PDA

View Full Version : *OFFICIAL* 5/02/06 Sox Split With Jndians Postgame Thread


Unregistered
05-02-2006, 02:48 PM
Blech. MB had a bad game. No biggie.

Woulda been nice to come back home with a 6.5 game lead over the Tribe, though...

RedHeadPaleHoser
05-02-2006, 02:49 PM
Oh well...5-3 on road is still not bad considering 6 games on the West Coast, going 4-2. Get on the plane, get some sleep, bitchslap the Mariners tomorrow.

Corlose 15
05-02-2006, 02:50 PM
I understand and agree with Ozzie keeping the subs sharp and all, but, does he have to play them all at the same time? :(:

Buehrle was rotten, they left a ton on base, thats a pretty goood recipe for a loss. Onto the sweep of the Mariners!!!!

Boone Logan was great today though 5Ks in 2.1IP. Nasty!:bandance:

palehozenychicty
05-02-2006, 02:50 PM
burls wasn't good, the offense wasn't very clutch esp. uribe. nevertheless, a good trip, and let's get payback from the m's tomorrow.

CLR01
05-02-2006, 02:50 PM
Another 8 game streak comes to an end. :(:

cbone
05-02-2006, 02:50 PM
Blahhh. Have our way with Seattle now. Let's get big Mark back on track.

oeo
05-02-2006, 02:51 PM
Just not a good game overall. Buehrle didn't show up, and we couldn't get clutch hits when we needed them. I think the game could have been different if we had our starters out there because we could have blown the game wide open numerous times.

Go get the M's tomorrow.

MUsoxfan
05-02-2006, 02:52 PM
I said this in the gamethread....but I think Ozzie should have played the B-team tomorrow night instead of today. A game with the Indians is much more important than a game against Seattle.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 02:52 PM
Look at this from the Indians' point of view. They're looking at the Sox' taillights and only managed a split at home.

This was one of the tougher road trips the Sox will have this year. 5-3 isn't bad in any 8-game stretch.

miker
05-02-2006, 02:53 PM
The good news is that when Mark has one bad game, the next one will be really solid...

jenn2080
05-02-2006, 02:53 PM
Sucked but whatever...We got Seattle and KC coming up.

SoxSpeed22
05-02-2006, 02:54 PM
That sure sucked on almost all cylinders.

HomeFish
05-02-2006, 02:55 PM
The good news is that when Mark has one bad game, the next one will be really solid...

Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 02:55 PM
I understand and agree with Ozzie keeping the subs sharp and all, but, does he have to play them all at the same time? :(: I hate this ****ing argument. Assuming playing a sub reduces your chances of winning, would you rather reduce your chance of winning 5 games or 1? I'd rather lose one game by 5 runs than lose five games by 1 run.

Corlose 15
05-02-2006, 02:55 PM
The good news is that when Mark has one bad game, the next one will be really solid...

Kind of like this year with Seattle and Cleveland....oh wait.:tongue:

Mark is the least of my worries with this team.

ChiSoxRowand
05-02-2006, 02:56 PM
At least Logan had a good outing, even though it was in mopup time. Uribe and Anderson still struggling.

Unregistered
05-02-2006, 02:56 PM
Just not a good game overall. Buehrle didn't show up, and we couldn't get clutch hits when we needed them. I think the game could have been different if we had our starters out there because we could have blown the game wide open numerous times.

Go get the M's tomorrow.Yeah, I'd assume a game Ozzie wanted to win wouldn't include Cintron stranding 7 guys...

scottjanssens
05-02-2006, 02:57 PM
I suspect that Ozzie wasn't playing the subs just to play them but to have all righties in against Sabathia. That's the only logical explanation of why Cintron was the DH and not Gload. Not that logic applies to Ozzie. :smile:

1917
05-02-2006, 02:57 PM
Oh well, you can't blame the lineup, we gave up 7 runs

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 02:58 PM
Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.Right on cue.
http://www.buzzmachine.com/pix/eeyore.jpg

Corlose 15
05-02-2006, 02:58 PM
I hate this ****ing argument. Assuming playing a sub reduces your chances of winning, would you rather reduce your chance of winning 5 games or 1? I'd rather lose one game by 5 runs than lose five games by 1 run.

