PDA

View Full Version : Front Page Story


dougs78
12-09-2001, 10:52 AM
George, I think you are being a little hypocritical here with your hindsight in the newest article on the front page. In the article you write that,

"All of us knew what the team's weaknesses were following the 2000 season. We needed a #1 starter to anchor the staff, a centerfielder who could bat higher than ninth in the order, and a catcher to replace free agent Charles Johnson. If the Sox fixed even two of these three weaknesses, we're probably repeat champions of the division in 2001."

Well, what I take exception to is that we did in fact fix two of those weaknesses. I suppose you were all sorely disappointed when we traded for Wells and then found out Sirotka was hurt? I know I was quite pleased that we had stepped up and made a move like that. And we also went out and signed Alomar. Short of signing CJ, who wanted to go back to Florida anyway, who on the market had a better track record?

I truly don't understand what different moves you would have had the Sox make going into last season. You also fail to mention another 2 weaknesses that were addressed and those are middle relief and defense. We went out and traded for 2 individuals with track records in exactly those categories in Osuna and Clayton.

As I stated earlier, you may look back now and not like any of those moves, but can you honestly tell me you were disappointed when the moves were made?

Finally you state that, "everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox," and then follow with the Wayne and Garth statement that, "Monkeys might fly out my butt." I just want to confirm that you are going on the record as saying that "everything will not fall into place for the White Sox in 2002." If that's true, then I'd get a good proctologist because on or about September 20th, there will be some primates exiting your rectum when the Sox clinch.

Jerry_Manuel
12-09-2001, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
You also fail to mention another 2 weaknesses that were addressed and those are middle relief and defense. We went out and traded for 2 individuals with track records in exactly those categories in Osuna and Clayton.

Finally you state that, "everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox," and then follow with the Wayne and Garth statement that, "Monkeys might fly out my butt." I just want to confirm that you are going on the record as saying that "everything will not fall into place for the White Sox in 2002." If that's true, then I'd get a good proctologist because on or about September 20th, there will be some primates exiting your rectum when the Sox clinch.

I'm not going to start the Valentin/Clayton debate again but there was no need to bring in Clayton. I agree with George the Sox will not win the division in 2002, if there is baseball. Clayton at short with Valentin at 3rd is not going to be pretty. Just my opinion.

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 11:23 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
George, I think you are being a little hypocritical here with your hindsight in the newest article on the front page. In the article you write that,

"All of us knew what the team's weaknesses were following the 2000 season. We needed a #1 starter to anchor the staff, a centerfielder who could bat higher than ninth in the order, and a catcher to replace free agent Charles Johnson. If the Sox fixed even two of these three weaknesses, we're probably repeat champions of the division in 2001."

Well, what I take exception to is that we did in fact fix two of those weaknesses. I suppose you were all sorely disappointed when we traded for Wells and then found out Sirotka was hurt? I know I was quite pleased that we had stepped up and made a move like that. And we also went out and signed Alomar. Short of signing CJ, who wanted to go back to Florida anyway, who on the market had a better track record?

I truly don't understand what different moves you would have had the Sox make going into last season. You also fail to mention another 2 weaknesses that were addressed and those are middle relief and defense. We went out and traded for 2 individuals with track records in exactly those categories in Osuna and Clayton.

As I stated earlier, you may look back now and not like any of those moves, but can you honestly tell me you were disappointed when the moves were made?

Finally you state that, "everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox," and then follow with the Wayne and Garth statement that, "Monkeys might fly out my butt." I just want to confirm that you are going on the record as saying that "everything will not fall into place for the White Sox in 2002." If that's true, then I'd get a good proctologist because on or about September 20th, there will be some primates exiting your rectum when the Sox clinch.

