PDA

View Full Version : Rob Neyer picks us for 3rd place next season


Whitesox4ever
11-29-2005, 12:45 PM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

Iwritecode
11-29-2005, 12:47 PM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

Not a big suprise.

Nobody picked them to even win the Central in 2005...

TheOldRoman
11-29-2005, 12:48 PM
He doesn't mean 3rd in the division, he means third in his all important power rankings. Of course, we are currently behind the mighty Indians.
Who gives a flying **** what he thinks?

Fuller_Schettman
11-29-2005, 12:48 PM
It's just bad genetic code....

itsnotrequired
11-29-2005, 12:50 PM
He doesn't mean 3rd in the division, he means third in his all important power rankings. Of course, we are currently behind the mighty Indians.
Who gives a flying **** what he thinks?

To his defense, he at least picked the Sox to go to the playoffs last year, the only one out of all the ESPN "analysts".

mike squires
11-29-2005, 12:51 PM
It's way to early to be making predictions. SOmetimes teams continue to make changes, additions etc. after even the magazines come out in Feb/March.

I'd love to go another year under the radar.

palehozenychicty
11-29-2005, 12:52 PM
neyer is a moneyball geek, in the mode of billy beane, epstein, and depodesta. why even bother listening to him? i mean, the indians are the best team in the game, right? they have the best run differential.

anewman35
11-29-2005, 12:52 PM
Notice that he's saying "third place without Konerko, possibly first place with him", which isn't really too far off, I don't think.

oeo
11-29-2005, 12:54 PM
Behind who? The Twins are not the same team they were 2 years ago. IMO, they have absolutely no shot at the division.

Fenway
11-29-2005, 12:55 PM
When you look at the White Sox chances in 2006 you have to ask one question. Can they dominate the division like they did last year? They went 52-22 in the Central which was 12 games better than both the Twins and Indians. They were also 14-5 against Cleveland and Detroit. It will not be easy to repeat those numbers.

The flip side is you have to assume they will play better at home in 2006.

Another factor to consider is how they will play on the road. In 2006 everywhere they go they will be billed as the World Champion White Sox and teams get "up" for those games. It was a problem for the Red Sox in 2005.

itsnotrequired
11-29-2005, 12:58 PM
Another factor to consider is how they will play on the road. In 2006 everywhere they go they will be billed as the World Champion White Sox and teams get "up" for those games. It was a problem for the Red Sox in 2005.

Yes, that reason and that reason alone...

:rolleyes:

Flight #24
11-29-2005, 01:03 PM
Notice that he's saying "third place without Konerko, possibly first place with him", which isn't really too far off, I don't think.

It's a question of being consistent. If he's saying that because they don't have Konerko right now they're in 3d place, you'd have to question why he's rating them behind the Indians, who don't have Howry, Millwood, Wickman.

If on the other hand, he's saying that he doesn't expect Konerko to resign, but does expect Millwood & Wickman to resign, it's easier to believe. It's kind of running in place offensively to replace Konerko-Everett-Rowand with Thome-Gload-Anderson. And you'd have to figure some bounces to go against the Sox in '06.

Ol' No. 2
11-29-2005, 01:04 PM
When you look at the White Sox chances in 2006 you have to ask one question. Can they dominate the division like they did last year? They went 52-22 in the Central which was 12 games better than both the Twins and Indians. They were also 14-5 against Cleveland and Detroit. It will not be easy to repeat those numbers.

The flip side is you have to assume they will play better at home in 2006.

Another factor to consider is how they will play on the road. In 2006 everywhere they go they will be billed as the World Champion White Sox and teams get "up" for those games. It was a problem for the Red Sox in 2005.The Sox dominated because of superior pitching. All are back next year with McCarthy added to the mix in place of Hernandez. Given that only Garland and Politte had what might be considered difficult to repeat performances, I see absolutely no reason to think 2006 will be any different from 2005.

batmanZoSo
11-29-2005, 01:06 PM
I pick Rob Neyer to contract herpes of the mouth in 2006.

ChiSoxGirl
11-29-2005, 01:11 PM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

Time to resurrect all of the "Under the Radar" slogans and pictures that became so prominent this season (and on WSI)! Same expert opinion... different day. :rolleyes:

spiffie
11-29-2005, 01:17 PM
And from later that same chat:

Matt (Chico, CA): You mentioned your projected standings. As of right now, who are your playoff picks for the American League?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:52 PM ET ) I was just fooling around before. Really, there are so many question marks that it's pointless to come up with projected standings. Until I know how the Indians are going to replace Kevin Millwood -- et cetera, etc. -- I just don't know how to come up with projected records.

Jjav829
11-29-2005, 01:18 PM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

Am I the only one who actually comprehended what he wrote? It seems like everyone else just glossed over it and saw "White Sox....third place" and ignored the rest. He's saying that with Thome and Konerko (or the equivalent) we are probably a first place team, without them we are a third place team. Where's the problem?

