PDA

View Full Version : Meanwhile Sully Downgrades Us


duke of dorwood
03-19-2002, 10:46 AM
"Their fielding has been brutal. Their pitching has been worse. Their outlook, despite scoring a majors-best 7.8 runs per game, must be downgraded.

When spring training began, it was reasonable to expect both Chicago teams to win 90 games. As fragile as the White Sox's pitching staff now appears, it is no longer a lock that Chicago's teams will have back-to-back winning seasons simultaneously for the first time since 1936-37.

I'm dropping the Sox's over-under on victories to 86. That still could be enough to win the American League Central, which will be the majors' softest division. But I'd handicap it Minnesota, Sox, Cleveland"

cheeses_h_rice
03-19-2002, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
"Their fielding has been brutal. Their pitching has been worse. Their outlook, despite scoring a majors-best 7.8 runs per game, must be downgraded.

When spring training began, it was reasonable to expect both Chicago teams to win 90 games. As fragile as the White Sox's pitching staff now appears, it is no longer a lock that Chicago's teams will have back-to-back winning seasons simultaneously for the first time since 1936-37.

I'm dropping the Sox's over-under on victories to 86. That still could be enough to win the American League Central, which will be the majors' softest division. But I'd handicap it Minnesota, Sox, Cleveland"

:knue

Guess who whispered sweet nothings in Paul's ear last night?

Soxboyrob
03-19-2002, 11:29 AM
At this point, I can't really disagree w/ Sully. Until we look like we have any semblance of a pitching staff, we shouldn't even assume we'll be a .500+ team. Gotta figure a trade might be imminent.

Procol Harum
03-19-2002, 11:40 AM
I think Sullivan's on target. While you don't take Spring Training as the end all and be all for how a team is going to play in the regular season, in the realm of pitching it is certainly a valid indicator of what you might generally expect. And our pitching has been donkey doo on a stick. Coming off all those torn labrums and rehab this gives us no reason to be optimistic that suddenly come April our guys are going to be dazzling opposing hitters and dishing up k's and feeble ground balls (and then there's always the matter of whether our guys will actually catch these or avoid throwing them into the lower boxes) where now naught but line shots and towering home runs are the daily fare. Unless something suddenly clicks we're gonna struggle to be more than a .500 team.

kermittheefrog
03-19-2002, 11:57 AM
Yeah, spring training is meaningful it's not like Texas lead the league in spring ERA last year or something. Oh wait, they did....

Procol Harum
03-19-2002, 12:11 PM
Nobody be sayin' that it's an infallible guide--everybody who follows the game knows that there are wild discrepancies--good and bad--between ST performance and actual regular season results.

But we're Sox fans and are made of sterner and more realistic stuff. We have suffered the inequities of front office smoke being blown up our bootays for many years as well as the example of the North Siders' incorrigibly reflexive (and unnwarranted) optimism. Given all the injuries and the winter-long bs campaign from JR and Lenny wouldn't you be feeling a little better to actually see some displays of skeelsz from our pitching?? Y'know, a few days where we limit the opposition to 0, 1, 2, 3, runs?? A sterling 6-inning stint by a Ritchie or a Garland?

This isn't the mid-90s Braves staff that could ditz around and experiment during ST trying to refine subtle aspects of their game. Our crowd has yet to collectively prove itself and has offered no observable evidence that they are a staff that can win this division--much less contend for a championship. Here's hopin' they dispell this impression.

moochpuppy
03-19-2002, 12:12 PM
Looking out there though there don't seem to be many viable options out there for trade. I think the most likely is Anaheim. I think someone on these boards mentioned Ramon Ortiz. I would even try for Washburn or Appier. This deal will have to contain Lee. KW seems to have the Angels GM's ear since he almost got Erstad from him.

Lip Man 1
03-19-2002, 12:21 PM
NEWSFLASH

That story was NOT done by Paul Sullivan. It was done by the Tribun's major league baseball writer Phil Rogers.

In my opinion it's right on the money, the only unfortunate thing is that the story didn't place the blame where it belongs.