It all comes down to the fact that this team has no pitching, they won't compete in 2002. Our whole season is being based on hope that our players come back off surgery...thats pathetic, it's going to be a long 2002 with or without baseball.

dougs78
12-09-2001, 11:28 AM
I knew I shouldn't have mentioned the word Royce becuase it would be the only thing anyone saw in the whole post. My point remains the same: The White Sox management made many moves that no doubt excited a large majority of fans last offseason including adding significant payroll to make the team better. To look back in hindsight and say they didn't attempt to improve the team just makes no sense.

I'm surprised you guys are so pessimistic, but as long as you are willing to stand by your prediction that they white sox will not be in the playoffs next year, then I can respect that. I just disagree.

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
I knew I shouldn't have mentioned the word Royce because it would be the only thing anyone saw in the whole post. My point remains the same: The White Sox management made many moves that no doubt excited a large majority of fans last offseason including adding significant payroll to make the team better. To look back in hindsight and say they didn't attempt to improve the team just makes no sense.

I'm surprised you guys are so pessimistic, but as long as you are willing to stand by your prediction that they white sox will not be in the playoffs next year, then I can respect that. I just disagree.

This team is really at a crossroads. They had a great season in 2000 and a very disappointing one in 2001. In 2002, we should find out which team we can expect in the coming years. Thomas is sort of a symbol of the whole team in general. Which Thomas shows up this season? Will we see the Royce who hit .340 in the second half? Or the one who couldn't hit himself out of a wet paper bag in the early months? How about Carlos Lee, or Ray Durham? Which one of them shows up? We have "prospects" who are at the point in their career where it is put up or shut up. Kip Wells, John Garland, and Joe Crede are the most glaring of those people. I firmly believe their careers sit on this season. They decide if they will ever amount to anything in the bigs. No more developing or growing pains, if they can't do it now, they can't ever do it. This entire season is one of the most uncertain I've seen in a while because it is based on hope. I just think thats a horrible way to run a team.
:reinsy
I don't care

MarqSox
12-09-2001, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by KempersRS


It all comes down to the fact that this team has no pitching, they won't compete in 2002. Our whole season is being based on hope that our players come back off surgery...thats pathetic, it's going to be a long 2002 with or without baseball.

:burly :kipper :jon :sean http://whitesox.mlb.com/cws/photo/ph_play_mugshot_216106.jpg :keith
We ain't feelin the love.

Jerry_Manuel
12-09-2001, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
I knew I shouldn't have mentioned the word Royce becuase it would be the only thing anyone saw in the whole post. My point remains the same: The White Sox management made many moves that no doubt excited a large majority of fans last offseason including adding significant payroll to make the team better. To look back in hindsight and say they didn't attempt to improve the team just makes no sense.

I'm surprised you guys are so pessimistic, but as long as you are willing to stand by your prediction that they white sox will not be in the playoffs next year, then I can respect that. I just disagree.

The trade for Wells was a good move, the trade for Osuna was a good move to replace Simas after he got hurt. The excitement ended right there for me. The trade for Clayton wasn't needed. Hell he wasn't even trying to improve the defense. His plan was to turn around and trade Royce once he got here. So he had no intention of improving the defense. They should be adding payroll to imrpove the team, I don't think I should be happy because they did their job. As far as Alomar goes it wasn't a bad move but they we're better off resigning Charles Johnson.

Jerry_Manuel
12-09-2001, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by MarqSox
:burly :kipper :jon :sean http://whitesox.mlb.com/cws/photo/ph_play_mugshot_216106.jpg :keith
We ain't feelin the love.

The team has no starting pitching was what Kempers meant. A rotation of Buehrle, Glover, Garland, Wright and Parque or whomever it may be won't get the job done.

Jerry_Manuel
12-09-2001, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by KempersRS
We have "prospects" who are at the point in their career where it is put up or shut up. Kip Wells, John Garland, and Joe Crede are the most glaring of those people. I firmly believe their careers sit on this season. They decide if they will ever amount to anything in the bigs.

I think Garland made progress from 2000 to 2001, I expect him to have a good 2002. I don't know what the hell to expect from Kip Wells. Unless Clayton is dealt Joe will be in AAA which is horrible.