Chill out. I could also make the argument that using 1 sub reduces your chances of winning said game by 5% and using five in one game reduces your chances of winning by 25%. That argument would be a total waste of time for the both of us though.

They scored one run on 11 hits today so there's plenty of blame to go around. I'm not overly upset though, it was just a thought.

viagracat
05-02-2006, 03:00 PM
Not gonna win 'em all. Sure, it was a lousy game. Travis Hafner is becoming another Mike Sweeney. 13 men (again) left on base, and Anderson's plate composure is beginning to concern me.

But let's keep it positive. Boone Logan was good today. We had a 5-3 record on a tough trip, we're still 18-8 and we're coming home. Every other team would love to have our problems.:smile:

MUsoxfan
05-02-2006, 03:01 PM
This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.

Oh my heavens!

Only in first place?!

Iwritecode
05-02-2006, 03:01 PM
Another 8 game streak comes to an end. :(:

Who had an 8 game streak?

Unregistered
05-02-2006, 03:02 PM
Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=3215&d=1125531610
http://www.acc.umu.se/~coppelia/images/poohpics/eeyore/eeyore_sad.gif

Congratulations to the Detroit Tigers. HomeFish's latest "team that can't lose." Sorry Twins, you've been replaced.

sullythered
05-02-2006, 03:02 PM
And if we don't occasionally play a few bench guys at one time (one of the best benches in the league) then we will need to consistently play one bench player at a time almost every night. The difference is negligible. Also, I have little fear of the Tigers in the long run. They have a fantastic lineup, but young pitching (outside Rodgers) is unreliable.

Btw, Boone Logan is looking better and better.

BeviBall!
05-02-2006, 03:02 PM
A 5-3 trip is AOK in my book. Well done, boys. Now come home and fatten up on some bottom feeders.

Unregistered
05-02-2006, 03:02 PM
Who had an 8 game streak?The Sox had an 8-game winning streak in Cleveland until today.

Beautox
05-02-2006, 03:03 PM
overall meh. But the Legend of Boone Logan continues to grow; 2.1IP, 35 pitches 20 for strikes, 5K and 1BB <b>nice</b>

http://www.southsidesox.com/images/admin/BOONE.jpg

MUsoxfan
05-02-2006, 03:03 PM
Anderson's plate composure is beginning to concern me.



The way I look at it is that we have a 'pitcher' that's not totally incapable of hitting..batting in the 9-hole. It's like when Eric Milton goes up to the plate for the Reds. Chances are he's really gonna do something totally useless, but there's that off-chance that he takes one deep

Chicken Dinner
05-02-2006, 03:04 PM
Anderson didn't strike out once today, that's a positive sign.

gobears1987
05-02-2006, 03:04 PM
Ozzie's lineup today sucked. Thome should've been in with the bases loaded not Cintron.:angry:

WizardsofOzzie
05-02-2006, 03:05 PM
overall meh. But the Legend of Boone Logan continues to grow; 2.1IP, 35 pitches 20 for strikes, 5K and 1BB <b>nice</b>

http://www.southsidesox.com/images/admin/BOONE.jpg

Nice to see logan out there throwing strikes

RockyMtnSoxFan
05-02-2006, 03:05 PM
I haven't read anything about JD, does anyone know how he's doing? Is he headed for the DL? I thought that last weekend Ozzie was saying he was pulling Dye as a precautionary measure so he could be in the lineup against Cleveland's lefties, but he only had one plate appearance before being removed for a PH. :?:

Procol Harum
05-02-2006, 03:06 PM
I'll take the 5-3 road trip--especially as it featured a 4-2 on the Left Coast. Now we just have to keep takin' care o' bees-knees at home like on the last stand.

mrs. hendu
05-02-2006, 03:07 PM
Just one of those days I guess... :(: Hopefully there won't be too many.
Now do you think KC can finally beat Detroit? :?:

oeo
05-02-2006, 03:08 PM
Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.

