PDA

View Full Version : Slap The Face - ESPN Steve Phillips


mikehuff
04-01-2005, 08:39 AM
I guess this guy is a baseball analyst on ESPN radio. He was just on the Mike and Mike show and was going over his preseason predections.
He picked the White Sox to have the biggest fall off in wins from the previous year.

My God, does anyone know this team? We are truly better than we were last year. There is no doubt in my mind. Three simple factors would tell you that...
1. No Billy Koch
2. No Danny Wright
3. No Joe Borchard

I know the kind of attention that the Sox get and I know it shouldn't make me mad because I still know what I know and I truly believe in the Sox this year. I absoutely hated the team they had for the last 3 years and I couldn't be more excited about the 2005 team.

wdelaney72
04-01-2005, 08:44 AM
There's a reason Steve Phillips is a FORMER GM, and not currently an active GM...

He's a
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/wdelaney72/RedForeman1.bmp "Dumbass"

rdwj
04-01-2005, 08:55 AM
His opinion doesn't mean anything since there hasn't been even 1 regular season game played yet. And honestly, it's going to be easier for them to play without high expectations.

rdwj

mikesouthside
04-01-2005, 08:59 AM
I heard it too...."I got that sick feeling in the pit of my stomach"....ha. What does he know? That's one fool's thoughts. Here's THIS fools thoughts...Sox win ALC....You like apples?

GO SOX 2005 !!!:bandance:

Mickster
04-01-2005, 09:03 AM
I just got into work and was going to post this. I have not put on the "silver & black" colored glasses like some have on these boards and predicted a 2005 WS title, but to say that we are essentially the least improved team in the entire AL v. 2004 simply because we lost the 64 games that Maggs played as well as CLee is INSANE!!!

Phillips has to be the dumbest "analyst" in all of baseball. Absolutely Pathetic.

Fake Chet Lemon
04-01-2005, 09:04 AM
When he said he wasn't too sure if our pitching was improved much, I immediately ignored everything else he said. We didn't even have a fifth starter last year, and he's not sure if our pitching is improved?!!! He's needs to be nominated for Mike & Mike's "Just Shut Up Award" next week for being a moron.

The Racehorse
04-01-2005, 09:05 AM
I have not put on the "silver & black" colored glasses like some have on these boards and predicted a 2005 WS title

mine fit nicely :cool:

:)

Fake Chet Lemon
04-01-2005, 09:22 AM
I did laugh when he said Jose Valentin might be a 30/30 guy.......Homeruns and Errors.

veeter
04-01-2005, 09:25 AM
It's to the point that I think the White Sox in some way, shape or form angered ESPN. They go out of their way to never compliment them. They even go as far as to try to make fun of the team. I mean, it's like the playground in elementary school. It just smells of purposeful bashing to me. Go Sox.

JRIG
04-01-2005, 09:27 AM
Phillips has to be the dumbest "analyst" in all of baseball. Absolutely Pathetic.

You obviously aren't familiar with the body of work of the esteemed ex-Sox John Kruk.

Jurr
04-01-2005, 09:35 AM
Yeah......that's the beauty of April 5th and beyond. All of the "baseball experts" show off how "unexpertly" they are....all of their insight and preseason prognostication gets thrown out the window. They get to tell you why the teams that they thought were garbage have "turned it around". You know...because they're experts. They'll get paid to tell you that Mark Buehrle is having such a good year because he throws strikes and that Aaron Rowand is a "guy on the rise" because he has been hitting well. Then they get to tell you something really profound like "The Sox will be even better offensively when Frank Thomas comes back to his previous form after the injury". Man...I love their insight.

Mickster
04-01-2005, 09:45 AM
You obviously aren't familiar with the body of work of the esteemed ex-Sox John Kruk.

Unfortunately very true. Take into consideration that Kruk is a redneck ex-player and Phillips is a former GM - Stevie-boy takes the cake!

TomParrish79
04-01-2005, 10:27 AM
Yeah I was watching this morning when Phillips said that.


I take his opinion with a grain of salt.

Kogs35
04-01-2005, 10:37 AM
yawn, we all know why espn baseball coverage sucks. they do this crap every year. they hire stupid morons as "analyst".

StepsInSC
04-01-2005, 10:37 AM
He also "GUARANTEED" that ARod and Sosa would hit 50+ homeruns...

If that's not an insta-credibility-killer, I'm not sure what would be.

spawn
04-01-2005, 10:42 AM
My favorite part of the broadcast this morning was when Mike Greenberg said he had issues with Phillips picking the Braves starting rotation as the best in a short series.