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I think Garland made progress from 2000 to 2001, I expect him to have a good 2002. I don't know what the hell to expect from Kip Wells. Unless Clayton is dealt Joe will be in AAA which is horrible.

Agreed. Garland had his best year last season. Let's hope he can step it up another level. Kip has showed signs, but thats all he has done through his career, showed signs of being a good pitcher. Lowe was all over the place too. He was dreadful at the start and (correct me if I am wrong) at the tail end of the season. Wright was terrible. No control will get him no where. I've gone over Foulke too many times...Even if everything does go our way and these guys have decent seasons, we don't have a great staff. I think best case scenario is that we will have OK pitching.

dougs78
12-09-2001, 12:35 PM
Kempers your points are well taken on the fact that we have lots of young players whose time it as come to "sh*t or get off the pot" as it were. Indeed, we have lots of guys that fit into this category. And thus, you are correct in your estimation that this year is based on hope. But in all actuality aren't all seasons based on hope? Hope is what makes sports great in the first place. What else could a season be based on? Do the Indians not 'Hope' that branyan, anderson and bradley can be a servicable OF? Do the twins not 'hope' that their team can recapture the magic they posessed last season? Even that best team money can buy up in the Bronx have to 'hope' that they can keep it all together one more year.

The difference between teams is actually what quantity of hope they have for the upcoming season and the security that some of that hope is well-grounded in past success. I think our 'hope' that players come back from injury is more reasonable that a lot of other teams out there. And for that reason I look forward with great 'hope' to the upcoming season in which I can honestly say I believe the White Sox will be in the playoffs.

Pete Ward
12-09-2001, 12:49 PM
We need Jason Schmidt

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
Kempers your points are well taken on the fact that we have lots of young players whose time it as come to "sh*t or get off the pot" as it were. Indeed, we have lots of guys that fit into this category. And thus, you are correct in your estimation that this year is based on hope. But in all actuality aren't all seasons based on hope? Hope is what makes sports great in the first place. What else could a season be based on? Do the Indians not 'Hope' that branyan, anderson and bradley can be a servicable OF? Do the twins not 'hope' that their team can recapture the magic they posessed last season? Even that best team money can buy up in the Bronx have to 'hope' that they can keep it all together one more year.

The difference between teams is actually what quantity of hope they have for the upcoming season and the security that some of that hope is well-grounded in past success. I think our 'hope' that players come back from injury is more reasonable that a lot of other teams out there. And for that reason I look forward with great 'hope' to the upcoming season in which I can honestly say I believe the White Sox will be in the playoffs.

This is true, yes. Every team bases their season on hope. The Yankees "hope" that their big name players won't become busts. I just think that our hope is a lot more desperate than that of most other teams.

PaleHoseGeorge
12-09-2001, 01:16 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dougs78
Well, what I take exception to is that we did in fact fix two of those weaknesses. I suppose you were all sorely disappointed when we traded for Wells and then found out Sirotka was hurt? I know I was quite pleased that we had stepped up and made a move like that.

The Wells trade was a wash. Clearly we were no better off keeping Sirotka. Meanwhile we did nothing to acquire another veteran starter. So explain to me how falling short of fixing the weakness ought to be equated with success? Are you giving Williams credit for simply trying? (I'm not).

And we also went out and signed Alomar. Short of signing CJ, who wanted to go back to Florida anyway, who on the market had a better track record?

Actually, the Sox had two winning choices: re-sign Johnson, or trade for somebody else's starting catcher. Williams did niether. Everybody knew Alomar was a downgrade from CJ. If I'm guilty of anything, it's not fully appreciating how much a downgrade it was until Josh Paul was tagged out twice at third base in Seattle last May.

I truly don't understand what different moves you would have had the Sox make going into last season. You also fail to mention another 2 weaknesses that were addressed and those are middle relief and defense. We went out and traded for 2 individuals with track records in exactly those categories in Osuna and Clayton.

