PDA

View Full Version : Sox becoming the AL Braves?


AaronRowandFan33
01-03-2007, 01:01 PM
with all their new young pitching and current veteran pitching, are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves? who for 15 years always had good pitching and attracted top free agents, and had a pitching coach in Mazzone who resurrected numerous careers (wright, hampton, neagle

look at the guys who've passed through Atlanta since 1991. All of them were good solid #2 or #3 pitchers at some point in their career, which is not really as common as people think.

Steve Avery, John Burkett, Odalis Perez, Kevin Millwood, Jason Marquis, Russ Ortiz, Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Jaret Wright, Tim Hudson (I know many of these guys were horrible elsewhere, but they were effective with Atlanta)

Not a Felix Diaz, Dan Wright, Jon Rauch, Josh Stewart, Todd Ritchie, Gary Glover, Rocky Biddle, Sean Lowe, or Jamie Navarro in the bunch. Probably not many ERAs over 4.5 either.

I know how Kenny feels about signing free agents, but it looks like the Sox could be turning into the team who has 4 or 5 good starters every year (12-14 wins, sub 4.00 era), like the Braves. Anchored by Contreras, Buerhle, Garland, and Javy, and with Sisco, Floyd, Haeger, Gio, Danks, McCulloch, Broadway, Masset, Phillips waiting in the wings, the Sox could/should have a top 10 staff for the next 5-8 years. We also know that Kenny is not shy about making a deadline trade (Wells, Garcia, Colon)

Likely, offense will come and go (Dye, Crede, Pods, or Uribe replaced in house by Sweeney, Fields, Rogo, Owens, or Valido or via trades) but the solid, above average starting pitching could/should keep the Sox a contender year in and year out, like the Braves, through into the 2010 decade.

skottyj242
01-03-2007, 01:03 PM
No.

bryPt
01-03-2007, 01:07 PM
hope not, Braves have only won 1 world series. I want more than one.

Iwritecode
01-03-2007, 01:11 PM
hope not, Braves have only won 1 world series. I want more than one.

They also won 14? straight divsion championships? I'd like to see the Sox just make the playoffs 2 years in a row...

Baby Fisk
01-03-2007, 01:12 PM
This comparison would be valid if the Sox actually made the playoffs more often than once every 5-10 years. Never mind the 14 consecutive division titles...

FedEx227
01-03-2007, 01:14 PM
During their top periods they had an almost unlimited payroll due to Turner's money-making, that's where I wouldn't connect the two. The Sox have made no bones about having a very small budget.

Also, they kept their core pitching staff in tact for many years. There is no doubt in any Sox fans mind that in 2008, we wouldn't have kept 3 of our starting five from 05.

Corlose 15
01-03-2007, 01:16 PM
I definitely think that's what Kenny has in mind. Its just way to early for any comparisons. The Sox already do have the 1 championship though.:bandance:

SABRSox
01-03-2007, 01:16 PM
I think the Sox are heading in that direction, but they're not there yet. If they were to re-sign both Mark and Jon, and use their stable of young arms to fill in the rest, I'd think a Braves comparison would be valid.

palehozenychicty
01-03-2007, 01:34 PM
I'd rather that they become baseball's version of the New England Patriots, from being lampooned to being deeply respected.

Flight #24
01-03-2007, 01:36 PM
The Sox have made no bones about having a very small budget.

Don't believe the hype. The Sox do NOT have a "very small budget", it's still top 5-10 in baseball. It's just that the disparity seems to be growing with the teams at the very top (NYY, BOS, CHC, NYM) throwing around ridiculous sums and a lot more than the teams in the "upper middle".

maurice
01-03-2007, 01:36 PM
Are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves?

KW has said that he's trying to emulate the Braves' model.

oeo
01-03-2007, 03:25 PM
During their top periods they had an almost unlimited payroll due to Turner's money-making, that's where I wouldn't connect the two. The Sox have made no bones about having a very small budget.

Also, they kept their core pitching staff in tact for many years. There is no doubt in any Sox fans mind that in 2008, we wouldn't have kept 3 of our starting five from 05.

