PDA

View Full Version : On Pace For...


kjhanson
05-10-2006, 10:13 AM
The Sox are on pace to...
Win 116 games
Score 932 runs
Give up 633 runs
Go 63-18 at home

Jim Thome is on pace to...
Hit 73 home runs
Drive in 187 runs
Score 171 runs
Walk 142 times

Paul Konerko is on pace to...
Get 203 base hits
Score 122 runs

Joe Crede is on pace to...
Hit 36 home runs
Drive in 130 runs
Strike out 25 times

Tadahito Iguchi is on pace to...
Get 219 base hits
Score 148 runs

Then Again...
A.J. is on pace for 0 home runs

This team isn't just good, they're dominant.

batmanZoSo
05-10-2006, 10:15 AM
This team isnt just good, they look good.

daveeym
05-10-2006, 10:18 AM
This team isnt just good, they look good.Especially since those damn hippies cut their hair.:cool:

batmanZoSo
05-10-2006, 10:27 AM
What I mean is they win games 9-1 and 10-2. They don't win 1-run games on RBI GIDPs. They don't have zero guys hitting .300, they have six. They have the sexy stats to go with the amazing record.

spiffie
05-10-2006, 10:36 AM
This thread means nothing to me without a graph of some sort.

CashMan
05-10-2006, 10:45 AM
I concur, I also need a graph!

my5thbench
05-10-2006, 10:49 AM
do ya' think that they'll miss any of those goals?

HomeFish
05-10-2006, 10:54 AM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.

soxfan13
05-10-2006, 10:57 AM
Thome has dropped off a bit after opening nite he was on pace for 162 HRs and 324 RBIs think we should trade him while we can

cbotnyse
05-10-2006, 10:59 AM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.

:whatever: :talktothehand:

oeo
05-10-2006, 11:00 AM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.
The top and the middle of the order will not decline that much. Of course they're all not going to be putting up these numbers all year, but close to them I can see. Thome has definately changed the lineup as a whole, and I can see 3 or 4 of them batting .300 all year. Your pessimism really sucks around here HomeFish.

Garland_IS_God
05-10-2006, 11:00 AM
I'll believe it when I read it in Baseball Prospectus.

soxfan13
05-10-2006, 11:04 AM
The top and the middle of the order will not decline that much. Of course they're all not going to be putting up these numbers all year, but close to them I can see. Thome has definately changed the lineup as a whole, and I can see 3 or 4 of them batting .300 all year. Your pessimism really sucks around here HomeFish.

Was gonna ask if homefish was ever happy?

daveeym
05-10-2006, 11:07 AM
Aw man those Sox are so lucky, the first world series was because all their pitchers had career years. Then this year all their hitters had career years. They're just so damn lucky so the wins don't really count.

cheeses_h_rice
05-10-2006, 11:09 AM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.

:captainobvious:

Berkules
05-10-2006, 11:23 AM
I was always wondering what phrases like "pulling a HomeFish" and what being like Homefish referred to (as being relatively new on WSI and seeing it on the forums) but now I get it.

I'm not saying we need blind, ignorant, rampant optimism but there's no reason to think that things would decline! Why? Because it's all "too good to be true" and we're "destined for collapse?" Your pessimism is BS. We have no curse. We won the World Series. We have the best record in baseball. We have the best pitchers and some of the best hitters in the American League. We take 1-1 ball games and turn them into a routing! It's not like 2001 anymore. We don't have to worry about the Twins. We can beat any team. We will beat every team.

Stop the damn pessimism.
whew

Frater Perdurabo
05-10-2006, 12:39 PM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.

I don't need to tell stat-heads what they can go do with their stats.

What I can say is that as likely as it as that those guys who are performing above their career norms would regress to their "means," it is just as likely that the Sox have assembled a 1-7 that protects and sets up one another like very few lineups have in the last 20 years.

You dark clouds might be right, but since none of us has ESP or a time machine, at this point it's just as possible that Thome might set the single-season HR mark. It's just as possible that Konerko could get his 200 hits. It's just as possible that Crede could bat .330 for the whole year. And it's just as possible that the Sox could go 11-1 again in the postseason.

So, dark clouds, please stop defecating on my enjoyment of this awesome season and please confine yourselves to the Roadhouse or something.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-10-2006, 12:50 PM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season.

No. What this means is HomeFish has to WAIT to announce he has crapped his pants again.

