PDA

View Full Version : Next-best team to Sox in 2005?


TheOldRoman
10-27-2005, 04:53 PM
If it's any consolation to you Outcast, you should know Cleveland was clearly a better playoff contender than at least two of the teams the Sox beat en route to the championship.

I would rank them this way (toughest to easiest)...

1. Anaheim
2. Cleveland
3. Boston
4. Houston

Those last 2 weeks in September battling Cleveland were as intense as anything over the past 3 weeks in October. The fact the Sox weren't playing the Tribe head-to-head probably made the pressure seem even greater: there were twice as many innings to sweat through daily.

The turning point for both teams was Sunday, September 25. Buehrle went the distance to finish off the sweep of Minnesota at Sox Park but Cleveland loses to KC in the ninth inning on that pop-fly error. The lead was back up to 2.5 games and the Sox never looked back -- right through last night. Once the Sox clinched in Detroit the afterburners really kicked in. It was like the weight of the world was lifted off their shoulders. All that pressure came from Cleveland's phenomenal stretch run.

But don't worry, Outcast. The national media will make Cleveland favorites to win the division in 2006. Just like 2005.

:wink:
I agree with what you are saying, but I think Houston is a much better team than Boston. Houston threw everything at us for four straight games. They were a very good team, and every one of those games could have easily gone the other way. Obviously, we were the much better team, and we won, but I have a lot of respect for Houston.
I might even put Houston ahead of LAAA. We swept the Astros, but they put up a hell of a fight in each one of those games.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-27-2005, 05:04 PM
Obviously this is all very subjective and there is no "right" answer. I agree Houston played the Sox tough, but Game 3 showed Houston simply couldn't win no matter how poorly the Sox played. That's why I ranked them last.

Anaheim gave the Sox fits most of the year, and they're the only team that hung a loss on the Sox this entire month. In fact they even had the Sox down 0-1 in the ALCS. If not for that heads up play by A.J. in Game 2 (combined with the boneheaded one by Josh Paul), who is to say what might have happened in that series. I got to give it to Scioscia and the Angels.

Boston wasn't very good, but at least they could hit and that made them very dangerous in a Best-of-5. However I could see your reasoning for putting Houston ahead of Boston because the Sox truly throttled the Red Sox (apologies to what Tim Wakefield might think).

:wink:

TheOldRoman
10-27-2005, 05:20 PM
Obviously this is all very subjective and there is no "right" answer. I agree Houston played the Sox tough, but Game 3 showed Houston simply couldn't win no matter how poorly the Sox played. That's why I ranked them last.

Anaheim gave the Sox fits most of the year, and they're the only team that hung a loss on the Sox this entire month. In fact they even had the Sox down 0-1 in the ALCS. If not for that heads up play by A.J. in Game 2 (combined with the boneheaded one by Josh Paul), who is to say what might have happened in that series. I got to give it to Scioscia and the Angels.

Boston wasn't very good, but at least they could hit and that made them very dangerous in a Best-of-5. However I could see your reasoning for putting Houston ahead of Boston because the Sox truly throttled the Red Sox (apologies to what Tim Wakefield might think).

:wink:
I agree that the ALCS might have gont down differently if not for that play in game 2. However, the Angels put up little fight in game 3 and no fight in game 4. Scoiscia had a great team, but he needed to pull them aside and bust some ass when they started barking at the umps from the bench. They were better than they showed, but the AJ call really got into their heads. Then again, mental toughness is one of the biggest keys to a champion.
Also, I agree with you about Tuesday night. It was a show of futility by both teams' hitting, but in the end we had what it took to outlast them. Houston certainly should be proud of their team. My rankings would go as follows:

1. Cleveland
2. Houston
2A. Anaheim.
and coming in a very distant 4. Boston

maurice
10-27-2005, 05:54 PM
1. Cleveland
2. Houston
2A. Anaheim.
and coming in a very distant 4. Boston

This could very well be true. One thing's for certain, the AL East and the NL generally were hugely overrated by the media, while the AL Central was massively underrated . . . as usual.

OEO Magglio
10-27-2005, 05:57 PM
Angels were the 2nd best team in baseball this season imo. Astros 3rd, Indians 4th, sawx and yanks way down on this list.

OEO Magglio
10-27-2005, 05:58 PM
This could very well be true. One thing's for certain, the AL East and the NL generally were hugely overrated by the media, while the AL Central was massively underrated . . . as usual.
The al central will be by far the best division in baseball next season.

antitwins13
10-27-2005, 06:02 PM
1. Oakland A's- We still couldn't beat them this year.
2. Cleveland- very tough down the stretch.
3. LA Angels- Toughest playoff compition
4. Boston- The defending champs were swept but were tough.
5. Houston- No offense, what can I say I was shocked they got as far as they did.

SoxFan76
10-27-2005, 06:05 PM
The Astros need a new manager and they would be fine.

I wasn't too impressed with Phil Gar(d)ner.

PAPChiSox729
10-27-2005, 06:22 PM
1. Oakland A's- We still couldn't beat them this year.


Not a chance that they are the second best team in the league. They were on a hot streak while we were in a funk. We would have rolled over them if we had played them in the postseason.

ode to veeck
10-27-2005, 06:29 PM
Obviously this is all very subjective and there is no "right" answer. I agree Houston played the Sox tough, but Game 3 showed Houston simply couldn't win no matter how poorly the Sox played. That's why I ranked them last.

:wink:

It is totally subjective, and the really only important point is they were all below the Sox.