Phillips: "How many teams have you taken to the World Series?"
Greenberg: "In my lifetime, one less than you"

I don't know how many people caught that, because Phillips was sorta laughing, but I loved the Greenmans comeback...:D:

SoxWillWin
04-01-2005, 10:43 AM
When he said he wasn't too sure if our pitching was improved much, I immediately ignored everything else he said. We didn't even have a fifth starter last year, and he's not sure if our pitching is improved?!!! He's needs to be nominated for Mike & Mike's "Just Shut Up Award" next week for being a moron.

I'll give him my april award early
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=2634
Previous winners:
March 2005 Joe Sheahan

SoxFan78
04-01-2005, 10:46 AM
Phillips also said Corey Patterson would join the 40/40 club. And this guy was a GM???

spawn
04-01-2005, 10:53 AM
Phillips also said Corey Patterson would join the 40/40 club. And this guy was a GM???
Exactly. He was a GM...

SoxWillWin
04-01-2005, 10:56 AM
Phillips also said Corey Patterson would join the 40/40 club. And this guy was a GM???

You guys didn't know this? And they're letting Pete Rose into the HOF this year too!

infohawk
04-01-2005, 10:58 AM
[QUOTE=wdelaney72]There's a reason Steve Phillips is a FORMER GM, and not currently an active GM...QUOTE]

I think Phillips one of the general managers who was depicted as victimized by Billy Beane in "Moneyball." If I recall correctly, the book made him look really unsure of himself and indecisive. Almost like Beane was employing the Jedi mind trick on him. I know the book didn't portray Kenny in the best light, but it was mild on Kenny compared to how it portrayed (correctly or incorrectly) Phillips.

Tekijawa
04-01-2005, 11:03 AM
I guess this guy is a baseball analyst on ESPN radio. He was just on the Mike and Mike show and was going over his preseason predections.
He picked the White Sox to have the biggest fall off in wins from the previous year.

It is April Fools day right?

SOXSINCE'70
04-01-2005, 11:06 AM
Phillips also said Corey Patterson would join the 40/40 club. And this guy was a GM???

40 HR's and 40 K's by the third game of the season?? :roflmao: :roflmao:

Jaffar
04-01-2005, 11:09 AM
Not only did he say the Sox would have the biggest fall off he was talking about the Twins or Indians making noise in the playoffs?!?!? Didn't mention the sox having a good bullpen (he had yanks, red sox, angels, twins, and indians over us).

SOXSINCE'70
04-01-2005, 11:09 AM
It is April Fools day right?

Forget April fool's day.Steve Phillips is one of the
forerunners for schmuck of the year!!:angry: :angry: :angry:

I'm not going to fool myself,but the White Sox will NOT
suffer the biggest falloff in the A.L.:mad: :mad:

SoxSpeed22
04-01-2005, 11:10 AM
They should make the next "Dream Job" about finding a Baseball analyst because ANYONE can do a better job than Steve Phillips or most of the analysts they have on there now. Good thing there's volume control on the radio and TV.

samram
04-01-2005, 11:15 AM
They should make the next "Dream Job" about finding a Baseball analyst because ANYONE can do a better job than Steve Phillips or most of the analysts they have on there now. Good thing there's volume control on the radio and TV.

There's also a channel changer, which I use frequently when I'm about to see an ESPN "expert" attempt to enlighten us with his baseball accumen.

skottyj242
04-01-2005, 11:16 AM
Didn't most analysts pick the Royals to win the division last year?

MRKARNO
04-01-2005, 11:20 AM
Didn't most analysts pick the Royals to win the division last year?

About 1/3 to 2/5 of them. It was one of the worst jobs of prognosticating I have ever seen.

The Racehorse
04-01-2005, 11:29 AM
There's also a channel changer, which I use frequently when I'm about to see an ESPN "expert" attempt to enlighten us with their baseball accument.

Yeah... I used to get all jazzed up for ESPN's comments on everyday baseball happenings, especially the BBTN crew... but during this year's run up to Opening Day, I've had no burning desire to see what they have to say. Maybe I'll change my tune as the season progresses, but I doubt it.

LVSoxFan
04-01-2005, 11:40 AM
My feeling, now that we've been through spring training, is this: the two "c"s.

As Contreras and Crede go, so will go the Sox.

Crede's been looking good; Contreras has not.

Out-on-a-limb prediction: McCarthy becomes starter before the All Star break; Contreras kicked back to bullpen.