Are you serious? Since when are the Tigers indestructable? The Royals are still a Major League team and can win games, they're actually due for a win.

And besides, the Tigers don't worry me at all. They're 2-5 against teams over .500 (the Sox and Indians)...that is why they are 17-9, they don't play anyone. And when they do, they get beat.

MUsoxfan
05-02-2006, 03:08 PM
Now do you think KC can finally beat Detroit? :?:

No. Mike Maroth is pitching to a team that I feel can be the worst in baseball history

mrs. hendu
05-02-2006, 03:09 PM
No. Mike Maroth is pitching to a team that I feel can be the worst in baseball history
Well, then we're just 0.5 games ahead.

Blob
05-02-2006, 03:10 PM
Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.

One of the mods should change your name from HOMEfish to WETfish.

You sure know how to look at the positive!!

BeviBall!
05-02-2006, 03:12 PM
I haven't read anything about JD, does anyone know how he's doing? Is he headed for the DL? I thought that last weekend Ozzie was saying he was pulling Dye as a precautionary measure so he could be in the lineup against Cleveland's lefties, but he only had one plate appearance before being removed for a PH. :?:

It was probably precautionary today as well. Stormy/wet conditions and a slippery outfield are not what JD needs for his calf.

soxfanatlanta
05-02-2006, 03:12 PM
Props to Logan, he brought it today.

Uribe...well...he's hitting .173 right now, and swinging at everything he sees. I hope he starts getting back to his form again; I'd love to see the bottom of the lineup produce at least a little bit. At least he and Anderson are playing well with the glove.

Bring on the churros!

MUsoxfan
05-02-2006, 03:13 PM
Well, then we're just 0.5 games ahead.

I'll take it. 2 with the M's that I'm confident we can take, then we have our turn with the Royals.

Meanwhile, the Tigers get the Angels for 2 and the Twins for 3.

sullythered
05-02-2006, 03:15 PM
Well, then we're just 0.5 games ahead.

"Ahead" being the operative word. Plus we've played a much tougher schedule. And what did they do against us again?

Lip Man 1
05-02-2006, 03:20 PM
Few things:

That game blew today. Period.

Dye missed yesterday's game, Ozzie has a rule that if you miss a game due to injury he's giving you an additional day off to make sure your OK.

Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.

GO ROYALS!!!!!!!!!!!

Lip

infohawk
05-02-2006, 03:25 PM
Oh well, you can't blame the lineup, we gave up 7 runs
And you can't blame the pitching because we only scored one run!:D:

sullythered
05-02-2006, 03:25 PM
Baseball Prospectus? May as well have been brought to them by my pet dog. In my eyes, Detroit is smoke and mirrors. They beat the bad teams, lose to the good ones.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 03:29 PM
Few things:

That game blew today. Period.

Dye missed yesterday's game, Ozzie has a rule that if you miss a game due to injury he's giving you an additional day off to make sure your OK.

Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.

GO ROYALS!!!!!!!!!!!

LipThe teams the Sox have played have a combined 8-18 record in games against them. Obviously, they're not very good teams.:rolleyes:

soxfanatlanta
05-02-2006, 03:31 PM
Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.


I have an idea...

http://www.orangebowl.org/images/newsroom/20041129_phpF8eiVe.gif

:dtroll:

CLR01
05-02-2006, 03:31 PM
The teams the Sox have played have a combined 8-18 record in games against them. Obviously, they're not very good teams.:rolleyes:


I believe we heard the same crap last year, as well.