Ol' No. 2
11-29-2005, 01:26 PM
Am I the only one who actually comprehended what he wrote? It seems like everyone else just glossed over it and saw "White Sox....third place" and ignored the rest. He's saying that with Thome and Konerko (or the equivalent) we are probably a first place team, without them we are a third place team. Where's the problem?The problem is that you can say the same thing about the Indians. Without re-signing Millwood and replacing other guys they lost, they're no better than a 3rd place team, too. Ditto for the Twins. So who's going to finish first?

The Deacon
11-29-2005, 01:31 PM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

He's a sabermetrics dork and consequently, full of it. As KW said... according to the stats guys, they shouldn't have even been in the Series. Oh well, proved them wrong

OEO Magglio
11-29-2005, 01:33 PM
The problem is that you can say the same thing about the Indians. Without re-signing Millwood and replacing other guys they lost, they're no better than a 3rd place team, too. Ditto for the Twins. So who's going to finish first?
The Indians have already lost their setup man from last year, and there is still a good chance they lose both their closer and their best pitcher from last year. The so called experts seem to think that those three aren't that big of a deal when in reality all three of them were huge parts in the success of the Indians.

Flight #24
11-29-2005, 01:34 PM
Am I the only one who actually comprehended what he wrote? It seems like everyone else just glossed over it and saw "White Sox....third place" and ignored the rest. He's saying that with Thome and Konerko (or the equivalent) we are probably a first place team, without them we are a third place team. Where's the problem?

Isn't he saying that with Konerko v. without Konerko? I mean there's no chance at this point that they don't get Thome, right? So he's thinking that the Sox plus Thome minus Konerko are a 3d place team.

Although it seems from his comments further down that he's joking around regarding any standings unless he thinks the ALE runner up will be awarded the ALC title.

Iwritecode
11-29-2005, 01:46 PM
Am I the only one who actually comprehended what he wrote? It seems like everyone else just glossed over it and saw "White Sox....third place" and ignored the rest. He's saying that with Thome and Konerko (or the equivalent) we are probably a first place team, without them we are a third place team. Where's the problem?

I saw the letters E-S-P-N and immediately lost interest...

MHOUSE
11-29-2005, 01:53 PM
I had a lot of problems with everyone picking the Indians to win the division last year considering how young they were and how good we looked with the pitching, Dye, AJ, and Pods acquistions. However, the Indians did got close to living up to it.

On the flip side, there is still a lot of offseason left, but so far they've lost Howry and possibly Wickman (retirement), two key cogs from their bullpen and both big-name closers are off the market. Millwood is probably gone too and Westbrook and Lee are becoming more established, but still only have two good years under their belt. Their offense is smokin', but they have some holes to fill on that team.

The bottom line is: How can you not pick the defending World Champs to win the division without some catastrophic happening ('97 Marlins firesale)? It seems crazy to me.

WestSideWhiteSox
11-29-2005, 02:25 PM
Why does every writer assume the Sox will "come back to earth" in '06 but that Cleveland won't?! Their 2nd half last year was as insane as our 1st half, but somehow they have the chemistry to duplicate that and yet we don't? How many times has a team hit 260 HRs in consecutive years? Are they really gonna get 11 wins from Scott Elarton again? Does losing Howry and probably Millwood too mean nothing?

ma-gaga
11-29-2005, 03:03 PM
Am I the only one who actually comprehended what he wrote? It seems like everyone else just glossed over it and saw "White Sox....third place" and ignored the rest. He's saying that with Thome and Konerko (or the equivalent) we are probably a first place team, without them we are a third place team. Where's the problem?

No Jjav, you are dead on. "It's fun to rip numbers geek", despite the fact that he picked the W.Sox for the division at the beginning of the year, and to win the W.Series at the beginning of the playoffs.

But he's a numbers geek. Let's get him!!!

:cool:

fquaye149
11-29-2005, 03:34 PM
No Jjav, you are dead on. "It's fun to rip numbers geek", despite the fact that he picked the W.Sox for the division at the beginning of the year, and to win the W.Series at the beginning of the playoffs.

But he's a numbers geek. Let's get him!!!

:cool:

Except I still don't see how we're a third place team w/o Konerko. I can see us being worse than the jndjans if all their question marks go right. But our pitching and hitting remains superior to Detroit and Minny respectively (actually our pitching AND hitting are superior to Minny's). So how do you pick us third even W/O Konerko?

Our pitching looks to be BETTER and our lineup doesn't project to be all that much worse even w/OUT Konerko because Thome's production looks to replace Paulie's. Trust me, I'll feel a hell of a lot better WITH Paulie but I don't see how we're any much worse than last year even as is right now. MAYBE 2nd. Certainly not 3rd.