Hope I'm wrong!

PAPChiSox729
04-01-2005, 12:12 PM
Not only did he say the Sox would have the biggest fall off he was talking about the Twins or Indians making noise in the playoffs?!?!? Didn't mention the sox having a good bullpen (he had yanks, red sox, angels, twins, and indians over us).

Enough with these experts! Let the baseball season speak for itself! Opening Day could not come any slower.

Randar68
04-01-2005, 12:42 PM
I know the kind of attention that the Sox get and I know it shouldn't make me mad because I still know what I know and I truly believe in the Sox this year. I absoutely hated the team they had for the last 3 years and I couldn't be more excited about the 2005 team.

This is what almost EVERY analyst is saying. We lost Maggs and CLee and are going to be without Frank for 1-2 months. However, nobody has even hinted at talking about a healthy contract-year Carl, Jermain Dye prior to Oakland, or AJ Pierzynski's .300 average, or Pods' 70 SB's...


Here is the thing. The Sox have a lot of question marks. Instead of trying to predict how those sort themselevs out, it's much easier to predict doom and gloom, and then be shoked and proclaim "the stars aligned" should things go well for the Sox.

Between the health problems (Dye, Frank, El Duque), the unknown track records (Iguchi, up and down numbers in short time for Uribe, Crede and Pods), and a closer people still don't think will get it done when "people figure him out", the national analysts have plenty of reasons to think the Sox will not win the Central...

That being said, KW with money to massage at the deadline is a dangerous weapon, and saying they'll be the biggest drop in wins in MLB is quite the reach...

Cleveland is full of mediocre defensive players, young unproven starters, and a weak bullpen, yet they're everyone's new favorite flavor of the week...

It's all how you look at things, and from a national analysts perspective, it's easy to look at the question marks and lost production, and think we'll be a mediocre team, so there's no use getting riled up every time someone says we're a bad team before the first week of the season has even begun...

zach074
04-01-2005, 12:43 PM
Lets get the season going already and let our guys prove these guys wrong on the field.

mikehuff
04-01-2005, 12:52 PM
No kidding. I have total faith in this team. We'll show em'.

I just noticed that I titled this "Slap The Face" rather than "Slap In The Face" like I intended. Actually it seems to make just as much sense. Slap the face of Steve Phillips for the slap in the face to the White Sox.

CubKilla
04-01-2005, 01:11 PM
My God, does anyone know this team? We are truly better than we were last year. There is no doubt in my mind.

I'm glad that situation is settled then before the first pitch of the first game of the '05 season.

Isn't anyone allowed to have their own opinion of the White Sox anymore without being labeled a "jerk" or a "dumbass" simply because they aren't sipping off of the White Sox Kool-Aid tapper?

And that labeling isn't addressed to you but to the myriad of others who have stated as much just because they disagree with one writer's take on the Sox.

What will everyone here do if these writers ARE RIGHT?

Ol' No. 2
04-01-2005, 01:13 PM
What will everyone here do if these writers ARE RIGHT?You really, really don't want to know the answer to that.

Mickster
04-01-2005, 02:06 PM
All I know is that somebody better get all of the preseason predictions and "bashing" clippings and hang them in the clubhouse early morning on April 4.


All I can say is: MY KIND OF TEAM! (http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/mp3s.cgi?Major_League=mykind.mp3)

Jjav829
04-01-2005, 02:24 PM
What will everyone here do if these writers ARE RIGHT?

Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.

Ol' No. 2
04-01-2005, 02:35 PM
Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.If one of these guys said essentially what you just said, I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. The Twins are the champs until someone knocks them off. But when they come out and say they'll be worse than last year or when they predict the Sox to finish 7-8 games behind the Indians, that's just plain silly.

Iwritecode
04-01-2005, 02:38 PM
Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.

Picking the Twins over the Sox I can live with. It's the clowns that keep saying the Sox will only win 70 or 75 games that I can't. The Sox haven't been under .500 since what 97?

These are probably the same guys who keep spouting off that the Sox lost all their power because Magglio is in Detriot and Lee is in Milwaukee.

They are also probably the same ones who picked the Royals to win the division last year. Who got the last laugh on that one?

spawn
04-01-2005, 02:41 PM
If one of these guys said essentially what you just said, I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. The Twins are the champs until someone knocks them off. But when they come out and say they'll be worse than last year or when they predict the Sox to finish 7-8 games behind the Indians, that's just plain silly.
Agreed. All they have to say is this team is hard to judge. That in my opinion is an honest assessment. Hell, no matter how much Cleveland and Detroit improved, I'm still picking the Twins to win the division, because they've been written off every year, only to prove all of the experts wrong. But to just arbitrarily write us off before a pitch is even thrown is just assinine. I think most posters here are realistic, in that we realize our season hinges on how El Duque and Contreras pitch, and if the small ball offense Ozzie wanted works. To say we'll have the largest dropoff in wins shows why Steve Phillips isn't a GM anymore.