We still have our core (Buehrle and Garland). I don't think they're going anywhere, either.

ondafarm
01-03-2007, 03:34 PM
The Sox have made no bones about having a very small budget.

The Sox do not have a very small budget. 100 million isn't chickenfeed. The budget is not unlimited like the Yankee$ or extraordinary like the Flubs or BoSawk, but the White Sox budget is very healthy in baseball terms.

TaylorStSox
01-03-2007, 03:50 PM
I can't believe people think we have a "small budget." It's become beyond ridiculous.

downstairs
01-03-2007, 03:50 PM
Forget the playoffs... I still believe they're pretty much a crapshoot.

As far as I am concerned the 1991-2005 Braves are the greatest sports dynasty ever. Maybe I'll let you argue with me with some Yankees dynasties of the 20's, 50's and the like.

No, the White Sox are not yet the Braves. No team may ever be that again.

Dolanski
01-03-2007, 03:56 PM
One, there are worse things to emulate than a team that won their division for over a decade.

Two, we aren't small budget anymore, but we also aren't pissing money down the free agency well. *cough* Cubs *cough*

Three, I love how quickly people seem to have forgotten winning the WS in 05 and are not begging for another title, but DEMANDING one. I want a team that competes no doubt, but I am still savoring 2005. I think after 80 plus years of not having a title, people are starting to get greedy around here...

FedEx227
01-03-2007, 03:57 PM
Calm down people. I didn't mean literally that we have a small budget, it's obvious that we have one of the top 5-10 budgets in baseball at the moment.

What I meant was...our budget isn't comparable to the amount of money the top tier teams bring in, plain and simple. The Mets have their own TV station, the Yankees have their own TV station, the Cubs are owned by a media company (although thats falling), when the Braves were huge they were owned by a multi-billion dollar media outlet. We don't have an owner that says "Heres the money, go out and win". Kenny has to do much more work than a Cashman/Epstein who just sees a player they like and throws $100 million at them.

THAT'S why I feel we are not comparable to the Braves just yet. In 1996 they had 6 players making over $5 million per season which at the time was pretty large. With that they were able to lock up many of their big three pitchers (Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine), which we will probably will not do.

Believe it or not, we do have a small budget compared to the giants of the baseball world. You can be the highest grossing independant film company with the most budget of any other and still be lightyears away from a big motion picture company.

caulfield12
01-03-2007, 03:59 PM
with all their new young pitching and current veteran pitching, are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves? who for 15 years always had good pitching and attracted top free agents, and had a pitching coach in Mazzone who resurrected numerous careers (wright, hampton, neagle

look at the guys who've passed through Atlanta since 1991. All of them were good solid #2 or #3 pitchers at some point in their career, which is not really as common as people think.

Steve Avery, John Burkett, Odalis Perez, Kevin Millwood, Jason Marquis, Russ Ortiz, Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Jaret Wright, Tim Hudson (I know many of these guys were horrible elsewhere, but they were effective with Atlanta)

Not a Felix Diaz, Dan Wright, Jon Rauch, Josh Stewart, Todd Ritchie, Gary Glover, Rocky Biddle, Sean Lowe, or Jamie Navarro in the bunch. Probably not many ERAs over 4.5 either.

I know how Kenny feels about signing free agents, but it looks like the Sox could be turning into the team who has 4 or 5 good starters every year (12-14 wins, sub 4.00 era), like the Braves. Anchored by Contreras, Buerhle, Garland, and Javy, and with Sisco, Floyd, Haeger, Gio, Danks, McCulloch, Broadway, Masset, Phillips waiting in the wings, the Sox could/should have a top 10 staff for the next 5-8 years. We also know that Kenny is not shy about making a deadline trade (Wells, Garcia, Colon)

Likely, offense will come and go (Dye, Crede, Pods, or Uribe replaced in house by Sweeney, Fields, Rogo, Owens, or Valido or via trades) but the solid, above average starting pitching could/should keep the Sox a contender year in and year out, like the Braves, through into the 2010 decade.