Actually, the 2000 team's relief corps was one of the strongest in the league. They were the ones who made 95 wins possible with an average set of starters. The only reason Williams got Osuna was to replace the injured Simas. Call that addition if you want. I don't.

As for Clayton's contribution to the defense, the less said the better. Suffice to say, his contributions to the team's winning effort are highly circumspect.

As I stated earlier, you may look back now and not like any of those moves, but can you honestly tell me you were [I]disappointed when the moves were made?

Honestly, yes. Did I have hope in spite of the disappointment? Absolutely.

Finally you state that, "everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox," and then follow with the Wayne and Garth statement that, "Monkeys might fly out my butt." I just want to confirm that you are going on the record as saying that "everything will not fall into place for the White Sox in 2002." If that's true, then I'd get a good proctologist because on or about September 20th, there will be some primates exiting your rectum when the Sox clinch.

This is silly. Go back and read the article again. Show me where I've declared the Sox won't win a championship. I do make the case that the Sox have done precious little to luck their way into a championship--something you've done a lousy job disproving.

dougs78
12-09-2001, 01:56 PM
George, I'm not saying that all the sox moves last season were glaring successes. I'd even say that maybe we would have been better off doing nothing in some of those cases. However at the time the moves were made, I think most of them made some logical sense and were definitely aimed at progressing.

Would you not grant that the Sox went out and made distinct effort to address weaknesses and improve the team last offseason? I believe they did. What I don't understand is how you can at the same time criticize them for not doing anything worthwhile as of December 10th of this offseason, and also criticize them for going out and making moves last offseason. I honestly don't see how we can have it both ways. Yes, we could go out and sign Damon, Boone and Smoltz and would obviously have a better team. But we all know there is only 1 team capable of making moves like that and unfortunately its not us.

Also you will note that I specifically did not comment on the contributions of any of the players acquired last season. What I was attempting to point out is that we identified needs and tried to assuage them. That is what I believe I hear many on this board pointing out needs to be done this year. Whether these moves were done in accordance with your views or beliefs is an entirely different question and I wholeheartedly respect your right to those beliefs. And since you can honestly say you were against the acquisitions at the time they were made, then I can appreciate your foresight.

Finally though I have re-read the article. Maybe I'm still not reading it as it was intended, but I stand by my previous statement. You wrote the following:

"Sure, everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox. Buehrle is capable of winning twenty games. Frank Thomas is always an MVP threat. Sandy Alomar might coax one more good season from his surgically-repaired knees. Chris Singleton might solve what nine previous seasons in professional baseball could not fix: the giant hole in his swing. Joe Borchard might be the next Mickey Mantle and Joe Crede might be the next everyday thirdbasemen--just like he might have been back in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.

Monkeys might fly out of my butt, too ."

In that paragraph, you literally equate the probability of the following things happening to the probability of monkeys flying out of your butt. (by which I assume you mean highly unlikely if not impossible)

1. Everything will fall into place for the 2002 sox
2. Buehrle is capable of winning 20 games
3. Frank Thomas is an MVP candidate
4. Alomar having a good year
5. Singleton might "fix the hole in his swing'
6. Borchard will be the next Mickey Mantle
7. Crede will play 3rd base everyday

It is my opinion that at the very least, ONE of those things are EXTREMELY LIKELY to happen. I'd say four are probable but I digress. Thus from your statement I can only assume that you are of the opinion that none will happen. This is precisely where I locate your assertion that the Sox won't win a title in 2002.

PaleHoseGeorge
12-09-2001, 02:17 PM
So what's your beef, Doug? The reason I never said the Sox won't win the division is because I never meant it. Furthermore, I never wrote it. The best you can do is "assume" and "equate", which of course is your interpretation, not a fact. There is no argument here.