SoxSpeed22
04-01-2005, 02:41 PM
Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.You make sense, but I'm mad about being picked to be in 4th place and under .500 and especially about being ranked in the lower half of the MLB by all the major sport networks including 21st by ESPN and 22nd by Fox. The 10th and 9th worst team in the league?!:cuss:

I'm saving 100 for opening day.

MRKARNO
04-01-2005, 02:49 PM
Picking the Twins over the Sox I can live with. It's the clowns that keep saying the Sox will only win 70 or 75 games that I can't. The Sox haven't been under .500 since what 97?


I agree. It's not the picking of us to finish second that really bothers me. Hell, I think this team is likely to finish second to the Twins. What is bothersome, on the other hand, is that so many are predicting the White Sox to absolutely crash and burn, finishing 4th behind the Tigers. There is really no tangible reason to expect this team to win 75 games and under, just as I don't think there is a tangible reason to expect this team to 90+. While I think both outcomes are very possible, I think the fact that they are of about the same likelihood means that one would have to project somewhere in the middle of those two if one were to be fair. There's just no telling with this team based on the wide range of performances that many of our new acquisitions have had in their careers.

People who think this team is more likely than not to fall off entirely have not actually looked at the moves this team has made nearly as much as we have here at WSI.

Projections such as the 71 wins from Joe Sheehan, 4th place by many in the sabermetric community (who are usually more fair to the White Sox, projecting them at about .500, where they have been in recent years) and other such predictions are assinine and ignorant of the moves that this team has made this offseason.

mantis1212
04-01-2005, 02:53 PM
I now see the same trend with all of these so-called experts- they seem to think Scott Podsednik was our biggest acquisition of the offseason because it made the most healines. Maggs and carlos out, Pods in, and that's it.

Podsednik was considered an acceptable downgrade in one outfield position in order to free up money for El Duque and AJ. None of the incompetent "analysts" realize that.

Pods will NOT make or break our season. If he hits .250 and steals 70 bases, that's great. If not, he can get benched while Carl goes to the outfield when Hurt comes back. I think Iguchi and/or Rowand would make GREAT lead-off men.

Also, no one realizes we are buying low, selling high when it comes to power hitters. Who here thinks Dye can't match Clee's power production in the cell?? Not me, that's for sure.

MRKARNO
04-01-2005, 02:55 PM
Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.

I agree that there are many here who will attack experts for reasonably pessimistic predictions, but I just don't see how a prediction of 71 or similar is truly reasonable to expect based on the sum total of all the moves that this team has made this offseason. Most of the reasonable folks around here won't argue that it is ridiculous to pick the Twins over the White Sox in 2005, but the Tigers? It's that which upsets the White Sox fandom more than the Twins and based on the previous responses to this post of yours, I think you'd find many here who would agree with this sentiment.

MRKARNO
04-01-2005, 02:57 PM
I now see the same trend with all of these so-called experts- they seem to think Scott Podsednik was our biggest acquisition of the offseason because it made the most healines. Maggs and carlos out, Pods in, and that's it.[...]

Pods will NOT make or break our season. If he hits .250 and steals 70 bases, that's great. If not, he can get benched while Carl goes to the outfield when Hurt comes back. I think Iguchi and/or Rowand would make GREAT lead-off men.


I agree. Many dont seem to realize that we don't actually have to play Podsednik and if we don't have him in the lineup, we can have out lineup include Thomas, Everett and Dye in it. If he suceeds then he can stay as a very good tablesetter. If he falters then we can have a more power-heavy lineup. It's really as simple as that.

mantis1212
04-01-2005, 03:00 PM
I agree. Many dont seem to realize that we don't actually have to play Podsednik and if we don't have him in the lineup, we can have out lineup include Thomas, Everett and Dye in it. If he suceeds then he can stay as a very good tablesetter. If he falters then we can have a more power-heavy lineup. It's really as simple as that.

Exactly, we have options this year, and depth. The bullpen is better also, another aspect of the team no one sees.

With these features of the team, Ozzie will truly be tested as a big-league manager.

