PDA

View Full Version : 2006 Sox = 2000 Sox


Chisox1500
07-04-2006, 10:15 AM
There are a lot of similarities between the teams, some kinda eerie:

Both teams had a starter start out 8-0. (Baldwin and Conteras)

Both teams had sluggers return to form and have MVP type years.

Both teams turned lefty journeyman relievers into setup men. (Wunsch and Thorton)

The big time comebacks, the reliance on offense and the shaky pitching are characteristics of both teams. While it has been exciting to watch the offense this year, I hope that the 2005 Sox or an improved version will be back by October.

TaylorStSox
07-04-2006, 10:24 AM
They are similar, but this team has playoff experience. Even though the pitching has been disappointing, it's still better than that 2000 team. Honestly, that 2000 team's staff was garbage. I still have hope that 4 out of our 5 guys will come around and dominate as the year wears on.

4th Gen. Sox Fan
07-04-2006, 10:25 AM
Wunsch was a rookie in 2000

Thome25
07-04-2006, 10:56 AM
This is baseball. While the outcomes are usually different, it's still the same game year in and year out. There's going to be these "eerie" similarites between teams every year. I'm sure there's something we can compare between the 2006 and the 1917 teams too.

I'm getting sick of all of the threads comparing this year's team to the 2004, 2000, etc. teams. Let's enjoy the ride this year and see what happens. Hopefully the 2006 Sox are similar to the 2005 Sox and win us another championship!! GO WHITE SOX!!!!!!!!

ewokpelts
07-04-2006, 10:58 AM
the difference is that the team won the world serieslast year.
the 1999 team sucked, thus allowing the 2000 sox to fly in with low expectations....
the 2006 team is EXPECTED TO REPEAT, if not that, then to make the ws

areilly
07-04-2006, 10:59 AM
They remind me more of the late-90's Yankees teams. You didn't really see those guys coming out with a sub-3.00 team ERA on the year or anything like that, but they just found a way to win day in and day out. Which, in the end, is really all I care about.

sullythered
07-04-2006, 11:06 AM
No.

Different players, different team. We didn't have ANY clutch hitters in 2000. Even Pauly wasn't really clutch back then. Totally different situation now.

starboy0
07-04-2006, 11:12 AM
Big bats as in 2000 but I believe our pitching is better and we are better equipped to manufacture runs.

I think this team will win more consistently in the 2nd half than either the 2000 or 2005 teams.

Huisj
07-04-2006, 11:24 AM
And how about the difference in the standings this year compared to that year? Though they had virtually the same record on this date in 2000, they had such a huge lead in the division that they pretty much had it won by the middle of the month. That certainly isn't the case this year.

And not to mention the pitching injuries that year. Let's hope nothing like that happens this year. Baldwin and Eldred both missed time in the second half, and Parque limped to the end and never pitched well again after his playoff start, and Sirotka never pitched again at all. If it weren't for Foulke, Howry, Simas, and Wunsch being solid out of the pen, they could have been in trouble in September.

Baby Fisk
07-04-2006, 11:28 AM
For my money, 2006 Sox = 1954 Sox.

gobears1987
07-04-2006, 11:32 AM
The only similarity between 2000 and 2006 is that both teams had Paulie, but he is a much better batter today than he was then.

ondafarm
07-04-2006, 11:38 AM
This (2006) team's pitching is far better than in 2000. This team is able to manufacture runs, unlike the 2000 team. This team is full of champions and has a manager who knows how to win.

Chips
07-04-2006, 11:39 AM
The only similarity between 2000 and 2006 is that both teams had Paulie, but he is a much better batter today than he was then.

What about Buehrle and Garland?

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2006, 11:40 AM
This lineup is far more balanced. This lineup features a legitimate leadoff hitter (Ray Durham was not), a truly great #2 hitter (Iguchi), left-handed power (Thome is far better than Valentin), left-handed hitting for average (AJ), and still has comparable right handed power (2006's PK, Dye and Crede are better than 2000's Maggs, Lee and Konerko). Jim Thome is having a season that is at least as good - if not better - than what Frank did in 2000.

This defense is far better (even if it hasn't been as good as last year at turning double plays). Uribe and Crede are far, far better than Herbert Perry and Manos. Iguchi is far better than "fire hydrant" Durham. Anderson is a better defensive CF than Chris Singleton. Dye is a better RF than Maggs. Pods is a better defensive CF than Lee.

2006's pitchers aren't pitching up to their potential, but on the whole they are a far better staff than the 2000 staff.

Buehrle > Sirotka (not even close)
Contreras > Baldwin (not even close)
Garcia > Eldred
Garland > Parque
Vazquez > Kip Wells (Vazquez may be struggling, be he flirted with two no-no's already)

Jenks is better than Howry or Foulke. Wunsch didn't have a 97 mph fastball like Thornton does. But I guess that overall the 2000 team had better middle relief.

The 2000 team was good, but they padded their record against a weaker Central division and weaker league overall (the Yankees won the East with 87 wins). They won 95 games, the most in the AL. This year, 95 wins may not be enough to win the Wild Card!