Most of those guys didn't come up with the Braves...

You're also forgetting Jason Schmidt and Bruce Chen, to name just a couple.

The Braves and White Sox cannot even begin to be compared until at least TWO of the recent KW acquistions stick in the rotation at All-Star caliber level for 5+ years.

likeawarlord
01-03-2007, 04:02 PM
Steve Avery, John Burkett, Odalis Perez, Kevin Millwood, Jason Marquis, Russ Ortiz, Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Jaret Wright, Tim Hudson (I know many of these guys were horrible elsewhere, but they were effective with Atlanta)

it seems likely that hampton just needed to be rescued from high altitude. many of these guys (avery, perez, millwood, marquis) were drafted by atlanta and weren't picked up along the way and transformed. denny neagle was well above league average before coming to atl, don't forget, and russ ortiz wasn't terrible until after he moved on to arizona.

john burkett and jaret wright, though, you might have be able to make cases for, although they had only two good years between them in atlanta.

TaylorStSox
01-03-2007, 04:18 PM
Calm down people. I didn't mean literally that we have a small budget, it's obvious that we have one of the top 5-10 budgets in baseball at the moment.

What I meant was...our budget isn't comparable to the amount of money the top tier teams bring in, plain and simple. The Mets have their own TV station, the Yankees have their own TV station, the Cubs are owned by a media company (although thats falling), when the Braves were huge they were owned by a multi-billion dollar media outlet. We don't have an owner that says "Heres the money, go out and win". Kenny has to do much more work than a Cashman/Epstein who just sees a player they like and throws $100 million at them.

THAT'S why I feel we are not comparable to the Braves just yet. In 1996 they had 6 players making over $5 million per season which at the time was pretty large. With that they were able to lock up many of their big three pitchers (Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine), which we will probably will not do.

Believe it or not, we do have a small budget compared to the giants of the baseball world. You can be the highest grossing independant film company with the most budget of any other and still be lightyears away from a big motion picture company.

If our "big 4" performed like they are capable, I guarantee they'd be resigned. Of our top 4, one got old fast, one was completely on the downside, one was good but not dominant and the last fell apart so badly it's hard to predict his future.

PaulDrake
01-03-2007, 04:47 PM
I'd rather that they become baseball's version of the New England Patriots, from being lampooned to being deeply respected. My favorite post in this thread so far, and my sentiments exactly, although I wasn't original enough to think of a comparison to the Patriots.

chisoxmike
01-03-2007, 04:52 PM
with all their new young pitching and current veteran pitching, are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves? who for 15 years always had good pitching and attracted top free agents, and had a pitching coach in Mazzone who resurrected numerous careers (wright, hampton, neagle



No. They're not.

thomas35forever
01-03-2007, 05:29 PM
There's already a thread on this.

:searchfirst:

AaronRowandFan33
01-03-2007, 07:45 PM
Weird that that same thread occurred in the past 2 weeks.

The main point of this comparison was this:

Besides their big 3, the Braves had a revolving door at the #4 and #5 spots. At worst their #4 was above average, better than half of the league. And often their #5 guy would at leat rank amoung the top #5's. They either had solid veteran innings eaters, or young guys who did not struggle. These guys were always legit big league pitchers, and rarely were question marks, no matter what every year. And good pitchers always seemed to end up there: Tim Hudson trade, Russ Ortiz signing, Denny Neagle trade, Kevin Millwood out of nowhere. Pitching was NEVER a question.

(For instance, after 2002 they lose Glavine and Millwood to free agency? No problem, they sign Ortiz who nearly won the CY with SF, pick up Hampton who becomes a quality pitcher again after 2 years of exile, and have rookie Horacio Ramirez give them 29 starts at a 4.00 ERA. Problem solved. -- The year before that, the back of the bullpen sucks, lets make Smoltz a dominant top 5 closer in all of baseball. No problem, Damien Moss will step in and start 29 games with a 3.42 ERA. Then we'll never hear from him again. -- Year before that 2001, Smoltz is on the shelf for the entire season with a shoulder injury, no big deal, 36 year old John Burkett will give us 34 starts with 3.00 ERA, then we'll never hear from him again -- 1997, they have a revolving door at #5, the next year rookie Millwood comes in and has 29 starts with a 4.00 ERA.)