SOXPHILE
05-02-2006, 03:35 PM
Any word on Chris Widger ? After getting hit with Belliard's backswing in the head, MLB.com said he had dizziness and upset stomach. Hope it's not a concussion.:(:

Baby Fisk
05-02-2006, 03:39 PM
Another weekday
loss. This is what it sounds like
When doves cry. Go Sox!

http://www.yogaschuleaarau.ch/zendoaarau/images/zen_buddha.jpg

MarySwiss
05-02-2006, 03:44 PM
Surprised again! Okay, a little gloom and doom on this thread, but I was expecting much, much worse. As Chisoxfanatic said, a championship will do that, I guess. Nice to see.

Chisox003
05-02-2006, 03:46 PM
Yuck.

Just got back from class, this was not expected.

Boone looks to have had a great game though, so that's good.

Hopefully Dye will be alright.

Moving along, nothing to see today. We'll get em tomorrow.

:gulp:

Flight #24
05-02-2006, 03:52 PM
The teams the Sox have played have a combined 8-18 record in games against them. Obviously, they're not very good teams.:rolleyes:

Yeah, that 3-0 record against the weakling Tigers, 2-3 against the Tribe and 3-0 against the ALCS runner-up Angels is just smoke.....bring on the mirrors....:rolleyes:

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 03:56 PM
Yeah, that 3-0 record against the weakling Tigers, 2-3 against the Tribe and 3-0 against the ALCS runner-up Angels is just smoke.....bring on the mirrors....:rolleyes:Not to mention that the Sox have caught the good teams they've played when they're playing badly. A team can be on a 5-game winning streak, but as soon as the Sox come to town, they go cold, only to get hot again after the Sox have left. It's just luck, I tell ya.:rolleyes:

MarySwiss
05-02-2006, 03:57 PM
Yeah, that 3-0 record against the weakling Tigers, 2-3 against the Tribe and 3-0 against the ALCS runner-up Angels is just smoke.....bring on the mirrors....:rolleyes: :yup:

spiffie
05-02-2006, 04:05 PM
Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.
Right now the teams we have played have a combined winning percentage of .469, tied for the lowest in the AL along with the Yankees. After this weekend we will have played:

Kansas City (5-18 .217) - 9 times
Minnesota (9-16 .360) - 3 times
Seattle (12-15 .444) - 5 times
LA Angels (12-14 . 462) - 3 times
Cleveland (14-13 .519) - 5 times
Toronto (13-11 .542) - 3 times
Detroit (17-9 .654) - 3 times

1/3 of our games at the beginning of the season are against the worst team in the AL. 5 more of them are against the worst team in the AL West. So basically half of our games at the beginning of this year (14 out of 31) are against last place teams. I don't really think pointing this out qualifies as either part of the vast media conspiracy against the Sox.

Interestingly, Detroit's opponents have a .499 WP right now. This is of course helped by playing, and getting their asses handed to them by us. They have lost 2 series this year, to us and LAA. They are:

3-0 vs. KC (.217)
3-0 vs. Minnesota (.360)
3-0 vs. Seattle (.444)
3-1 vs. Texas (.538)
2-1 vs. Oakland (.520)
2-2 vs. Cleveland (.519)
1-2 vs. LAA (.462)
0-3 vs. Sox (.692)

So against +.500 teams right now they are 7-7. Of course, the Sox are an awesome 7-4 against such teams. Which is why even though I agree we have had a very easy schedule early I have no worries about the season as it goes on.

goon
05-02-2006, 04:08 PM
looking at the schedule in front of me, i hope that statement of the white sox having the easiest schedule was made before the season. otherwise, i have no idea how SI came to that conclusion.

MarySwiss
05-02-2006, 04:10 PM
Right now the teams we have played have a combined winning percentage of .469, tied for the lowest in the AL along with the Yankees.

And part of the reason for that is that they've been playing us. :wink:

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 04:19 PM
Right now the teams we have played have a combined winning percentage of .469, tied for the lowest in the AL along with the Yankees. After this weekend we will have played:

Kansas City (5-18 .217) - 9 times
Minnesota (9-16 .360) - 3 times
Seattle (12-15 .444) - 5 times
LA Angels (12-14 . 462) - 3 times
Cleveland (14-13 .519) - 5 times
Toronto (13-11 .542) - 3 times
Detroit (17-9 .654) - 3 times

1/3 of our games at the beginning of the season are against the worst team in the AL. 5 more of them are against the worst team in the AL West. So basically half of our games at the beginning of this year (14 out of 31) are against last place teams. I don't really think pointing this out qualifies as either part of the vast media conspiracy against the Sox.