If he's talking overall AL power rankings, that's a diff story, but if he's talking 3rd place in the AL Central, I must respectfully call Bull****.

Randar68
11-29-2005, 04:06 PM
Notice that he's saying "third place without Konerko, possibly first place with him", which isn't really too far off, I don't think.

Where's the conditional ranking of Cleveland without Millwood?

Ol' No. 2
11-29-2005, 04:19 PM
Where's the conditional ranking of Cleveland without Millwood?Or the conditional ranking of Minnesota without Jones and Mays. Are both of them 3rd place teams, too? I guess that leaves the Tigers and Royals fighting it out for 1-2.:?:

Fuller_Schettman
11-29-2005, 04:22 PM
I pick Rob Neyer to contract herpes of the mouth in 2006.

What's the over/under on that? :tongue:

zach074
11-29-2005, 04:27 PM
good, i like being the underdogs.

santo=dorf
11-29-2005, 04:37 PM
Where's the conditional ranking of Cleveland without Millwood?
Don't forget Bob Wickman and Juan Gonzalez. They already lost Howry.

Ma-gaga, I think more hate for Neyer stems from an article he wrote back in Arpil bashing Sox fans, and then prediciting that we wouldn't win the division.

ma-gaga
11-29-2005, 05:36 PM
Ma-gaga, I think more hate for Neyer stems from an article he wrote back in Arpil bashing Sox fans, and then prediciting that we wouldn't win the division.

This one? Thread (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=49980&page=1&pp=20&)

Ok, I can see the problem. I read his 'bash' as complete sarcasm and mildly amusing to a non-White Sox fan, but a lot of people here took offense to a really bad joke.

But here is his 2005 prediction: ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?page=05expertpicks)

You'll note he's the only "expert" to pick the W.Sox. Not to win it all, but at least he got the division right. And I was wrong, he picked the standard Red Sox vs Yankees in his playoff predictions (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2005/news/story?id=2179945). :angry:

I think his original prediction had the W.Sox in 3rd place last year, but he changed it once he realized that he completely missed the signing of Jermaine Dye. I'm sure he has a spreadsheet, and he projected 600 plate appearances of Joe Borchard based on his horrible 2004 season, instead of a healthy Dye.

These "minor" things change division races. That, and Jon Garland kicked ass. :gulp:

Ol' No. 2
11-29-2005, 05:42 PM
This one? Thread (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=49980&page=1&pp=20&)

Ok, I can see the problem. I read his 'bash' as complete sarcasm and mildly amusing to a non-White Sox fan, but a lot of people here took offense to a really bad joke.

But here is his 2005 prediction: ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?page=05expertpicks)

You'll note he's the only "expert" to pick the W.Sox. Not to win it all, but at least he got the division right. And I was wrong, he picked the standard Red Sox vs Yankees in his playoff predictions (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2005/news/story?id=2179945). :angry:

I think his original prediction had the W.Sox in 3rd place last year, but he changed it once he realized that he completely missed the signing of Jermaine Dye. I'm sure he has a spreadsheet, and he projected 600 plate appearances of Joe Borchard based on his horrible 2004 season, instead of a healthy Dye.

These "minor" things change division races. That, and Jon Garland kicked ass. :gulp:This isn't bashing. This is calling him out for a stupid article. What kind of sense does it make to project standings when you don't even know who's going to be on the roster? So the Sox could take a big loss if one of their big FA players leaves and they don't replace him. What insight. You could say the same about every playoff team from last year.

ma-gaga
11-29-2005, 05:58 PM
This isn't bashing. This is calling him out for a stupid article. What kind of sense does it make to project standings when you don't even know who's going to be on the roster? So the Sox could take a big loss if one of their big FA players leaves and they don't replace him. What insight. You could say the same about every playoff team from last year.

Good god. How did I get trapped into defending another numbers geek?

I've done this one before HERE (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=50308&page=1&pp=20&), and I've defended BP against you HERE (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=61224&page=2&pp=20). I don't have all the answers, but I do think these guys get unfairly bashed.

Sure, this is a dumb article. But what else are you going to write about on November 29th? How awesome the 2005 playoffs were! Besides, we roughly "know" who 20-22 of the W.Sox/Twins/Indians/Royals/Tigers 2006 25 man rosters are going to be. You can do some rough projections based on that.

You can even run multiple contingencies if a team like the W.Sox have a free agent like Paul Konerko, who MAY or MAY NOT resign with the club. I'm sure he has one for Kevin Millwood as well.

:gulp:

ChiSoxIn06
11-29-2005, 06:00 PM
I pick Rob Neyer to contract herpes of the mouth in 2006.

hilarious

Daver
11-29-2005, 06:03 PM
Good god. How did I get trapped into defending another numbers geek?