My point is that Sox are setting themselves up to have a similar run. Good vet starters now. Lots of arms to groom for the future, thus pretty good odds that at least one or two of them will end up being a quality major league starter.

Sox are moving their focus to pitching, much like the Braves did. That is the similarity I'm calling out.

jenn2080
01-03-2007, 08:05 PM
Search function is your friend.:?: :o:


If I search, amazing things happen. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=82525&highlight=braves)

I want Mags back
01-04-2007, 12:22 AM
gimme a call when we win the division 15 straight times:rolleyes:

Mohoney
01-04-2007, 06:24 AM
With that they were able to lock up many of their big three pitchers (Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine), which we will probably will not do.

Look at those names, though. At the very least 2, and I'm thinking all 3, will be in Cooperstown. You pay WELL ABOVE market value for these guys, because they perform WELL ABOVE their competition, and it would be absolutely stupid not to.

MAYBE Buehrle belongs in that discussion (I personally don't think so, but I can see differing views on it as valid), being somewhat comparable to Glavine at the same stage of their career. Garland, Vazquez, or Contreras? Not even close.

It makes sense to pay megabucks for guys with Cooperstown written all over them. After that, it gets dicey.

caulfield12
01-04-2007, 09:22 AM
Look at those names, though. At the very least 2, and I'm thinking all 3, will be in Cooperstown. You pay WELL ABOVE market value for these guys, because they perform WELL ABOVE their competition, and it would be absolutely stupid not to.

MAYBE Buehrle belongs in that discussion (I personally don't think so, but I can see differing views on it as valid), being somewhat comparable to Glavine at the same stage of their career. Garland, Vazquez, or Contreras? Not even close.

It makes sense to pay megabucks for guys with Cooperstown written all over them. After that, it gets dicey.


The problem is that only Buehrle and Garland are in their primes, and I sincerely doubt either will receive more than a handful of HOF votes. MB has a chance, but talk to me 8 years from now when he has at least 200 wins.

Maddux will be remembered as the best of his generation (of the true "pitchers"), Glavine is probably the best left-hander of his generation and Smoltz has closed and started at a "near" HOF level. Along with Pedro Martinez, Clemens and Randy Johnson, those are the six pitchers that will be most remembered from the 1990-2000 time period.

ewokpelts
01-04-2007, 10:42 AM
with all their new young pitching and current veteran pitching, are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves? who for 15 years always had good pitching and attracted top free agents, and had a pitching coach in Mazzone who resurrected numerous careers (wright, hampton, neagle

look at the guys who've passed through Atlanta since 1991. All of them were good solid #2 or #3 pitchers at some point in their career, which is not really as common as people think.

Steve Avery, John Burkett, Odalis Perez, Kevin Millwood, Jason Marquis, Russ Ortiz, Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Jaret Wright, Tim Hudson (I know many of these guys were horrible elsewhere, but they were effective with Atlanta)

Not a Felix Diaz, Dan Wright, Jon Rauch, Josh Stewart, Todd Ritchie, Gary Glover, Rocky Biddle, Sean Lowe, or Jamie Navarro in the bunch. Probably not many ERAs over 4.5 either.

