than it was.

While it apepars to be factored into his conclusion that the O will be solid, he also neglects the differential between AJ's #s and last year's catching crew of Alomar(jr), Davis, Burke, & Olivo. Really, I think the biggest differential in most assessments here and his is that he's making a comparison of Garland, Duque, & Contreras to the question marks most teams have at the #3 or 4 spot, and neglecting that they have even greater ?s at the #5 that we don't have.

34 Inch Stick
03-08-2005, 01:11 PM
By "last bad ballpark" he means it was the last stadium built before the "new model" ballparks were built....Camden, Comerica, Miller....etc. I have to agree with him. Comiskey park in 1991 was an experiment gone very wrong

It was not even an experiment. The architectural company that designed Comiskey presented a plan for the first retro park to Jerry. He nixed the idea IIRC because he wanted a stadium with more luxury suites. As was reported by the Sun Times last year, there are some suites that to this day have not been built out due to lack of interest.

Ol' No. 2
03-08-2005, 01:24 PM
I actually agree with him here, because he is saying Dye represents a slight improvement over 1/3 Maggs, 1/3 Timo and 1/3 Borchard. If you add Maggs' solid numbers to Timo and Joe (cumulative .238 23 HR 97 RBI in 696 AB), you probably end up a little short of what Dye will likely produce (.270/25/100?).They add up to about .239. I think Dye will be more than a "slight" improvement over that.

balke
03-08-2005, 01:39 PM
I actually agree with him here, because he is saying Dye represents a slight improvement over 1/3 Maggs, 1/3 Timo and 1/3 Borchard. If you add Maggs' solid numbers to Timo and Joe (cumulative .238 23 HR 97 RBI in 696 AB), you probably end up a little short of what Dye will likely produce (.270/25/100?).

I don't agree with that. Even when maggs was "healthy" he wasn't producing last season. Dye will be an outfield upgrade defensively over all of them, and will hit well over .238. If he hit .238 and had the strikeouts he will, we should've just put Valenstache out there.

MisterB
03-08-2005, 02:07 PM
I don't agree with that. Even when maggs was "healthy" he wasn't producing last season. Dye will be an outfield upgrade defensively over all of them, and will hit well over .238. If he hit .238 and had the strikeouts he will, we should've just put Valenstache out there.

Maggs' '04 stats extrapolated over 162 games:

.292/.351/.485, 99 runs, 28 hr, 115 rbi

That might not be up to Maggs' standards (except for rbi), but hardly what I'd call 'not producing'.

mweflen
03-08-2005, 02:17 PM
They add up to about .239. I think Dye will be more than a "slight" improvement over that.

Well certainly Dye should top .239. You have to remember that Borchard's abysmal average skews the total by quite a bit. But The production should be just about a wash - which I'd be quite satisfied with, BTW.

mweflen
03-08-2005, 02:20 PM
While it apepars to be factored into his conclusion that the O will be solid, he also neglects the differential between AJ's #s and last year's catching crew of Alomar(jr), Davis, Burke, & Olivo.

Yeah, he fails to mention AJ. Overall, With Dye and AJ, we're probably looking at 170 RBI - not much less than Maggs/Carlos. Throw Iguchi in, who can hit for more power than Willie, and we've actually upgraded our offensive production, and gaines speed at the same time.

Frank is the offensive X-Factor - I hope he hits 30 and drives in 100, justifying his 10 mil extension, and an extension beyond that to finish his career here.

balke
03-08-2005, 02:20 PM
Maggs' '04 stats extrapolated over 162 games:

.292/.351/.485, 99 runs, 28 hr, 115 rbi

That might not be up to Maggs' standards (except for rbi), but hardly what I'd call 'not producing'.

EDIT: Producing for Maggs. Producing for 14 million dollars. Producing in a contract year. Producing wins. I hated Maggs so much last season, before he was to be martyred for injury. Dye would normally have a tough act to follow, but now he could drop stats pretty deep offensively and we'll be like "Well at least we didn't put Borchard out to start".

If Dye puts those numbers listed up above I'd be a very happy camper. Tis just a pipe dream though.