BeviBall!
07-04-2006, 12:12 PM
We only had depth at catcher in 2000... we have depth everywhere now. This current team is nothing like 2000.

Brian26
07-04-2006, 12:45 PM
and the shaky pitching

The shaky pitching of 2000 and the shaky pitching of the 2006 team are like comparing apples and oranges.

TDog
07-04-2006, 12:59 PM
The shaky pitching of 2000 and the shaky pitching of the 2006 team are like comparing apples and oranges.

Indeed. Both teams recorded 11-run innings, but the second-place team (to this point) of 2006 is stronger in pitching, defense and hitting than than the first-place team of 2000.

The 2006 Sox have a better manager, too.

Brian26
07-04-2006, 01:04 PM
Indeed. Both teams recorded 11-run innings, but the second-place team (to this point) of 2006 is stronger in pitching, defense and hitting than than the first-place team of 2000.

The 2006 Sox have a better manager, too.

The starting five of Sirotka, Eldred, Baldwin, Parque....and Kip Wells. Talk about smoke and mirrors. That was just a crazy year of everything coming together and the stars aligning. None of those guys could even be the 5th starter on this 2006 team.

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2006, 01:12 PM
In 2000, the AL still was stronger than the NL but not by as much. The AL wasn't nearly as strong as then as it is now.

The Red Sox were 85-77 and finished in second place in 2000. Oakland and Seattle made the playoffs with 91 wins each.

There were three 90-win teams in the AL that year. This year, there may be eight. There may be two 100-win teams this year.

That 2000 team was good but they didn't face near the competition as the 2006 team. Just look at all the great pitching in the AL Central now. Back then, the Sox had the best rotation in the Central with Mike Sirotka as the ace and Jim Parque getting 32 starts!

Fuller_Schettman
07-04-2006, 01:19 PM
The 2000 team had an admin named Lincoln

The 2006 team has an admin named Kennedy

Coincidence? (http://hcs.harvard.edu/demon/issues/nov_20_1999/lincoln-kennedy/lincoln-kennedy.html) You decide...

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2006, 01:26 PM
The 2000 team had an admin named Lincoln

The 2006 team has an admin named Kennedy

Coincidence? (http://hcs.harvard.edu/demon/issues/nov_20_1999/lincoln-kennedy/lincoln-kennedy.html) You decide...

The 2000 Sox lost to the Mariners. The 2006 Sox are depicted as Pirates in Pale Hose Six. :wink:

:)

fquaye149
07-04-2006, 02:44 PM
There are a lot of similarities between the teams, some kinda eerie:

Both teams had a starter start out 8-0. (Baldwin and Conteras)

Both teams had sluggers return to form and have MVP type years.

Both teams turned lefty journeyman relievers into setup men. (Wunsch and Thorton)

The big time comebacks, the reliance on offense and the shaky pitching are characteristics of both teams. While it has been exciting to watch the offense this year, I hope that the 2005 Sox or an improved version will be back by October.

There are a lot of similarities. It's kind of eerie:

Both teams had a left-handed ace who ate up a lot of innings

Both teams had a fast, below average defensively left-fielder

Both teams had an overweight closer who could top out at 100 mph

Both teams had an (over?)aggressive 3rd base coach

Both teams had a fiery, sometimes politically incorrect manager

CLR01
07-04-2006, 05:22 PM
When I remember Carlos Lee (13 SB in 2000), I don't think of "fast," certainly not anywhere near "fast" like Pods.

Jerry Manuel was fiery and politically incorrect? Compared to Guillen, Manuel was comatose.

Who was the overweight closer who threw 100 mph on the 2000 squad? I don't remember Howry (6-5, 220 lbs.) or Foulke (6-0, 195 lbs.) as "overweight."

He is comparing the 2005 White Sox to the 2006 White Sox. Titles are your friend. :smile:

Tragg
07-04-2006, 05:39 PM
It's similar to 2000, except that this team is much better on Defense, on Offense in starting pitching and in relief pitching.
Perry, Singleton, Baldwin, Valentin, Parque, Fordyce, Eldred ----all starters in 2000 - couldn't make this club's roster.

soxfanreggie
07-04-2006, 05:49 PM
Dude, you totally meant to say 2006 > 2000 right? C'mon, having 2,006 White Sox is 6 greater than 2,000 White Sox :tongue:

Pierzynski 12
07-04-2006, 05:54 PM
This is something new.:rolleyes:

Frater Perdurabo
07-04-2006, 06:19 PM
He is comparing the 2005 White Sox to the 2006 White Sox. Titles are your friend. :smile:

Nevermind! :redface:

fquaye149
07-04-2006, 07:30 PM
:wink:
Nevermind! :redface:

SaltyPretzel
07-04-2006, 07:42 PM
The only similarities between the two teams is that they wore the same jersey.:threadsucks

Blueprint1
07-04-2006, 07:46 PM
:?: I don't think so.

Lip Man 1
07-04-2006, 09:10 PM
All I hope is that the 2006 season doesn't end the same way the 2000 season did...then carry over into the following season because a half dozen pitchers had surgery.

Lip

fquaye149
07-04-2006, 09:43 PM
All I hope is that the 2006 season doesn't end the same way the 2000 season did...then carry over into the following season because a half dozen pitchers had surgery.

Lip

Well, it could conceivably happen, so better start expecting it too...

Ah! it's good to have the old Lip back, we missed you :smile:

FarWestChicago
07-04-2006, 10:10 PM
Ah! it's good to have the old Lip back, we missed you :smile:Yep, he's back. Clear out the deep end, The Master is holding court. :D:

DumpJerry
07-05-2006, 12:27 AM
Both teams had a fiery, sometimes politically incorrect manager

Being "fiery" was General Chaos' biggest asset as Manager.

:jerry
Fiery? Did someone actually say fiery? *blushing* I'm being compared to Ozzie Guillen? *blushing more*

Hey! What's this poster's WSI screen name?

Chips
07-05-2006, 12:30 AM
Being "fiery" was General Chaos' biggest asset as Manager.

:jerry
Fiery? Did someone actually say fiery? *blushing* I'm being compared to Ozzie Guillen? *blushing more*

Hey! What's this poster's WSI screen name?

No ****, Jerry Manuel is nowhere near fiery.

TornLabrum
07-05-2006, 07:27 AM
Being "fiery" was General Chaos' biggest asset as Manager.


Please get our South Park reference right.

:KW

"I am the artist formerly known as Prof. Chaos."

:jerry

"My name is Gen. Disarray."

DumpJerry
07-05-2006, 07:32 AM
Please get our South Park reference right.
I've been trying to erase the memories of that era, so things get mixed up. I'm still trying to understand what the poster meant by Manuel being "politically incorrect" since JM took the Calvin Coolidge approach to life.

wdelaney72
07-05-2006, 07:55 AM
Our starters will be fine, and are MUCH better than the 2000 rotation. Even considering some of the struggles of our starters, I still don't see a better rotation out there in either league.

I agree with the post that said the only comparison is they wear the same uniform.

HerzogVon
07-05-2006, 08:32 AM
I've been trying to erase the memories of that era, so things get mixed up. I'm still trying to understand what the poster meant by Manuel being "politically incorrect" since JM took the Calvin Coolidge approach to life.

Same here. Mr. Manuel was the "Zen Master Lite". The only connection Ozzie has to Zen is that some consider him "in-Zen-in-the-membrane".

:b&b

fquaye149
07-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Being "fiery" was General Chaos' biggest asset as Manager.

:jerry
Fiery? Did someone actually say fiery? *blushing* I'm being compared to Ozzie Guillen? *blushing more*

Hey! What's this poster's WSI screen name?

this has already been addressed in the thread. It's my fault for assuming people would read post headlines.

DumpJerry
07-05-2006, 11:18 AM
this has already been addressed in the thread. It's my fault for assuming people would read post headlines.
Your post said "Both teams had a manager......." which implies you're talking about two different people. Secondly, this thread is a comparison of the 2000 team and 2006 team. You responded to a posting about some of the similarities between those two teams. Why on Earth would you respond with an irrelevant (to the thread) posting about this year's team and last year's team?

AJTrenkle
07-05-2006, 11:37 AM
This Sox team plays better defense and has better starting pitching. Also, that team relied on so many starters who had injury issues (Eldred most notably).

fquaye149
07-05-2006, 04:56 PM
Your post said "Both teams had a manager......." which implies you're talking about two different people. Secondly, this thread is a comparison of the 2000 team and 2006 team. You responded to a posting about some of the similarities between those two teams. Why on Earth would you respond with an irrelevant (to the thread) posting about this year's team and last year's team?

I'll answer your last question first:

Because I think it's stupid to compare this team to a past team by citing arbitrary similarities.

I also think you can compare this team to any team in sox history using the model he used and come to a similar conclusion.

I also think this team has a lot in common with the 2005 team that won the world series than with the 2000 team.

as for why I said "both teams had a manager..." well, my headline read: "2005 Sox=2006 Sox" ...so to be quite honest, I WAS talking about two teams.

Any more questions?

DumpJerry
07-06-2006, 12:33 AM
I'll answer your last question first:

Because I think it's stupid to compare this team to a past team by citing arbitrary similarities.

I also think you can compare this team to any team in sox history using the model he used and come to a similar conclusion.

I also think this team has a lot in common with the 2005 team that won the world series than with the 2000 team.

as for why I said "both teams had a manager..." well, my headline read: "2005 Sox=2006 Sox" ...so to be quite honest, I WAS talking about two teams.

Any more questions?
One point cancels the other one. True, the 2005 Sox and 2006 Sox are two different teams, but Ozzie is and was the same person both years, so why make a comparison as if there was a different manager one year to the next?

fquaye149
07-06-2006, 04:39 AM
One point cancels the other one. True, the 2005 Sox and 2006 Sox are two different teams, but Ozzie is and was the same person both years, so why make a comparison as if there was a different manager one year to the next?

If you read the post every person is being compared to himself.

I'm making fun of the structure of the original post.

Obviously not my most effective post ever, but whatever.

I'm sick of this.