Of course you couldn't wait, so instead you crapped your pants today predicting you'll crap your pants at another point in the future.

You're constantly crapping your pants, HomeFish. And that is why you are the lamest poster here.

HomeFish
05-10-2006, 12:53 PM
Because it's all "too good to be true" and we're "destined for collapse?" Your pessimism is BS. We have no curse.

I have never said the Sox were "cursed" or proposed anything metaphysical. Rather, my point was that the stats that Sox hitters are on pace for are so ridiculously high that it is almost certain that they will decline. Not because we're cursed, but because it is physically difficult for even the best players in the game to put up those stats. You don't see many 73 HR seasons, and it has everything to do with the limits of the human body and nothing to do with "curses" or bad luck.

Ol' No. 2
05-10-2006, 12:54 PM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.You set the bar too high with the Pierzynski graphs. Your usual bleating just seems pale by comparison.

sullythered
05-10-2006, 12:55 PM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order.


Wow, HomeFish turns a positive into a negative yet again.

Baby Fisk
05-10-2006, 01:03 PM
The odds are likely that Buehrle will catch a communicable disease on his neighbours' slip 'n' slide, and have to go on the DL for the rest of this season. This season will end in tears for everyone.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-10-2006, 01:06 PM
I have never said the Sox were "cursed" or proposed anything metaphysical. Rather, my point was that I have a congenital need to crap my pants even when there is absolutely nothing for me to crap my pants about besides the likelihood that I'll crap my pants sometime in the future. I'm always crapping my pants and everyone knows it. I'm the lamest poster here.

Fixed it for you Fish Boy.

WhteSox725
05-10-2006, 01:10 PM
Then Again...
A.J. is on pace for 0 home runs



A.J. is just suffering from a Samson complex. If they let him grow his hair back he will be hitting homeruns again.

fquaye149
05-10-2006, 01:17 PM
What I mean is they win games 9-1 and 10-2. They don't win 1-run games on RBI GIDPs. They don't have zero guys hitting .300, they have six. They have the sexy stats to go with the amazing record.

there's no such thing as an RBI GIDP :wink:

Frater Perdurabo
05-10-2006, 01:20 PM
Fixed it for you Fish Boy.

<Frater wipes the mixture of saliva, water and bits of apple from his monitor>
:redface:

pythons007
05-10-2006, 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeFish
I have never said the Sox were "cursed" or proposed anything metaphysical. Rather, my point was that I have a congenital need to crap my pants even when there is absolutely nothing for me to crap my pants about besides the likelihood that I'll crap my pants sometime in the future. I'm always crapping my pants and everyone knows it. I'm the lamest poster here.


Fixed it for you Fish Boy.

Now that is funny!

Iwritecode
05-10-2006, 01:58 PM
No. What this means is HomeFish has to WAIT to announce he has crapped his pants again.

Of course you couldn't wait, so instead you crapped your pants today predicting you'll crap your pants at another point in the future.

You're constantly crapping your pants, HomeFish. And that is why you are the lamest poster here.

That is POTW material. :roflmao:

I'm beginning to wonder if he writes this stuff just to see the response he gets...

spiffie
05-10-2006, 02:01 PM
there's no such thing as an RBI GIDP :wink:
Then what would it be called if a man is up with bases loaded and no outs, batter hits into a 6-4-3 DP, run scores and man on 2nd goes to 3rd?

Ol' No. 2
05-10-2006, 02:02 PM
Then what would it be called if a man is up with bases loaded and no outs, batter hits into a 6-4-3 DP, run scores and man on 2nd goes to 3rd?No RBI is credited to the batter when he hits into a DP, even though a run scores.

spiffie
05-10-2006, 02:05 PM
No RBI is credited to the batter when he hits into a DP, even though a run scores.
Weird...I never knew that. Any particular reason why not?

Ol' No. 2
05-10-2006, 02:06 PM
Weird...I never knew that. Any particular reason why not?Just one of those quirky rules, I guess. Someone years ago decided if you hit into a DP you shouldn't get an RBI. :dunno:

Berkules
05-10-2006, 02:34 PM
Just one of those quirky rules, I guess. Someone years ago decided if you hit into a DP you shouldn't get an RBI. :dunno:
so the run isnt accounted for as batted in by anybody? that seems weird since there are multiple ways to get out and still get an rbi

gbergman
05-10-2006, 02:54 PM
Good to see these numbers. I think 3-4 will bat .300 this year. Wouldn't it be something if Thome could hit 73 and atleast tie barry and get the asterik removed from the single season HR mark.

Berkules
05-10-2006, 02:59 PM
Good to see these numbers. I think 3-4 will bat .300 this year. Wouldn't it be something if Thome could hit 73 and atleast tie barry and get the asterik removed from the single season HR mark.

Yeah cuz it's nice that Thome got off the juice last year! Just in time for a clean Sock to break (not tie) the asteriked record.

Baby Fisk
05-10-2006, 03:01 PM
Yeah cuz it's nice that Thome got off the juice last year! Just in time for a clean Sock to break (not tie) the asteriked record.
Huh? :?:

The Wall
05-10-2006, 03:04 PM
Just one of those quirky rules, I guess. Someone years ago decided if you hit into a DP you shouldn't get an RBI. :dunno:
They changed that a couple years back and I remember Hawk saying it was the right thing.

Berkules
05-10-2006, 03:12 PM
Huh? :?:

Sorry baby...its that damn california slang i guess....I'm saying Thome was obviously a juicer earlier in his career- he got off and was injury prone. Now he's pulled a Giambi and he's the man again- clean. So...it's time for a clean SOX player to break that record...that should have an asterisk, hence it is asterisked...i forgot the s

:D:

Ol' No. 2
05-10-2006, 03:16 PM
Ooooo...way to liven up a dull thread.

[pulls up chair to watch the fireworks]

Baby Fisk
05-10-2006, 03:19 PM
I'm saying Thome was obviously a juicer earlier in his career-
How do you know this? You seem very positive about it.

batmanZoSo
05-10-2006, 03:22 PM
How do you know this? You seem very positive about it.

Naturally, because early in his career he was much slimmer and hit less homers.

Baby Fisk
05-10-2006, 03:25 PM
Naturally, because early in his career he was much slimmer and hit less homers.
Thanks for clarifying. Now that he's slimming down again and hitting the odd token homer, the proof is before our very eyes.

daveeym
05-10-2006, 03:25 PM
How do you know this? You seem very positive about it.Dude because he was on Cleveland, Bro. They all cheat in that unenlightened backwater, gas guzzling, pollution infested burg.

Baby Fisk
05-10-2006, 03:31 PM
Dude because he was on Cleveland, Bro. They all cheat in that unenlightened backwater, gas guzzling, pollution infested burg.
I think that just means he wore his hat crooked. Now that he's with the Sox, he's wearing it straight again. Fo shizzle daveazizzle.

spiffie
05-10-2006, 03:32 PM
They changed that a couple years back and I remember Hawk saying it was the right thing.
Actually after ON2 said that I looked it up and he was right according to the MLB rule book.

spiffie
05-10-2006, 03:33 PM
Sorry baby...its that damn california slang i guess....I'm saying Thome was obviously a juicer earlier in his career- he got off and was injury prone. Now he's pulled a Giambi and he's the man again- clean. So...it's time for a clean SOX player to break that record...that should have an asterisk, hence it is asterisked...i forgot the s

:D:

:hawk
*clears throat*

daveeym
05-10-2006, 03:38 PM
:hawk
*clears throat* Been seeing a lot less of that over the last six months. Been kinda nice. I guess that's what winning does for ya. But it is a good time to shake the cobwebs off.

fquaye149
05-10-2006, 03:49 PM
Then what would it be called if a man is up with bases loaded and no outs, batter hits into a 6-4-3 DP, run scores and man on 2nd goes to 3rd?

That's called the following: Fielder's Choice, no RBI

WSox8404
05-10-2006, 04:25 PM
What I mean is they win games 9-1 and 10-2. They don't win 1-run games on RBI GIDPs. They don't have zero guys hitting .300, they have six. They have the sexy stats to go with the amazing record.

Pods should be there in another week or two. That would leave us with the first seven players hitting above .300. And we aren't talking .301 or .304. They are in the .320's and .330's. Unreal. Uribe and BA will eventually get to around .250 or so. Even though I doubt we will finish the year with 7 guys hitting .300 or better, if it did happen that might be one of the best lineups of all time.

Berkules
05-10-2006, 04:33 PM
It just seems relatively obvious, or at least logical, that Thome's Cleveland years were spent juiced...his size, slugging (upwards of .650 a couple years I think) and then his slow recovery through the steroid-crackdown are all indicators.

Like I mentioned, it reminds me of Giambi who just dropped off completely then worked hard and he's back as a huge threat. I wanted to sign him in the off-season but I think I'm pretty pleased with JT

Zednem700
05-10-2006, 04:53 PM
Whoa whoa whoa, people actually think it is LIKELY that the Sox will win 116, Thome will hit 73 homeruns, drive in 187, and score 171. That Konerko will get 203 hits, Iguchi will get 219 hits and Crede will strike out 11 fewer times than he homers. I love the Sox, but if people are interested, I'm open to taking action on those, I'll take the under on all of them, except the Crede thing, I'll take the over on that one (gap between homeruns and Ks).

sullythered
05-10-2006, 04:55 PM
It just seems relatively obvious, or at least logical, that Thome's Cleveland years were spent juiced...his size, slugging (upwards of .650 a couple years I think) and then his slow recovery through the steroid-crackdown are all indicators.

Like I mentioned, it reminds me of Giambi who just dropped off completely then worked hard and he's back as a huge threat. I wanted to sign him in the off-season but I think I'm pretty pleased with JT

By that logic (ha!) every power hitter baseball has been on roids. I guess you assume Manny Ramirez is on the stuff as well. Also, one season injured is hardly a "slow recovery through the steroid-crackdown." Jim Thome came into the league built like a brick house, and I imagine he has always been that way. He hasn't shown any of the eye test indicators (rapid growth, spurt in power numbers) that would raise an eyebrow.

JohnBasedowYoda
05-10-2006, 05:00 PM
Wow, HomeFish turns a positive into a negative yet again.

The universal symbol for homefish?

http://scitec.uwichill.edu.bb/cmp/online/P10F/images/inverter_symbol.gif

WhiteSoxFan84
05-10-2006, 05:05 PM
As long as we're "on pace" to win another ring, I'm happy. All the other numbers can suck or be larger than life and it wouldn't matter.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-10-2006, 05:11 PM
I haven't learned a damned thing from this thread except to confirm two things I already knew.

1.) The average fan has NO CLUE how to interpret the meaning of statistics. The recent threads fretting about Detroit's little run and any thread concerning the latest "facts" from Baseball Prospectus prove the same point.

2.) HomeFish is the lamest poster at WSI. He now craps his pants today for nothing more than knowing he'll likely crap his pants sometime in the future, too.

Let's see if Berkrules can produce all the photographic proof that Jim Thome entered the league as a skinny runt, or that he looks any different today than he did when he wasn't producing 2-3 years ago.

:kukoo:

:nandrolone:
"Berkrules needs to get a clue about obvious juicers."

http://flyingsock.com/BaseballCards/Sosa91.jpg

Johnny Mostil
05-10-2006, 05:15 PM
As long as we're "on pace" to win another ring, I'm happy. All the other numbers can suck or be larger than life and it wouldn't matter.

Yep. And the Sox currently have at least a 3.5 game lead to have an opportunity to do that--or a 4 game lead if you want to look at wild card standings this early in the long, long, long season of baseball.

As a Cub fan friend told me today, the best part of baseball is speculation based upon copious record-keeping, with no possible hope of a control group . . .

gobears1987
05-10-2006, 05:21 PM
What this means is that the offense will eventually slow down, because they are not going to put those numbers up consistently over an entire season. That just simply doesn't happen. Anderson and Uribe might improve, yes (and Uribe almost certainly will by the end of the season), but that won't make up for the decline of the top and middle of the order. I was wondering how long it would be until the obligatory Homefish post was in this thread.

Berkules
05-10-2006, 05:46 PM
I haven't learned a damned thing from this thread except to confirm two things I already knew.

1.) The average fan has NO CLUE how to interpret the meaning of statistics. The recent threads fretting about Detroit's little run and any thread concerning the latest "facts" from Baseball Prospectus prove the same point.

2.) HomeFish is the lamest poster at WSI. He now craps his pants today for nothing more than knowing he'll likely crap his pants sometime in the future, too.

Let's see if Berkrules can produce all the photographic proof that Jim Thome entered the league as a skinny runt, or that he looks any different today than he did when he wasn't producing 2-3 years ago.

:kukoo:

:nandrolone:
"Berkrules needs to get a clue about obvious juicers."

http://flyingsock.com/BaseballCards/Sosa91.jpg

First of all it's Berkules not Berkrules. Secondly, I wasn't the one that said he was skinny and stole bases...I was just stating my opinion that I've always thought Thome was a Juicer. Lastly, I'm not trying to say I know everything about Thome's career but in the 90s he gave me the impression that he was probably on something- whether roids or andro or whatever. Frankly I don't care now. This started with someone saying how cool it would be if Thome hit 73 and I just replied that it would be great for someone who we all know is clean (whether he was or wasn't in the past doesn't even matter) to hold one of the most prestigious records in baseball.

Not trying to ruin this thread at all- I'm relatively new to WSI and I'm not trying to establish a negative repoire.

I think we can all agree that this team is going to end up with much better numbers than they did last year....what they're on pace for is fun to speculate, but there is still no doubt, even if Thome doesn't hit 162 jacks, that this team is one of the best offensive Sox teams ever.

GO HAEGER!

Berkules
05-10-2006, 05:50 PM
he was skinnier but who doesn't get bigger with age?
http://gradedcardcenter.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/thome.jpg

QCIASOXFAN
05-10-2006, 05:59 PM
I Luuuuuuuvvvvv how Joe makes contact now.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-10-2006, 06:08 PM
he was skinnier but who doesn't get bigger with age?


Yeah, sure. While sorting through his minor league cards, why not post 1 or 2 more from little league, too?
:nuts:

Thome has been in the major leagues since 1991. He started producing all-star numbers in the mid-90's. Unlike a certain ballplayer who went from small to big to small again, Thome's outward appearance and production haven't changed. He only had 193 AB's last year! You're hanging your roid conspiracy on THAT???

:kukoo:

Berkules
05-10-2006, 06:23 PM
Yeah, sure. While sorting through his minor league cards, why not post 1 or 2 more from little league, too?
:nuts:

Thome has been in the major leagues since 1991. He started producing all-star numbers in the mid-90's. Unlike a certain ballplayer who went from small to big to small again, Thome's outward appearance and production haven't changed. He only had 193 AB's last year! You're hanging your roid conspiracy on THAT???

:kukoo:
Man why are you attacking me? I had never thought about what he looked like in 1990 so I just googled "thome rookie." Would you chill out? There is no "roid conspiracy" here, I am just of the opinion that Thome probably took some performance-enhancing drugs sometime in his career. If you disagree with me then oh well...it's one thing to have a conversation and it's another to use multiple question marks and kukoo faces. To be honest I didn't follow Thome's career once he went to the Phillies and you're probably much more learned in his stats and injuries but I was just stating an opinion.

"Opinions are like a-holes; everyone has one and most of em stink."

Cheers to a truce? :gulp:

PaleHoseGeorge
05-10-2006, 06:39 PM
....To be honest I didn't follow Thome's career once he went to the Phillies and you're probably much more learned in his stats and injuries but I was just stating an opinion...

So basically you come to a website and post an opinion that Jim Thome's fall in production in Philadelphia is based on EXACTLY NOTHING, the sum total of what you admit you know about that period.

Yeah, go ahead and complain about me using the :kukoo: on you. You're doing a fine job proving my point without it.

santo=dorf
05-10-2006, 07:00 PM
It just seems relatively obvious, or at least logical, that Thome's Cleveland years were spent juiced...his size, slugging (upwards of .650 a couple years I think) and then his slow recovery through the steroid-crackdown are all indicators.

Like I mentioned, it reminds me of Giambi who just dropped off completely then worked hard and he's back as a huge threat. I wanted to sign him in the off-season but I think I'm pretty pleased with JT
Ever think that his great numbers are due to him being a great hitter? :rolleyes:

:hurt <------juicer too? Look at the injuries he's dealt with the last few seasons.


:rolleyes:

Berkules
05-10-2006, 07:05 PM
Ever think that his great numbers are due to him being a great hitter? :rolleyes:

:hurt <------juicer too? Look at the injuries he's dealt with the last few seasons.


:rolleyes:

absolutely. like i said im not s-talking on thome and im not trying to start a conspiracy and/or trouble. im glad someone else has chimed in on the topic. i didnt even really want to get into a discussion on thome and roids..its not on my agenda. i think were all in agreement that we want him to break the single season hr record right?

my last post about this--- sorry, george and everyone else, for ruining the thread.

game on in one minute. lets spell knuckleball with 27 Ks