I would actually rank Houston higher, as I looked at game 3 as Houston being very scrappy, their scoring the tying run late (which Boston and Anaheim didn't do very well) and then threatening nearly every inning in the marathon. Game 3 as more won by our outstanding bullpen efforts to get out of the jams. Even Hermie was there closing the 8th, then followed by legendary work by El Duque, Big Bobby Jenks and even Marte, who was throwing strikes and effective breaking stuff. Sure, our bats took until the Ozzie's son suggested Blum HR inthe 14th, but the Strohs D both in DPs and their more than decent pen held us at bay, more so than Halos Escobar had been able and we don't even need to talk about the Boston pen.

On the other hand, Boston's offense was one of the scariest things we saw during the playoffs and during the season, even though we swept them.

In fact, I thought all three opponents were very tough, and other than the ALDS game one blowout, and the ALCS game one where the Halos got a lead we couldn't quite catch up to, all of the other 9 games were each very close games where we had to overcome substantial or late leads, or at least last a long close game (the last 15 innings of WS 3 & 4). Unlike the idiots at ESPN page 2 today, I thought the baseball was tremendous, and the Sox managed to eek out tough wins by their depth and breadth of contributions and their overall "looseness" and confidence.

greenpeach
10-27-2005, 07:06 PM
This could very well be true. One thing's for certain, the AL East and the NL generally were hugely overrated by the media, while the AL Central was massively underrated . . . as usual.

The AL & NL Central Divisions were the two best in baseball this year. It's funny because they are populated with more small to mid-sized market teams then the others. Has parody started to creep into baseball ??

MarySwiss
10-27-2005, 07:11 PM
I agree that the ALCS might have gont down differently if not for that play in game 2. However, the Angels put up little fight in game 3 and no fight in game 4. Scoiscia had a great team, but he needed to pull them aside and bust some ass when they started barking at the umps from the bench. They were better than they showed, but the AJ call really got into their heads. Then again, mental toughness is one of the biggest keys to a champion.
Also, I agree with you about Tuesday night. It was a show of futility by both teams' hitting, but in the end we had what it took to outlast them. Houston certainly should be proud of their team. My rankings would go as follows:

1. Cleveland
2. Houston
2A. Anaheim.
and coming in a very distant 4. Boston

Not sure about 2-4, but I agree about Cleveland. The only reason they were not in the playoffs is because they played us that last weekend. There's no way to know for sure, but IMO, Cleveland would have clobbered Boston, the Yanks, or Anaheim.

Of course, we still would've kicked their butts. :D:

PaleHoseGeorge
10-27-2005, 07:24 PM
Not sure about 2-4, but I agree about Cleveland. The only reason they were not in the playoffs is because they played us that last weekend. There's no way to know for sure, but IMO, Cleveland would have clobbered Boston, the Yanks, or Anaheim.

I would have rated Cleveland ahead of Anaheim except the Indians really didn't show much the last week of the season. Besides getting swept at home by the Sox (and missing the playoffs), they also lost three in a row to last-place Kansas City and Tampa Bay. That's what killed them.

It's easy to look great when you're surging and you're playing loose because you have nothing to lose since you're so far behind. However once the Tribe finally got into position to knock on the door... <gag> <wretch>

Chips
10-27-2005, 07:26 PM
1. White Sox - WE'RE THE ****ING CHAMPS
2. Angels - The Angels are the next best team to us, they have great speed, great defense, great pitching, we didn't even see Colon in the ALCS, their hitting is as good as ours in some cases better.
3. New York - Great hitting, good defense, good speed, decent pitching to an extent, and a manager who has won eight straight titles.
4. Cleveland - Good pitching, good defense, good hitting sometimes, but I think they are a little overrated, the played under .500 ball all season except for one stretch where they played .900 (28-3 or something close), I
5. Bawston - They tried to hit their way into a world series, but good pitching will always stop that
6. Minnesota - Good team, good pitching, good hitting, had some injuries.
7. Oakland - played us at the right time. We had them beat twice this season where there were some ****ty calls that could have let us win. We were cold when the were hot and they beat us.
8. Toronto - Never go anywhere soon
9. Texas - Same here, need pitching.
10. Baltimore - Good start, collapse, too much drama.
11. Detroit - Need a lot, maybe Leyland will help them contend
12. Seattle - Should have been better
13. Tampa Bay - They just plain suck
14. Kansas City - Same as above.

maurice
10-28-2005, 12:49 PM
The AL & NL Central Divisions were the two best in baseball this year.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. The NL Central had 2 very good teams but no depth. The other 4 teams were terrible. Heck, at mid-season, they had an amazing 5 teams under .500.

1951Campbell
10-28-2005, 12:56 PM
I would have rated Cleveland ahead of Anaheim except the Indians really didn't show much the last week of the season. Besides getting swept at home by the Sox (and missing the playoffs), they also lost three in a row to last-place Kansas City and Tampa Bay. That's what killed them.


Not to mention their loss to Charlotte.

DSpivack
10-28-2005, 03:06 PM
Second-best team in baseball? IF fully healthy, the St. Louis Cardinals.

Ol' No. 2
10-28-2005, 03:08 PM
Do they give a trophy for second-best team? If not,

:whocares

Tragg
10-28-2005, 03:23 PM
If you count teams like Oakland, the team that really beat the snot out of us was Texas.

But, I'd say

Houston - the games were close; no one else came close except for 1st 2 against Angels
Anaheim
NY
Boston
St Louis
Philadelphia - may have been the best NL team at season's end, but they simply couldn't beat Houston head to head.
Atlanta
Cleveland I guess (they had a hot 6 weeks; that's it)