ChiSoxRowand
03-08-2005, 02:34 PM
Neyer was just on ESPNEWS with some guy from baseballprospectus.com. They both talked up the Indians. Neyer said the Sox have a chance but he said their pitching was soft. They also talked about people who should be in the hall of fame and neyer said Minoso should be in. They both thought Santo should be in.

The Racehorse
03-08-2005, 02:49 PM
Neyer was just on ESPNEWS with some guy from baseballprospectus.com. They both talked up the Indians. Neyer said the Sox have a chance but he said their pitching was soft.

The Sox pitching is soft? Compared to who, the Indians pitching staff from 1948? We'll see.

CWSGuy406
03-08-2005, 04:55 PM
Yeah, he fails to mention AJ. Overall, With Dye and AJ, we're probably looking at 170 RBI - not much less than Maggs/Carlos. Throw Iguchi in, who can hit for more power than Willie, and we've actually upgraded our offensive production, and gaines speed at the same time.

Frank is the offensive X-Factor - I hope he hits 30 and drives in 100, justifying his 10 mil extension, and an extension beyond that to finish his career here.

It's not as cut-and-dry as 'we've actually upgraded our offensive production', IMHO.

While there is a clear upgrade this year at C, 2B (I assume Iguchi is an ugrade over Harris' OPS), 3B (another assumption on my part, that Crede improves upon last year's numbers), and RF, there's also a clear downgrade -- and a pretty big one -- at LF. And, we can't say that Uribe/Konerko/Rowand won't go down a bit, because all three had numbers in which they hadn't come close to in year's prior (though I don't think any will have significant drops).

CPditka
03-08-2005, 07:44 PM
Decent article, I didnt even realize this:

What's it like to be a long-time White Sox fan? Since 1919, when the Black Sox threw the World Series, the Sox have won exactly five postseason games (in 2004 alone, the Houston Astros (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/clubhouse?team=hou) won six).

PAPChiSox729
03-08-2005, 09:27 PM
It's not as cut-and-dry as 'we've actually upgraded our offensive production', IMHO.

While there is a clear upgrade this year at C, 2B (I assume Iguchi is an ugrade over Harris' OPS), 3B (another assumption on my part, that Crede improves upon last year's numbers), and RF, there's also a clear downgrade -- and a pretty big one -- at LF. And, we can't say that Uribe/Konerko/Rowand won't go down a bit, because all three had numbers in which they hadn't come close to in year's prior (though I don't think any will have significant drops).

I think that Pods will have a very good year this year. Carlos and Pods are very different types of players, so I don't think that they can be directly compared. Pods fills a very important role with this current lineup. I'm not saying that Carlos isn't an impact player, but that Pods is just better suited to help out the team.

balke
03-08-2005, 09:34 PM
Yeah, i wish there was a way we could've had our lineup from last year, and pods-type base stealer at SS or 2nd. That's smoking some serious pipe though.

Carlos Offense is what we are going to want now, but if we didn't have a Pods Carlos would be useless... if that makes sense. I hope I'm wrong, but I just think we'll miss that 30 hr, 35 double, high BA guy hitting behind Frank, or ahead. IF Pods has a break-out .300 season w/ 60+ steals, he's still going to need someone to drive him in.

Dadawg_77
03-09-2005, 10:05 AM
"The last bad ballpark." Typical.

What about Oakland or St. Louis? Minnesota? Tampa Bay? Boston?

The Cell was built after those staduims.

Palehose Pete
03-09-2005, 10:18 AM
Maybe I missed it, but did someone post the link to Neyer's article? If not, could someone please post it? It would be cool to read the whole article. Thanks.

The Racehorse
03-09-2005, 10:22 AM
Maybe I missed it, but did someone post the link to Neyer's article? If not, could someone please post it? It would be cool to read the whole article. Thanks.

The article is an ESPN insider's article... I'm thinking the link will have a filter on it preventing access unless you subscribe... I could be wrong though.

Palehose Pete
03-09-2005, 10:25 AM
OK, thanks. Maybe I'll stop being a cheapskate and just subscribe.