I know how Kenny feels about signing free agents, but it looks like the Sox could be turning into the team who has 4 or 5 good starters every year (12-14 wins, sub 4.00 era), like the Braves. Anchored by Contreras, Buerhle, Garland, and Javy, and with Sisco, Floyd, Haeger, Gio, Danks, McCulloch, Broadway, Masset, Phillips waiting in the wings, the Sox could/should have a top 10 staff for the next 5-8 years. We also know that Kenny is not shy about making a deadline trade (Wells, Garcia, Colon)

Likely, offense will come and go (Dye, Crede, Pods, or Uribe replaced in house by Sweeney, Fields, Rogo, Owens, or Valido or via trades) but the solid, above average starting pitching could/should keep the Sox a contender year in and year out, like the Braves, through into the 2010 decade.not even worth thinking about until we win the division at least 2 years in a row....and maybe get to the ws more than once in 46 years.

spiffie
01-04-2007, 11:04 AM
We're like the AL Braves in that we will never be out of contention. Unlike them, I have no doubt that Kenny Williams will end up with no less than 5 or 6 World Series rings before his work here is done. I'd be positively stunned if we don't get another title or two before the decade is out, which is more than the Braves can say for their entire run.

soxinem1
01-04-2007, 11:38 AM
No, the White Sox are not yet the Braves. No team may ever be that again.

I agree. Most organizations would be realistically happy just to competitive every year going into September and have a chance to make the playoffs.

Sure the Braves only won a single World Series in that time, but to have the opportunity to win a division that many seasons in a row is amazing! I don't think any team, including ours (that has never even gone to the psotseason two seasons in a row) will ever eclipe that, even the Yankees.

ewokpelts
01-04-2007, 12:26 PM
I agree. Most organizations would be realistically happy just to competitive every year going into September and have a chance to make the playoffs.

Sure the Braves only won a single World Series in that time, but to have the opportunity to win a division that many seasons in a row is amazing! I don't think any team, including ours (that has never even gone to the psotseason two seasons in a row) will ever eclipe that, even the Yankees.and dont forget that the braves of 1991-2005 have 4 nl championships in addition to thier lone ws win(1991, when they went from worst to first, 1992, 1996, 1999)

ewokpelts
01-04-2007, 12:32 PM
We're like the AL Braves in that we will never be out of contention. Unlike them, I have no doubt that Kenny Williams will end up with no less than 5 or 6 World Series rings before his work here is done. I'd be positively stunned if we don't get another title or two before the decade is out, which is more than the Braves can say for their entire run.no...the braves WON 15 division titles from 1991-2005...the sox won 3....difference of 12.....and dont say we "compted" in all of those 15 years....the jndians had a lock on the division from 1995-2001, and we only made 2nd place in those years becuase the division was so crappy(tallest midget anyone?)

as for kenny...he might want to think about trading the 40 year old(or older?) cuban for as much as he can get before he really starts to look 50.

caulfield12
01-04-2007, 12:45 PM
no...the braves WON 15 division titles from 1991-2005...the sox won 3....difference of 12.....and dont say we "compted" in all of those 15 years....the jndians had a lock on the division from 1995-2001, and we only made 2nd place in those years becuase the division was so crappy(tallest midget anyone?)

as for kenny...he might want to think about trading the 40 year old(or older?) cuban for as much as he can get before he really starts to look 50.


Technically, in 1994 the White Sox were in first place over the Indians by one game and the Braves were trailing Montreal, so we've been "post season eligible" 4 out of the last 15 seasons.

maurice
01-04-2007, 02:51 PM
Through age 26, Glavine was better than Garland, but the gap isn't as big as you'd think, especialy when you consider than Garland pitches in the AL.

Glavine was a 4.5-ish ERA pitcher for his 1st 4 years and then dropped to an outstanding 2.something ERA for a couple of years before finishing up mostly in the 3.something range. Garland is about a full point higher but, again, he's in the AL. Some other interesting numbers . . .

Garland's win totals by age:
20 - 4
21 - 6
22 - 12
23 - 12
24 - 12
25 - 18
26 - 18

Glavine's win totals by age:
21 - 2
22 - 7
23 - 14
24 - 10
25 - 20
26 - 20

You cannot fairly compare Contreras in this way.

ewokpelts
01-04-2007, 03:34 PM
Technically, in 1994 the White Sox were in first place over the Indians by one game and the Braves were trailing Montreal, so we've been "post season eligible" 4 out of the last 15 seasons.anyone that uses 1994 in this argument is a complete tool
despite what the sox media guide says, the sox did NOT win the 1994 al central. aside from the strike, there's no gurantee that the sox could have held on the division. we do have a nasty trend of ****ing it up in september....look at 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006

JUribe1989
01-04-2007, 03:45 PM
Not until the Sox win 14 straight division titles, much less just make the playoffs a couple years in a row.