Interestingly, Detroit's opponents have a .499 WP right now. This is of course helped by playing, and getting their asses handed to them by us. They have lost 2 series this year, to us and LAA. They are:

3-0 vs. KC (.217)
3-0 vs. Minnesota (.360)
3-0 vs. Seattle (.444)
3-1 vs. Texas (.538)
2-1 vs. Oakland (.520)
2-2 vs. Cleveland (.519)
1-2 vs. LAA (.462)
0-3 vs. Sox (.692)

So against +.500 teams right now they are 7-7. Of course, the Sox are an awesome 7-4 against such teams. Which is why even though I agree we have had a very easy schedule early I have no worries about the season as it goes on.So teams that have played a lot of games against the best team in the AL have poorer records than those that don't. Imagine that.:rolleyes:

What you're neglecting is that:

The Angels would be a game above .500 and a half game back if not for the fact the Sox tatooed them at home last week.

The Blue Jays would be only a half game behind the Yankees if you took out the games against the Sox.

Detroit has the second best record in the AL and the Sox swept them at home. Take away the Sox sweep and they'd have a 17-6 record, which would be by far the best record in baseball.

itsnotrequired
05-02-2006, 04:24 PM
So teams that have played a lot of games against the best team in the AL have poorer records than those that don't. Imagine that.:rolleyes:

What you're neglecting is that:

The Angels would be a game above .500 and a half game back if not for the fact the Sox tatooed them at home last week.

The Blue Jays would be only a half game behind the Yankees if you took out the games against the Sox.

Detroit has the second best record in the AL and the Sox swept them at home. Take away the Sox sweep and they'd have a 17-6 record, which would be by far the best record in baseball.

These facts escaped analysts all last year. The reason the teams the Sox played had poor records was becuase the Sox wailed on them all year long.

Bobbo35
05-02-2006, 04:32 PM
Followed the game for a bit on gameday. Did not look good. Get the Mariners tommorow.

Tigerclaw
05-02-2006, 04:34 PM
I don't see the point in arguing records against teams over .500 right now...the Angels were over .500 until the sox have played them and are now under .500 therefore eliminating them from the teams that are over .500 record. Right now there are a lot of teams fluctuating around .500 including the Blue Jays, Indians, A's and Angels.....what's the point in that argument until teams have established where they are going?

spiffie
05-02-2006, 05:15 PM
So teams that have played a lot of games against the best team in the AL have poorer records than those that don't. Imagine that.:rolleyes:

What you're neglecting is that:

The Angels would be a game above .500 and a half game back if not for the fact the Sox tatooed them at home last week.

The Blue Jays would be only a half game behind the Yankees if you took out the games against the Sox.

Detroit has the second best record in the AL and the Sox swept them at home. Take away the Sox sweep and they'd have a 17-6 record, which would be by far the best record in baseball.
And Seattle and KC would still be awful teams that we get to play a lot of games against early.

Even if you remove record considerations, we've played less than half our games thus far against teams that have any legitimate shot at making the playoffs, or even being in contention in their division this year. I guess I just don't see what's so inaccuarate about the idea that playing a lot of games against bottom-of-their-division teams makes a schedule lighter than it otherwise could be. Especially since Detroit beating up on most of the same teams is why people here are saying they have beaten up on weak teams.

batmanZoSo
05-02-2006, 05:24 PM
I don't see the point in arguing records against teams over .500 right now...the Angels were over .500 until the sox have played them and are now under .500 therefore eliminating them from the teams that are over .500 record. Right now there are a lot of teams fluctuating around .500 including the Blue Jays, Indians, A's and Angels.....what's the point in that argument until teams have established where they are going?