I always have hope for a new season. However, I'm not willing to dismiss the reasons we fail at winning simply because the front office made an effort. Wells didn't fix our need for a veteran starter last year; Alomar didn't fix our need for a catcher. Both those positions are still weak, and the best any of us can do is make excuses why nothing else can be done.

To my ears, this sounds like an excuse for why we'll have achieved 85 years of futility sometime next September. Certainly you aren't going to suggest otherwise?

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 02:32 PM
We gotta record and save all predictions for this year. I won't say this would be my official prediction, but I would say about 75 wins sounds right to me.

dougs78
12-09-2001, 03:05 PM
Furthermore, I never wrote it. The best you can do is "assume" and "equate", which of course is your interpretation, not a fact. There is no argument here.

the best I can do is assume and equate? Well I think I've raised some pretty valid points here. If all I've done is assume then lets look once again at the actual statement you made.

You did state, "Sure, everything might fall into place for the 2002 Sox." And then followed this directly with the statement, "Monkeys might fly out of my butt, too." What do these two statements mean to you then when they are combined???

Also in your very last post you state at the beginning that, "The reason I never said the Sox won't win the division is because I never meant it. " Then at the end say that, "...why we'll have achieved 85 years of futility sometime next September."

These are obviously contradictory. The word futile is defined as "completely ineffective" and since you say that will be the state of the White Sox in September. However, the regular season doesn't even end until October. Therefore, futile by September + game 162 in October = No playoffs.

So while you may not state it directly, you are in fact saying the Sox won't be in the playoffs.

However, the word futile is appropriate because it perfectly describes what you and I are doing here. The point I have been trying to make is that so many people here are negative and fatalistic about everything the Sox do or don't do. It's become a catch 22 where if we make moves and they don't pan out, then its "see, I told you we shouldn't have done that" and if we don't make moves its, "geez, I know we should have done x, y and z."

FarWestChicago
12-09-2001, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
The point I have been trying to make is that so many people here are negative and fatalistic about everything the Sox do or don't do. What do you expect? Sox fans here are realistic. When was the last time the Sox were in the World Series? If you want to read "everything the Sox do is awesome" the official MLB site is always available. If that isn't sufficiently postitve for you, I can recommend some Flubs websites. :smile:

PaleHoseGeorge
12-09-2001, 03:36 PM
Actually Doug, you're not making valid points. Even as you quote me, the "might" word is popping up all over the place. I'm sure the definition of the word is not beyond you, but your conclusions indicate just that. Thus, you aren't making valid points; you're overreaching. I suggest you stop trying to put words in my mouth--especially after I've categorically denied both your "equations" and "assumptions".

If you wish to believe the Sox will win a championship because they didn't fix the veteran starter weakness, you're welcome to it. If you wish to believe the Sox will win a championhship because they didn't get better at catcher, you can have that, too.

For my part, I believe these facts make our chances of winning a championship slimmer. That's what I have written. There is always luck, but I'm not counting on receiving the quantity you apparently are willing to hope for. That's why I keep bringing up the fact of 84 years of futility. It's getting a bit old, don't you think?

As for what I haven't written, I can only advise you to stop torturing a point that isn't there to be made.

dougs78
12-09-2001, 04:25 PM
I hope you don't feel I have attacked you personally here, If you'll check back through I have made no references to you as a person or your intelligence. I am simply arguing a point on the basis of logic which is the only way I know how to operate.

I really don't understand how I have put anything into your mouth since in every instance I have quoted you verbatim. On the other hand, it is you are speculating on my beliefs when I have yet to espouse any as to what I would like to see happen with the Sox.

My arguements are very sound and I stand behind them. If you feel you can disprove them on the basis of logic then I welcome you to that.

And West, I actually think we are trying to make the same points. I am incredibly realistic about the White Sox, but this is exactly why I am positive about their chances in the Central. What I can't understand is why other realists don't feel the same way about a team that on paper looks better than any team in the division. Of course even communism looks good on paper. I'm not saying they are perfect or that we will even get to the world series, but I'm saying its not so bad and we have lots to look forward to.