Ol' No. 2
04-01-2005, 03:01 PM
I think there are two things to keep in mind about these predictions:

1. It's no accident they all sound alike. They just regurgitate what they hear/read from each other. It's group-think in all its glory. That's why Cleveland is suddenly everyone's favorite.

2. Most don't know diddle about the Sox or most of the 30 teams in MLB. It's not as if they did any actual research to come up with this stuff. They might read a PECOTA projection, but mostly, rankings are based on star power, i.e. the number of players they recognize as "good". So the Tigers upgraded by adding Ordonez, but the Sox have a question mark in RF because Dye is "oft-injured".:?::?::?: Go figure that one out.

Iwritecode
04-01-2005, 03:02 PM
This thread brings up a couple of interesting questions...

Has any team ever been so widely fluctuated in the predictions by the national media?

I've seen predictions anywhere from 70 wins and 4th place to 92 wins and a division title. It's amazing how two different people can look at the same team and come up with two amazingly different outcomes.

What was the last team that failed miserably to meet expections when coming off a pretty average previous season?

We all remember the 2001 Sox and even the Mariners the season after they won 116 games. But it's not like the Sox are coming off a championship season with sky high expections for this season. They didn't exactly have a firesale during the offseason, what's the reasoning behind so many people predicting them to crash and burn?

MRKARNO
04-01-2005, 03:27 PM
2. Most don't know diddle about the Sox or most of the 30 teams in MLB. It's not as if they did any actual research to come up with this stuff. They might read a PECOTA projection, but mostly, rankings are based on star power, i.e. the number of players they recognize as "good". So the Tigers upgraded by adding Ordonez, but the Sox have a question mark in RF because Dye is "oft-injured".:?::?::?: Go figure that one out.

I agree about the star power bit. Prognosticators often just go around seeing how many star players they can try to name instead of actually looking at how good the players are on a team.

:ManyIdioticMediaMembers
"Tigers? Bonderman, Pudge, Ordonez, Guillen, Percival, Urbina. White Sox? Thomas, Buehrle, Garcia, Konerko, Rowand. Tigers have 6 to the White Sox 5 star players, therefore the Tigers are better. It's fourth place for the South Siders in 2005"

mikehuff
04-01-2005, 04:12 PM
Isn't anyone allowed to have their own opinion of the White Sox anymore without being labeled a "jerk" or a "dumbass" simply because they aren't sipping off of the White Sox Kool-Aid tapper?


If the Sox came in with the same team again this year, even with Maggs and Frank healthy I wouldn't have a doubt in my mind that they would still finish in 2nd place again. My problem is that no one really knows this team. No one besides us knows how many games we lost because of a combination of Billy Koch, Danny Wright, no 5th starter, Joe Borchard, Jose Valentin's strikeouts, Willie Harris as the starting second baseman, Ben Davis... All that stuff. And ALL of that has changed now. Simple addition by subtraction. We have improvements in all of those areas and that will make this team better.

This year we will be able to hit rookie pitchers. I guarantee it!

Randar68
04-01-2005, 04:30 PM
This thread brings up a couple of interesting questions...

Has any team ever been so widely fluctuated in the predictions by the national media?

I've seen predictions anywhere from 70 wins and 4th place to 92 wins and a division title. It's amazing how two different people can look at the same team and come up with two amazingly different outcomes.


When a team makes as many changes as the Sox have, it sure leaves them open for a wide range of predictions. Like I said, there are a lot of relative unknowns, and it's easier to just project the worst, than to try to figure out which are real question marks are which are unfounded concerns.

Every team has health issues or players with questionable health in the past. How bad they will be is the question. I'm really only worried about El Duque and Dye, personally, so I don't think it's as bad as some have projected.

bigdommer
04-02-2005, 11:14 AM
It's one thing for KW to fail with his paltry budget.

Phillips had a NY sized budget and couldn't keep up with the Braves and Marlins, and thus had to look for a new job. I respect what he has to say about the "business" of baseball, because none of us have been GM's. But we all watch games like he does.

SoxWillWin
04-02-2005, 12:46 PM
Personally I get offended at these predictions because I have the best feeling about the Sox I've had in years. It is an emotional response. I also bash these predictions because I want to not because I have some ultimate insight into how this team is going to do.

The Truth the way I see it is that there is not one single method we could accurately use to predict how this teams going to do. So I would expect people to take my opinion as mine and not try to give me a summation of why I'm wrong. Since at this point none of these predictions from anyone is wrong, and none of them are right either.