AaronRowandFan33
01-04-2007, 04:26 PM
i think this thread is dead as more than 50% of the replies seem to have missed the crux of the comparison.

chisoxmike
01-04-2007, 04:49 PM
i think this thread is dead as more than 50% of the replies seem to have missed the crux of the comparison.

How have we missed it? You asked, we answered. The Sox have won TWO division titles the past six years. Every year they should've won it, they **** themselves. (2001-2004, 2006)

The Yankees are more of a AL Braves if you want to look at consistant titles. Wasn't 2006 their 9th division title in a row? Look at the Twins... four division titles in five years (2002,2003,2004,2006)

The Sox are no where near the level of the Braves. Not even close. The Braves always preformed to expectations and even over achieved in years maybe they weren't the best team. The Sox haven't. Sorry.

caulfield12
01-04-2007, 04:57 PM
anyone that uses 1994 in this argument is a complete tool
despite what the sox media guide says, the sox did NOT win the 1994 al central. aside from the strike, there's no gurantee that the sox could have held on the division. we do have a nasty trend of ****ing it up in september....look at 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006

Ummm...MLB is a "complete tool" for messing up that season, just like HOF voters are put in the position of being "tools" for voting yes on McGwire, Sosa and Palmeiro.

And, yes, there was/is no "gurantee," but there was a guarantee they were leading at that point in the season. You can't prove they wouldn't have won, and 90% of White Sox fans would tell you that was their best team.

spiffie
01-04-2007, 05:05 PM
How have we missed it? You asked, we answered. The Sox have won TWO division titles the past six years. Every year they should've won it, they **** themselves. (2001-2004, 2006)

The Yankees are more of a AL Braves if you want to look at consistant titles. Wasn't 2006 their 9th division title in a row? Look at the Twins... four division titles in five years (2002,2003,2004,2006)

The Sox are no where near the level of the Braves. Not even close. The Braves always preformed to expectations and even over achieved in years maybe they weren't the best team. The Sox haven't. Sorry.
Divisional titles and playoff appearances, while nice and obviously the first step towards winning the World Series, are in the end meaningless without results. Otherwise we wouldn't all rightfully laugh at Billy Beane as the most overrated useless GM in all of baseball for continually putting together bunches of OBP obsessed roiding chokers who don't have the heart to win the tough games or the skills to play the smallball needed in the playoffs, while deifying Kenny Williams, who actually put together a team that could win in the postseason. So yes, yay Atlanta, they won an endless string of divisional titles. And almost every year you could count on them to **** up somehow when it counted. If in another 12 years we've only got the 2005 title to look back, then you can rip on the Sox. But until then, we've got management that knows the goal is going all the way, not just getting to the playoffs.

ewokpelts
01-04-2007, 05:23 PM
Divisional titles and playoff appearances, while nice and obviously the first step towards winning the World Series, are in the end meaningless without results. Otherwise we wouldn't all rightfully laugh at Billy Beane as the most overrated useless GM in all of baseball for continually putting together bunches of OBP obsessed roiding chokers who don't have the heart to win the tough games or the skills to play the smallball needed in the playoffs, while deifying Kenny Williams, who actually put together a team that could win in the postseason. So yes, yay Atlanta, they won an endless string of divisional titles. And almost every year you could count on them to **** up somehow when it counted. If in another 12 years we've only got the 2005 title to look back, then you can rip on the Sox. But until then, we've got management that knows the goal is going all the way, not just getting to the playoffs.
the braves have LOST more world series in the last 15 years than the white sox have won EVER. it looks like kenny and ron schueler, with ozzie, manuel, bevington, torborg, and lamont ****ed up more than john schuerholz and bobby cox