Anyway, thanks for the debate, I've enjoyed it. But I'll defer to you to end this, George. Its not worthy of being on the main page anyway and since its your site, you can have the last word.

KempersRS
12-09-2001, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by dougs78

And West, I actually think we are trying to make the same points. I am incredibly realistic about the White Sox, but this is exactly why I am positive about their chances in the Central. What I can't understand is why other realists don't feel the same way about a team that on paper looks better than any team in the division. Of course even communism looks good on paper. I'm not saying they are perfect or that we will even get to the world series, but I'm saying its not so bad and we have lots to look forward to.


I don't see what is so great about this team on paper. Average pitching, streaky hitters? Thats what I see. And to add to that, take the biggest factor that isn't on paper...management.

FarWestChicago
12-09-2001, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
And West, I actually think we are trying to make the same points. I am incredibly realistic about the White Sox, but this is exactly why I am positive about their chances in the Central. What I can't understand is why other realists don't feel the same way about a team that on paper looks better than any team in the division. Of course even communism looks good on paper. I'm not saying they are perfect or that we will even get to the world series, but I'm saying its not so bad and we have lots to look forward to.We will have a chance to win the division. But, I would like to see a little more one of these days. Of course, I'll still be hanging out here no matter what happens. :smile:

PaleHoseGeorge
12-09-2001, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
Anyway, thanks for the debate, I've enjoyed it. But I'll defer to you to end this, George. Its not worthy of being on the main page anyway and since its your site, you can have the last word.

No, no, no! Everyone is welcome to express whatever they want on these message boards. Of course everyone else is invited to respond to your posts, and not everyone is going to agree with you. That's the game.

However, if you want a forum to more directly reach a larger audience, I strongly recommend (to everyone) taking advantage of the Sox Fan Sound Off feature on the main page. You get your own platform to say whatever you want about the Sox. The only limitations are no personal attacks on others from the boards, and staying with a loose theme surrounding the Sox or Sox fandom.

Full disclosure: I created White Sox Interactive in part to offer a more effective means for Sox Fans' opinions to be heard than simply writing the newspaper sports editor or calling in some lame sports talk radio show. None of them would give you one-tenth the access WSI does.

Take advantage of it.

voodoochile
12-09-2001, 05:03 PM
Actually, I agree with Doug to a point. I am pretty optimisitic about 2002, but I don't expect it to end in a WS championship. I expect that in 2003. I don't want to see major changes made on the team that has shown such promise (including matching the 2000 team's performance over the last 100 games of 2001 without a staff ace or our MVP DH). I too thought the article was more negative than called for, but we all see different things and expect different things from the players and management.

Still want to see as much of the young players as possible next year. It is the only way they develop into Major leaguers.

PaleHoseGeorge
12-09-2001, 06:41 PM
Gee, I don't remember being this negative when I was 8 years-old, being raised a Cubs fan by my father. :cool:

Come on, everybody join in!

[musically]"Hey Hey! Holy Mackerel! No doubt about it...[/muscially]

Gag wretch!

:mkillcub

WinningUgly!
12-09-2001, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by KempersRS
We gotta record and save all predictions for this year. I won't say this would be my official prediction, but I would say about 75 wins sounds right to me.

I'll say this much for dougs78, I hope like hell his prediction below does come true!
I'd get a good proctologist because on or about September 20th, there will be some primates exiting your rectum when the Sox clinch.
(The part about the Sox clinching, not the part about monkees flying outta PHG's ass!) :D: :D: :D:

voodoochile
12-10-2001, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Gee, I don't remember being this negative when I was 8 years-old, being raised a Cubs fan by my father. :cool:

Come on, everybody join in!

[musically]"Hey Hey! Holy Mackerel! No doubt about it...[/muscially]

Gag wretch!

:mkillcub

Never Mind... Too much beer... My signature says how I feel about the current club...