Hope springs eternal for me when it comes to the Sox. That doesn't mean that I can't be realistic. I know the sox have to beat the Twins this year, but they also have to beat a lot of other teams. I personally like to make the positive hope induced prediction to everyone and keep my realistic feelings to myself.

So my hope induced prediction is that the sox win 94 games, win the division, win the ALCS, and Lose in the WS.

My realistic feeling is that they are going to struggle to stay above 500 until august and then make a run. Maybe taking the wildcard.

I Also have a high threshold for dissapointment. I hope that the Sox are going to make it to the playoffs, but if they don't it's not the end of the world.

As I said I have the best feeling about the Sox that I've had since 2000. So is it wrong to make a hopeful prediction in the face of all the media predictions?????

I don't think it is

CWSGuy406
04-02-2005, 03:43 PM
Wasn't Phillips rated the worst GM in all of baseball by USA Today? I thought I remember hearing that...

Stroker Ace
04-02-2005, 04:57 PM
Who cares what a FAILED METS GM said

JB98
04-02-2005, 06:06 PM
Uhhh....the same thing as last year.

This happens every year. Go back and look at last years posts about how we'd stick it to Harold Reynolds and Peter Gammons once we got to playoffs. Look how that turned out. You can do the same for each year. People always bitch about how these "experts" are morons because they don't pick the Sox to win the division. And yet, we haven't won the division since 2000. Every year though we get the same thing. It's getting really old. There's absolutely no reason any unbiased observer of this team would have to pick the Sox over the Twins until the Sox show they can win the division. I just wish some people would realize this.

AMEN!!!!!!

I've been watching a lot of the spring training games this year, and I'm listening to Hawk talk about how great we are supposedly going to be. My response is, what makes anyone think we're going to be great? We haven't won a damn thing in five years. Other than Buerhle, we don't have a single starting pitcher we can trust. Our bullpen is much deeper. That is a plus. We don't have as much power in our lineup as we have in the past, and if spring training is any indication (I hope not), we are the worst baserunning team in the history of baseball. Speed or no speed, some of the outs we make on the basepaths are embarrassing. Obviously, I'm hoping the Sox will win, but if I were being paid to analyze baseball from an unbiased point of view, I'd be picking us for third. Maybe second, if everything goes right.

I'm always excited for the beginning of the season, but honestly, my expectations for the Sox haven't been this low in years. We have a lot of people on this board drinking silver and black Kool-Aid. I enter this season hoping to win, not expecting to win.

rainbow6
04-02-2005, 06:08 PM
This may be the first year as a Sox fan (since '82) that I don't expect them to win the division, or contend for that matter. It may be I've grown tired of getting my heart broken, but I will go into opening day with very low expectations...I think Kenny Williams has done a phenominal job given his payroll restrictions but there are WAY too may question marks to assume the Sox will post a winning record...why is Contreras the third starter?...can Shingo do it again?...which Pods will show up?...is Crede any good?...will El Duque stay healthy?...which Konerko will show up?...is the bullpen REALLY that good?....is McCarthy that good?

I think I'm taking the George Castanza opposite approach - instead of assuming the Sox will make the playoffs and subsequently scheduling vacation time in early October to watch the games (as I have the past several years), I'll assume the worst and hopefully be suprised.

Anyway, what that goofy former Mets GM predicted (biggest drop-off in wins) is my biggest fear.


Luke.

Hey, really, why is Contreras the third starter?

samram
04-02-2005, 06:17 PM
AMEN!!!!!!

I've been watching a lot of the spring training games this year, and I'm listening to Hawk talk about how great we are supposedly going to be. My response is, what makes anyone think we're going to be great? We haven't won a damn thing in five years. Other than Buerhle, we don't have a single starting pitcher we can trust. Our bullpen is much deeper. That is a plus. We don't have as much power in our lineup as we have in the past, and if spring training is any indication (I hope not), we are the worst baserunning team in the history of baseball. Speed or no speed, some of the outs we make on the basepaths are embarrassing. Obviously, I'm hoping the Sox will win, but if I were being paid to analyze baseball from an unbiased point of view, I'd be picking us for third. Maybe second, if everything goes right.

I'm always excited for the beginning of the season, but honestly, my expectations for the Sox haven't been this low in years. We have a lot of people on this board drinking silver and black Kool-Aid. I enter this season hoping to win, not expecting to win.

You know, I agree that there's no reason not to pick the Twins to win the division. My problem is with those who seem to act as if all of Cleveland and Detroit's question marks will be answered positively and the Sox's will be answered negatively.