There's never a point in having that argument.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 05:44 PM
And Seattle and KC would still be awful teams that we get to play a lot of games against early.

Even if you remove record considerations, we've played less than half our games thus far against teams that have any legitimate shot at making the playoffs, or even being in contention in their division this year. I guess I just don't see what's so inaccuarate about the idea that playing a lot of games against bottom-of-their-division teams makes a schedule lighter than it otherwise could be. Especially since Detroit beating up on most of the same teams is why people here are saying they have beaten up on weak teams.That argument might hold water if these were the only weak teams in the league and no other teams played them. There are weak teams in all divisions. Tampa Bay is not significantly worse than the Twins or Mariners. AL West teams have played a lot more games against the Mariners than the Sox have. Moreover, and this is the key point, you can't tell who are the weak teams this early in the season, since no team has played all the other teams yet. Do these teams have bad records because they're weak or because they've played a lot of games against strong opponents?

spiffie
05-02-2006, 05:51 PM
That argument might hold water if these were the only weak teams in the league and no other teams played them. There are weak teams in all divisions. Tampa Bay is not significantly worse than the Twins or Mariners. AL West teams have played a lot more games against the Mariners than the Sox have. Moreover, and this is the key point, you can't tell who are the weak teams this early in the season, since no team has played all the other teams yet. Do these teams have bad records because they're weak or because they've played a lot of games against strong opponents?
Actually, after Thursday we will have played Seattle more than any other team in baseball up to that point.

And you're right, there are weak and strong teams. And many of our games have been against the teams that are almost universally acknowledged as weak.

I mean, honestly, if this weren't about the Sox s.o.s., would anyone on here really be trying to argue that KC might not be all that bad this year and who can tell that this early?

MarySwiss
05-02-2006, 05:53 PM
That argument might hold water if these were the only weak teams in the league and no other teams played them. There are weak teams in all divisions. Tampa Bay is not significantly worse than the Twins or Mariners. AL West teams have played a lot more games against the Mariners than the Sox have. Moreover, and this is the key point, you can't tell who are the weak teams this early in the season, since no team has played all the other teams yet. Do these teams have bad records because they're weak or because they've played a lot of games against strong opponents?
Ol' No. 2, you've done it again! That's exactly the point. We are one month into the season; no one has been eliminated from contention.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 05:57 PM
And many of our games have been against the teams that are almost universally acknowledged as weak.What you're missing is that's true of EVERY TEAM. How many games have the Sox played against the D-rays and Orioles?

Lip Man 1
05-02-2006, 06:05 PM
Just FYI the story says that according to BP Houston and the Mets have the 2nd and 3rd easiest schedule starts this season.

According to the story (maybe this will help explain) BP arrives at their results by "using it's PECOTA projected standings to establish each teams strength of schedule through Sunday."

:?:

I have no idea what a PECOTA is (San Diego's balklpark?) but that's what it says.

Lip

JUribe1989
05-02-2006, 06:07 PM
Did Dye start and then leave the game?

AZChiSoxFan
05-02-2006, 06:15 PM
The Royals are still a Major League team and can win games


:tealpolice:

Chicken Dinner
05-02-2006, 06:18 PM
Did Dye start and then leave the game?

Yes

wassagstdu
05-02-2006, 06:35 PM
Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.

The Sox have the easiest schedule period. They are the only team that doesn't have to play the best team in baseball!

.

RockyMtnSoxFan
05-02-2006, 06:42 PM
The Sox have the easiest schedule period. They are the only team that doesn't have to play the best team in baseball!

.

Good point. The ESPN RPI (Relative Performance Index) tries to take into account the fact that wins against weak teams are not necessarily indicative of a team's capability, and also that an opponent might have a poor record due to playing good teams frequently.