You set yourself up for it?

spiffie
11-29-2005, 06:16 PM
Where's the conditional ranking of Cleveland without Millwood?
Perhaps a few posts up where he says "I was just fooling around before. Really, there are so many question marks that it's pointless to come up with projected standings. Until I know how the Indians are going to replace Kevin Millwood -- et cetera, etc. -- I just don't know how to come up with projected records. "

WSoxFanForever
11-29-2005, 06:31 PM
The Sox do so much better when underrated. Keep it coming, ESPN. We'll make fools out of you again and you still won't learn.

ChiSoxPatF
11-29-2005, 07:01 PM
[QUOTE=MHOUSE]there is still a lot of offseason left, but so far they've lost Howry and possibly Wickman (retirement), two key cogs from their bullpen and both big-name closers are off the market. Millwood is probably gone too and Westbrook and Lee are becoming more established, but still only have two good years under their belt. Their offense is smokin', but they have some holes to fill on that team.
[QUOTE]

Thank God someone out there has thought this through. I'm sick of all these 2006 preseason projections with the Indians #1 in the AL. They're losing three major contributors to the team that needs to IMPROVE their pitching, not take a step back (its hard to look at that pitching staff and not think they overacheived).

Plus everyone is still oowing and aahing over that 16 game win streak they had near the end of the season while writing off our 17 of 18 to finish the season AND postseason.

Lets leave preseason projections until the dust settles on the offseason. I trust Kenny will make us a better team going into 2006.

kevin57
11-29-2005, 09:06 PM
It is stupid to even try to make predictions about next season at this point. Granted, there is not a huge or hugely talented --relatively speaking--free agent class this year, but ever hear of trades? Injuries?

Just the fact he touched this topic tells me a lot about how seriously to take him.

chisox77
11-29-2005, 09:28 PM
It's always amusing to see predictions pop up this early, even casually. But I don't care about them. The experts can predict whatever they want about the White Sox. I would prefer that they continue to overlook and underestimate our team.

:cool:

Whitesox029
11-29-2005, 09:33 PM
Why does this thread exist?
? ? ?
:?::?::?:

Jjav829
11-29-2005, 09:41 PM
Why does this thread exist?
? ? ?
:?::?::?:

Because people like to whine and bitch about anything they can.

RowanDye
11-29-2005, 11:08 PM
The Sox dominated because of superior pitching. All are back next year with McCarthy added to the mix in place of Hernandez. Given that only Garland and Politte had what might be considered difficult to repeat performances, I see absolutely no reason to think 2006 will be any different from 2005.

You are correct in saying that we dominated because of superior pitching, but the overall team health may have been what set us apart from the competition. Jenks stepped up big when Hermanson went down and we had consistent pitching all year. But other than Crede and Podsednik going down (which hurt us badly), the only thing to speak of was having to spell El Duque with McArthy -- and we all knew El Duque wasn't going to pitch 200+ innings. Almost every other team had injuries to starting pitchers that severely affected their playoff chances (Pavano, Colon, Clemens, Schilling, Foulke, etc.) The Sox are a good team but a lot of things fell into the perfect places last year, it was a magical season. On paper we will contend for the division as is, but without Konerko's bat our team (i.e. pitching staff) will be forced to show the same amazing display of durability. I trust KW will do something.

HaroMaster87
11-29-2005, 11:30 PM
wait, wait, wait..."lack of hittiness"?????

What in the hell????? This guy writes for a living????

What a joke.

bobowhite
11-30-2005, 12:12 AM
Did anyone else see that a bunch of people picked Jeremy Reed, formerly of the Sox org to be the AL ROY in 2005 and even one guy picked Iguchi to get the ROY. Someone even picked McCarthy to be ROY 2005.

Does anyone know if he'll be eligible for ROY 2006? If so, I have to get to Vegas to put down a bet on him.

Theanticub
11-30-2005, 01:05 AM
Satya (Chicago): What's your take on Konerko signing with the White Sox? Is the Thome deal a sign that they may not get Konerko to re-sign or they wanted more pop in the lineup?

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/sn2.gif Rob Neyer: (1:36 PM ET ) This is the American League, so the White Sox need a first baseman *and* a DH. Considering Frank Thomas's injuries and Carl Everett's general lack of hittiness, I think they've got plenty of room for both Thome and Konerko. And if they *get* both of them, I might elevate the White Sox from third place to first place in my projected standings.

Most of us gave up on their ridiculous predictions.

Mohoney
11-30-2005, 03:00 AM
Given that only Garland and Politte had what might be considered difficult to repeat performances, I see absolutely no reason to think 2006 will be any different from 2005.

Neal Cotts was huge, too. His season definitely qualifies as a "difficult to repeat" performance to me.

Another ERA below 2.00 and BAA below .200 is asking an awful lot.