spiffie
01-04-2007, 05:26 PM
the braves have LOST more world series in the last 15 years than the white sox have won EVER. it looks like kenny and ron schueler, with ozzie, manuel, bevington, torborg, and lamont ****ed up more than john schuerholz and bobby cox
What the hell is the point of bringing up Torborg? We're not comparing the White Sox of 1990-2006 to the Braves of 1990-2006. We're comparing the concept of the Braves of that time frame to what the Sox are currently rounding into. The fact that the Sox didn't do as well as the Braves during the 90's or early 2000's is only relevant in that it feeds your need to apparently rip on the Sox as much as possible in this thread. Jerry Manuel has as much to do with what the Sox are becoming (note the word in the thread title) as Al Lopez does.

maurice
01-04-2007, 05:27 PM
How have we missed it?

It could have something to do with the fact that the question and comments in the OP look to the future direction of the club, and that at least some of the replies are talking about 1994. Specifically, the OP doesn't ask whether the Sox ARE or HAVE BEEN the Braves. It asks whether they're BECOMING the Braves.

Of course, the only reasonable answer is "We don't know yet; probably not." Nonetheless, seeing as this is the offseason and that many recent posts are absurdly negative, I'd say it's a moderately interesting, optimistic topic and a nice change of pace. JMHO.

soxwon
01-04-2007, 06:17 PM
with all their new young pitching and current veteran pitching, are the Sox becoming the AL version of the Braves? who for 15 years always had good pitching and attracted top free agents, and had a pitching coach in Mazzone who resurrected numerous careers (wright, hampton, neagle

look at the guys who've passed through Atlanta since 1991. All of them were good solid #2 or #3 pitchers at some point in their career, which is not really as common as people think.

Steve Avery, John Burkett, Odalis Perez, Kevin Millwood, Jason Marquis, Russ Ortiz, Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, Jaret Wright, Tim Hudson (I know many of these guys were horrible elsewhere, but they were effective with Atlanta)

Not a Felix Diaz, Dan Wright, Jon Rauch, Josh Stewart, Todd Ritchie, Gary Glover, Rocky Biddle, Sean Lowe, or Jamie Navarro in the bunch. Probably not many ERAs over 4.5 either.

I know how Kenny feels about signing free agents, but it looks like the Sox could be turning into the team who has 4 or 5 good starters every year (12-14 wins, sub 4.00 era), like the Braves. Anchored by Contreras, Buerhle, Garland, and Javy, and with Sisco, Floyd, Haeger, Gio, Danks, McCulloch, Broadway, Masset, Phillips waiting in the wings, the Sox could/should have a top 10 staff for the next 5-8 years. We also know that Kenny is not shy about making a deadline trade (Wells, Garcia, Colon)

Likely, offense will come and go (Dye, Crede, Pods, or Uribe replaced in house by Sweeney, Fields, Rogo, Owens, or Valido or via trades) but the solid, above average starting pitching could/should keep the Sox a contender year in and year out, like the Braves, through into the 2010 decade.

The futures so bright...Gotta wear shades!!!!

PennStater98r
01-04-2007, 06:33 PM
:smile:

The Sox and Atlanta of the 90s?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=82525

I'd say it's a moderately interesting, optimistic topic and a nice change of pace. JMHO.

/raises hand

Me! Me! Me!

I really was feeling like we're becoming that team... I know we can't say we are them now - but I think we're doing the things to set ourselves up for a dynasty - and that's what I was getting at about a month ago.

AaronRowandFan33
01-04-2007, 06:58 PM
It could have something to do with the fact that the question and comments in the OP look to the future direction of the club, and that at least some of the replies are talking about 1994. Specifically, the OP doesn't ask whether the Sox ARE or HAVE BEEN the Braves. It asks whether they're BECOMING the Braves.

Thank you, I couldn't have put it better myself...

Nonetheless, seeing as this is the offseason and that many recent posts are absurdly negative, I'd say it's a moderately interesting, optimistic topic and a nice change of pace. JMHO.

Thank you for the kind words...