Ol' No. 2
05-02-2006, 07:00 PM
Good point. The ESPN RPI (Relative Performance Index) tries to take into account the fact that wins against weak teams are not necessarily indicative of a team's capability, and also that an opponent might have a poor record due to playing good teams frequently.This kind of thing becomes inevitably circular. Are the Sox not as good as they look because they're playing weaker opponents or are their opponents not as weak as they seem because they're playing the Sox? The mediots love to apply it only in one direction to reinforce their biases. It's impossible to determine when only 1/7 of the season has been played and teams haven't played all the other teams yet. Even after all the games have been played, it's not as easy as it looks. A team in a tough division will have a poorer record than they would if they were playing in another division. But since all the teams in that division have fewer wins than they should, it looks like the competition in that division is weaker rather than stronger, so the RPI discounts it further. And around and around it goes.

About the only way to really get a handle on division strength is inter-divisional games. Last year the AL West had a winning record against both other AL divisions and the AL East had a losing record against both other divisions. Yet KC had the worst record in the AL by far. This helped the Red Sox win the WC over the Indians. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind which was the better team?

Maximo
05-02-2006, 07:03 PM
Few things:

That game blew today. Period.

Dye missed yesterday's game, Ozzie has a rule that if you miss a game due to injury he's giving you an additional day off to make sure your OK.

Regarding schedule...Sports Illustrated has a little blurb brought to them by he 'good' folks at Baseball Prospectus that says the White Sox have the easiest schedule start in MLB. (page 74) How they arrive at this I have no idea just passing it along.

GO ROYALS!!!!!!!!!!!

Lip

Lip:

Only makes sense since the Sox are the best team in baseball and don't have to play themselves.

JB98
05-02-2006, 07:11 PM
Except this is two bad games for him in a row. He got beat up in Seattle also.

This also likely means we will be just 0.5 games in front of the Tigers by tonight, unless Kansas City pulls off a miracle.

You make me look like a ray of sunshine, and I'm a card-carrying Dark Cloud.

Buerhle didn't get beat up in Seattle. He had one bad inning where a couple of breaks went against him. Today was his first bad start of the year. So what?

And who cares about the Tigers? Over the course of 162 games, which team do you think can win consistently, the White Sox or the Tigers? I'm going with the White Sox. We've proven we're a good team. The Tigers, OTOH, lost 91 games last year.

Quit your ****ing crying. It's just one loss. We aren't going to win every day. Jesus.

Blueprint1
05-02-2006, 07:18 PM
Why do we have to listen to HomeFish again this year. I am pretty sure that MB is going to be alright.

JB98
05-02-2006, 07:21 PM
Why do we have to listen to HomeFish again this year. I am pretty sure that MB is going to be alright.

I'm going to have to stop visiting the board after losses. It's bad for my health.

Hitmen77
05-02-2006, 07:45 PM
The teams the Sox have played have a combined 8-18 record in games against them. Obviously, they're not very good teams.:rolleyes:

:kneeslap: I love that. I nominate this for Post of the Week!

I hate this "we've only played bad teams" crap. You know, using that logic, our wins would only count when we play Cleveland, Boston, or NY. Every other win gets dismissed due to weaknesses of the other team.

It's a shame this thread got totally sidetracked by this lame arguement. But, maybe there wasn't much worth talking about from today's game.

JB98
05-02-2006, 08:08 PM
:kneeslap: I love that. I nominate this for Post of the Week!

I hate this "we've only played bad teams" crap. You know, using that logic, our wins would only count when we play Cleveland, Boston, or NY. Every other win gets dismissed due to weaknesses of the other team.

It's a shame this thread got totally sidetracked by this lame arguement. But, maybe there wasn't much worth talking about from today's game.

For truly weak teams, see the National League. I think Anaheim is pretty damn good. Their record isn't great now, but they'll be there at the end of the year.

stl_sox_fan
05-02-2006, 09:42 PM
The Sox have the easiest schedule period. They are the only team that doesn't have to play the best team in baseball!

.

Too funny. Let's just hope the Mariners don't catch the Sox "ahem" playing with themselves these next two games. :cool: