PDA

View Full Version : Hawk on the Score...


Kilroy
02-05-2002, 03:40 PM
"We're gonna win the division..."

I like that kinda talk.

irish rover
02-05-2002, 03:42 PM
Richie is suppose to be on too

Meatpants
02-05-2002, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy
"We're gonna win the division..."

I like that kinda talk.

A friend of mine (Cubs fan) just asked me "I hear all the Sox talking about how they're going to win the Central. Why aren't they talking about how they're going to win the World Series??"


I begrudgingly admit it's a good question.

bjmarte
02-05-2002, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by Meatpants


A friend of mine (Cubs fan) just asked me "I hear all the Sox talking about how they're going to win the Central. Why aren't they talking about how they're going to win the World Series??"


I begrudgingly admit it's a good question.

Too afraid of the jinx.

Randar68
02-05-2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Meatpants


A friend of mine (Cubs fan) just asked me "I hear all the Sox talking about how they're going to win the Central. Why aren't they talking about how they're going to win the World Series??"


Please refer him to the Yankee's 130 million dollar payroll, more than double ours, and around 35-40% higher than the Cubs....

Championships are won in the front office today....

What did the D'Backs do? They bought two of the best pitchers of the last 10 years, and got lucky with a couple of veterans, and lost 20 million bucks....

Kilroy
02-05-2002, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by Meatpants


A friend of mine (Cubs fan) just asked me "I hear all the Sox talking about how they're going to win the Central. Why aren't they talking about how they're going to win the World Series??"


I begrudgingly admit it's a good question.


You gotta walk before you can run...

irish rover
02-05-2002, 03:56 PM
anyone else listening, did hawk just say Bull ****

lololo

Kilroy
02-05-2002, 04:00 PM
I heard that too. Hawk tellin it like it is...

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by Meatpants


A friend of mine (Cubs fan) just asked me "I hear all the Sox talking about how they're going to win the Central. Why aren't they talking about how they're going to win the World Series??"


I begrudgingly admit it's a good question.

One step at a time. Only if your head is as swollen as Sammy Sosa's do you make predictions about what will happen in October before the season starts.

I refuse to make postseason predictions - anything can (and usually does) happen in a short series.

the A's came within a hair's breadth of eliminating the Yankees in both 2000 and 2001. Had they been successful either time, people wouldn't be making comments like "championships are won in the front office." All the money in the world won't guarantee you a world championship.

NUCatsFan
02-05-2002, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by irish rover
anyone else listening, did hawk just say Bull ****

lololo

I, for one, would like a full recap of the conv once it's over.

Kilroy
02-05-2002, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by NUCatsFan
I, for one, would like a full recap of the conv once it's over.

Well, I the meat of the conversation was this:

Hawk said that he's not concerned w/ Frank coming back, defense, offense, or pitching. He is concerned, however, about those pitchers that are coming off injury. He said that lots of times with the surgeries, it takes a full season of competition to get back where you used to be.

Randar68
02-05-2002, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
the A's came within a hair's breadth of eliminating the Yankees in both 2000 and 2001. Had they been successful either time, people wouldn't be making comments like "championships are won in the front office." All the money in the world won't guarantee you a world championship.

You are totally clueless if you think it doesn't take either money, or extraordinary luck to be in position to win a championship these days.

Why were the A's where they were? Front office
Why were the Yankees where they were? Front Office and their money
Why were the D'Backs where they were? Front Office and their money

let's be realistic here, this isn't the golden age of level and fair competition here...

There's a reason why the NFL is the most popular of the 4 major sports today....

duke of dorwood
02-05-2002, 04:38 PM
And the uncertainty of the pitchers coming back right out of the gate makes the Ritchie trade of 3 pitchers, some real depth, a big questionmark.

duke of dorwood
02-05-2002, 04:39 PM
:hawk

I love it when you analyze

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


You are totally clueless if you think it doesn't take either money, or extraordinary luck to be in position to win a championship these days.

Why were the A's where they were? Front office
Why were the Yankees where they were? Front Office and their money
Why were the D'Backs where they were? Front Office and their money

let's be realistic here, this isn't the golden age of level and fair competition here...

There's a reason why the NFL is the most popular of the 4 major sports today....

Oh, my bad. When you said "front office", I thought you meant "money".

All the money in the world doesn't mean squat if you don't spend it wisely. Ask the Rangers and the Dodgers and the Red Sox and the Mets...

But smart teams can get by, at least for a while, without a huge payroll. The main advantage the Yankees have is they never have is that they never have to dump payroll. If Jorge Posada has a career-ending injury, they can write him off and go get someone else without missing the $50 Million. That would kill basically every other team.

But I'm just repeating what you already said.

Randar68
02-05-2002, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And the uncertainty of the pitchers coming back right out of the gate makes the Ritchie trade of 3 pitchers, some real depth, a big questionmark.

To be honest, I think we have the guys and the number capable to compensat eif all these guys aren't healthy. If 2 or 3 of them obviously need some time in AAA or even a whole season of it, I think we have the guys, Vining, Guerrier, Rauch, etc., to fully compensate and more than "fill their shoes"...

Just one man's opinion though...

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
And the uncertainty of the pitchers coming back right out of the gate makes the Ritchie trade of 3 pitchers, some real depth, a big questionmark.

That trade made me nervous, too. If someone in the bullpen is lost for the season, that's going to be tough to make up.

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


You are totally clueless if you think it doesn't take either money, or extraordinary luck to be in position to win a championship these days.




The only thing I would add to my previous thought is that the front office can only get you to the playoffs. The Yankees are virtually guaranteed a postseason appearance in 2002, but all that Steinbrenner can do once the postseason starts is cross his fingers and hope for the best. Giambi could go 0-for-20 in the ALDS, Mussina could get shelled, Shane Spencer could drop a ball in the bottom of the ninth inning.

Any team that makes the postseason has a shot to win it all. The Patriots just proved that, and so did the Diamondbacks. The Diamondbacks weren't even the favorite in the NL at regular season's end.

Did the Yankees give themselves a big advantage? Sure. Would I be surprised if they won it all again next year? Not at all. But not even George Steinbrenner can guarantee a championship.

All the Sox have to do is win the central, and then anything's possible.

bc2k
02-05-2002, 05:18 PM
I enjoyed a caller named Frank who said how Bob Howry and Keith Foulke combined to blow 21 games. The sox were ahead at the time of these two men entered, and wound up losing 21 although I'm sure Howry lost 17 of them. There were also a number of games when howry came in when the sox were only down one or two runs and let up many runs putting the game out of reach. It wasn't the injuries that hurt us as much as Howry. That is the division right there. Thanks for nothing, Bobby Howry.

Randar68
02-05-2002, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


The only thing I would add to my previous thought is that the front office can only get you to the playoffs. The Yankees are virtually guaranteed a postseason appearance in 2002, but all that Steinbrenner can do once the postseason starts is cross his fingers and hope for the best. Giambi could go 0-for-20 in the ALDS, Mussina could get shelled, Shane Spencer could drop a ball in the bottom of the ninth inning.


That is essentially the point I was trying to make. Economics decide who the perrenial contenders will be. The A's had a great run, and even with all their pitching, what do they have without Giambi? They don't have the economic capability to hold onto their players as time passes. They are a AAA team for NY and Texas...



Originally posted by czalgosz
All the Sox have to do is win the central, and then anything's possible.

Any team that makes the postseason has a shot to win it all. The Patriots just proved that, and so did the Diamondbacks. The Diamondbacks weren't even the favorite in the NL at regular season's end.

While this is true, I am certainly not going to put my money on this Sox team over the Yanks in a 7 game series...odds are odds, but remote odds are just that...

The difference between Football and baseball: Anybody can win on any given day, but more often then not, the better team will win 4 out of 7 days...

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 05:49 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
I enjoyed a caller named Frank who said how Bob Howry and Keith Foulke combined to blow 21 games. The sox were ahead at the time of these two men entered, and wound up losing 21 although I'm sure Howry lost 17 of them. There were also a number of games when howry came in when the sox were only down one or two runs and let up many runs putting the game out of reach. It wasn't the injuries that hurt us as much as Howry. That is the division right there. Thanks for nothing, Bobby Howry.

That's fun to say, but that simply isn't true. Howry and Foulke combined for 9 blown saves (3 for Foulke, 6 for Howry). Howry had some rough outings, but to say that he cost the Sox the division by himself is hyperbole, plain and simple.

As for the games in which the Sox were behind and Howry gave up more runs, that's kind of speculative whether he cost us those games. Like Sept 19 vs. Yankees, for instance - Sox were losing 4-3 going into the ninth - they bring in Howry for the top of the ninth, he gave up two runs, the Sox lost 6-3. Maybe those two runs killed the Sox, maybe they would have scored in the ninth against Rivera, but maybe not. Howry cost us some games, but you can say that about any reliever.

BTW, didnt' Howry pitch hurt most of last season? I think he'll bounce back next year.

I mean, look at these numbers -

1998 - 3.15 ERA
1999 - 3.59 ERA
2000 - 3.17 ERA
2001 - 4.61 ERA

Don't you think that's a little anomalous? Hitters batted .216 against Howry in 2000, .279 in 2001. I think Howry's velocity was down, and suddenly he became hittable. If he's healthy, he can be very good. It's not very fair to criticize him, IMO.

Soxboyrob
02-05-2002, 05:53 PM
I think that in addition to the blown saves, the caller was adding the number of losses that Howry and Foulke incurred. Foulke's losses were a killer last year...what did he have, 9? I tend to believe that Foulke's 9 losses were a statistically anomaly and am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He should be back to being the regular old Foulke. It would be nice if the guy could be counted on when coming in during tie game, though.

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Randar68




The difference between Football and baseball: Anybody can win on any given day, but more often then not, the better team will win 4 out of 7 days...

I don't disagree with you, but I don't think the Yankees were the best team in the AL last season. The best team in the AL hasn't represented the AL since 1998. The Yankees were never really head and shoulders above the pack after '98 - they would get into the playoffs by virtue of being in a weak division, and then let Clemens carry them through.

I still think the A's will win their division this season. But you're right - if the current CBA is in place when Hudson, Mulder, and Zito become Free Agents, they will lose those guys. But Oakland is kind of a bad place, IMO, to have a baseball team. The A's just don't get the support they deserve.

Randar68
02-05-2002, 06:10 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I don't disagree with you, but I don't think the Yankees were the best team in the AL last season. The best team in the AL hasn't represented the AL since 1998. The Yankees were never really head and shoulders above the pack after '98 - they would get into the playoffs by virtue of being in a weak division, and then let Clemens carry them through.

When the Lakers win the title again this year, despit likely not finishing with the best record, will you say they aren't the best team in Basketball? Veteran teams know how to pace themselves and get themselves ready for postseason play. They are confident and good enough to know that once they get there, they will win.

Lakers and Yankees are a good analogy here, IMO...

Again, the Yanks could squeek into the payoffs and even if they had crap-ass 4th and 5th starters, it wouldn't matter, because they have 3 #1 pitchers!

bc2k
02-05-2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz



I think Howry's velocity was down, and suddenly he became hittable. If he's healthy, he can be very good. It's not very fair to criticize him, IMO.

I will criticize Howry because I do not believe his injury was the cause for his rise in era. I strongly believe it was because he doesn't have a breaking ball. I mean, his fastball doesn't even more either. May I suggest to you to watch the pitchtrax on television. Howry's pitch sequences are like lasers. Although watching his pitches live on televison are proof enough. Am I the only one who sees this? I pitched in high school and can figure out this mans problem. Can't nardi see this. The only reason i can see why he doesn't throw a breaking ball would be because of his injury? I don't even know what injury he had, but if it was an elbow, I could understand not throwing it. But if it put too much stress on him, he shouldn't have been throwing anyway. Every fourteen year old I know, has at least two pitches. Howry sucks.

Soxboyrob
02-05-2002, 06:15 PM
Howry's injury was shoulder related and not in his elbow. Howry has a slider that he uses somewhat frequently. The problem w/ that is that it too much resembles the heater. The heater is 93-94 w/ little movement while the slider is about 88-89, also w/ little movement. He needs either a change or a pitch w/ more movement. Can't this be taught to some degree?

Daver
02-05-2002, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by bc2k


I will criticize Howry because I do not believe his injury was the cause for his rise in era. I strongly believe it was because he doesn't have a breaking ball. I mean, his fastball doesn't even more either. May I suggest to you to watch the pitchtrax on television. Howry's pitch sequences are like lasers. Although watching his pitches live on televison are proof enough. Am I the only one who sees this? I pitched in high school and can figure out this mans problem. Can't nardi see this. The only reason i can see why he doesn't throw a breaking ball would be because of his injury? I don't even know what injury he had, but if it was an elbow, I could understand not throwing it. But if it put too much stress on him, he shouldn't have been throwing anyway. Every fourteen year old I know, has at least two pitches. Howry sucks.

He can throw a curve,but not for a strike,never could.He has been a one pitch pitcher his entire career with the Sox,and asking that Nardi fix the problem?ROFL.You'd be better off getting the ballgirl to do it.

doublem23
02-05-2002, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by bc2k
I will criticize Howry because I do not believe his injury was the cause for his rise in era. I strongly believe it was because he doesn't have a breaking ball. I mean, his fastball doesn't even more either. May I suggest to you to watch the pitchtrax on television. Howry's pitch sequences are like lasers.

I don't buy that. If Howry really had as little stuff as you claim he does, I think MLB hitters would have gotten to him a lot faster than his fourth MLB season. Before 2001, his career ERA was like 3.31...

If his pitches are as hittable as you claim, there's no way he puts up an 3.31 ERA in 193 IP over 3 years.

delben91
02-05-2002, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by irish rover
anyone else listening, did hawk just say Bull ****

lololo

Hey, anyone know where KingXerxes has been? He'd be perfect to run with that kind of Hawk line.

bc2k
02-05-2002, 06:33 PM
two points i would like to make.
1. I don't think it is too much to ask for a major league pitcher to have at least two dependable pitches.
2. I believe it was czal who pointed out to me howry's career era. That era is good. I was shocked at how good it was--on paper. I have never been a stat-hound, but I rarely miss a game. From what I saw from Howry in the 2001 season, he didn't pitch as well as his era says he did. I saw him pitch many innings where the outcome of the game was likely already decided. It seemed whenever we needed a big out, whenever he pitched in the big game, he never came through-especially toward the last two months of the season. Although for the entire season whenever he came in the game to relieve another pitcher with men already on base, all those men came around to score. The other pitchers get charged with the men scoring on them. I would like to see a stat on howry that tells how many inherited runners he allowed to score.

AsInWreck
02-05-2002, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz




Any team that makes the postseason has a shot to win it all. The Patriots just proved that....

Anyone besides me think the Superbowl was fixed?
I've never seen such lack of effort or emotion in my life/rams players just seemed to let the Pats intercept and receive the ball/on both interceptions that lead to td's, the ram's receiver just stood there, didn't even stick his hand out-same thing on many Patriot passes-and during interviews there seemed to be a glaze in the eyes of quite a few players who normally you would imagine would be at least somewhat excited, i don't know, just seemed a little fishy to me.

czalgosz
02-05-2002, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by Randar68


When the Lakers win the title again this year, despit likely not finishing with the best record, will you say they aren't the best team in Basketball? Veteran teams know how to pace themselves and get themselves ready for postseason play. They are confident and good enough to know that once they get there, they will win.

Lakers and Yankees are a good analogy here, IMO...

Again, the Yanks could squeek into the payoffs and even if they had crap-ass 4th and 5th starters, it wouldn't matter, because they have 3 #1 pitchers!

I don't know anything about basketball, so I'm not the one to ask about the Lakers.

I'm not taking anything away from the Yankees, because they know how to perform in the postseason (something the White Sox hitters had no clue how to do in 2000), but they weren't the best team in the AL last season. That's all I'm saying.

RichH55
02-06-2002, 02:19 AM
Originally posted by bc2k
two points i would like to make.
1. I don't think it is too much to ask for a major league pitcher to have at least two dependable pitches.
2. I believe it was czal who pointed out to me howry's career era. That era is good. I was shocked at how good it was--on paper. I have never been a stat-hound, but I rarely miss a game. From what I saw from Howry in the 2001 season, he didn't pitch as well as his era says he did. I saw him pitch many innings where the outcome of the game was likely already decided. It seemed whenever we needed a big out, whenever he pitched in the big game, he never came through-especially toward the last two months of the season. Although for the entire season whenever he came in the game to relieve another pitcher with men already on base, all those men came around to score. The other pitchers get charged with the men scoring on them. I would like to see a stat on howry that tells how many inherited runners he allowed to score.

Its a very result oriented business and before 2000 Howry was getting it done......2001 I'm hoping was just a year out of the norm and with a full year between Howry and the injury, I'm hoping its back to the old Howry....So put me in the camp that think sHowry will rebound