That's on the "brilliant" Sox management who took an unwarrented and extremly risky approach to the season by banking the team hopes on an injured, underachieving pitching staff.

and why? because they claim they can't (sniff) afford (choke) to pay for a team in the nation's 3rd biggest markey (sob)

I want to see the Sox do well this year but part of me would love it for the team to fall on its collective asses just to hear the "excuses" coming from Uncle Jerry, his pet flunky G.M. and our brilliant P.R. director who couldn't even remember the phone number for tickets, during his interview Saturday during the TV
game.

What a "first class" organization eh?????

Mark

longshot7
03-19-2002, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by moochpuppy
Looking out there though there don't seem to be many viable options out there for trade. I think the most likely is Anaheim. I think someone on these boards mentioned Ramon Ortiz. I would even try for Washburn or Appier. This deal will have to contain Lee. KW seems to have the Angels GM's ear since he almost got Erstad from him.

I don't believe the Angels are shopping any of their starters, but I could be wrong....

cheeses_h_rice
03-19-2002, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Procol Harum
Given all the injuries and the winter-long bs campaign from JR and Lenny wouldn't you be feeling a little better to actually see some displays of skeelsz from our pitching?? Y'know, a few days where we limit the opposition to 0, 1, 2, 3, runs??

Exactly what I said last week...

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?postid=71762#post71762

I just got aboard the panic train a bit earlier, I guess...

MarqSox
03-19-2002, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1


I want to see the Sox do well this year but part of me would love it for the team to fall on its collective asses just to hear the "excuses" coming from Uncle Jerry, his pet flunky G.M. and our brilliant P.R. director who couldn't even remember the phone number for tickets, during his interview Saturday during the TV
game.


Yeah I agree, let's hope the Sox suck this year. That would make everything worthwhile. Boo Sox.

DrCrawdad
03-19-2002, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by Procol Harum
But we're Sox fans and are made of sterner and more realistic stuff. We have suffered the inequities of front office smoke being blown up our bootays for many years as well as the example of the North Siders' incorrigibly reflexive (and unnwarranted) optimism.

Paul Sullivan may not have written the article in question, but he certainly said essentially the same thing during Sunday's Sox vs. Cub game on WGN. Sullivan and Rogers probably are pretty much on target with the questions about the White Sox team this year.

Here's my question though, why is that Teddy Greenstein writes articles about the Cubs that have about as much criticism of the Cubs and objectivity as VineLine?

Maybe someone can post the Cubs ST ERA. I don't know where you get that information. I wonder though if their collective ERA is vastly better than the Sox.

There I go though expecting things to be fair. I should remember my dad's advice, "don't expect things to be fair and you won't get disappointed."

- DrCrawdad.

Soxboyrob
03-19-2002, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by DrCrawdad

Maybe someone can post the Cubs ST ERA. I don't know where you get that information. I wonder though if their collective ERA is vastly better than the Sox.



Ask and you shall receive. Interesting numbers.

Sox
ERA........7.75
Runs surrendered by pitching staff........159(in 184 2/3 innings)
Runs scored by Sox offense...................163 runs

Cubs
ERA........6.41
Runs surrendered by Cub staff..............131(in 184 innings)
Runs scored by Cub offense..................112 runs

Based on what I'm seeing above, the Sox are scoring more than they're surrendering and are playing like a .500 team. The Cubs are not scoring nearly what they're surrendering and are playing like a .450 team.

What would be a better thing to look at would be the performance of only the guys that have a chance of making their respective teams.

RichH55
03-19-2002, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by Soxboyrob


Ask and you shall receive. Interesting numbers.

Sox
ERA........7.75
Runs surrendered by pitching staff........159(in 184 2/3 innings)
Runs scored by Sox offense...................163 runs

Cubs
ERA........6.41
Runs surrendered by Cub staff..............131(in 184 innings)
Runs scored by Cub offense..................112 runs

Based on what I'm seeing above, the Sox are scoring more than they're surrendering and are playing like a .500 team. The Cubs are not scoring nearly what they're surrendering and are playing like a .450 team.

What would be a better thing to look at would be the performance of only the guys that have a chance of making their respective teams.


Case in Point....you can make stats dance anyway you like.....ST is simply not the end all be all.....maybe a cause for concern at worst, but to downgrade us before even the last week of ST(which is when players tend to be much closer to their real state then the first couple of weeks of ST time(or as i call it Mario Valenzula time))......If anyone thought Jim Parque was the make or break point this year for us, how the hell were they optimistic in the first place? Lets at least lose a real ball game before the sky is falling