PDA

View Full Version : ESPN dooms Tigers


nofluke69
04-01-2007, 12:27 PM
Looks like they're finished.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview07/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2819259

CLR01
04-01-2007, 12:29 PM
Looks like they're finished.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview07/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2819259


Why does this belong in the Sox forum?

HotelWhiteSox
04-01-2007, 12:46 PM
Phillips on SportsCenter this morning picked the Tigers for the Central but us for the Wild Card (again bringing up his point about the big pressure for Ozzie (?) and saying that will work for him, as well as the pitching and pen/power arms.

I think the Tigers are good, but a little overrated. We'll see if the magic continues. It'll still have good pitching but I don't think this division will be as good as it was last year

soxwon
04-01-2007, 01:11 PM
I think it is weaker, than last year
And the Sox will run away with it.
Day 1 to Nov 1
The best.

Evman5
04-01-2007, 01:47 PM
Looks like they're finished.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview07/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2819259

This article is almost identical to what was said about us last year.

-Adding Sheffield, similar to our Thome addition

-Talk about a future ace, "And last June's No. 1 pick, future dominator Andrew Miller (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=7847), could show up any minute, especially now that Rogers has created an ace-ian kind of vacancy"

Pretty much similar to us having McCarthy as insurance last year

-"Our starting staff" said Bonderman, "is almost like the Braves used to be."

Hmm where did we hear that talk before?

-Various Tigers player are talking about how this year is a new year and last year means nothing

Same thing with us....our players wanted to put the championship behind them and focus on winning another.

The bottom line is there are many similarities between the '06 White Sox and '07 Tigers...Let ESPN annoint them if they want, however I will go to battle with our current roster any season. Our team is just as complete as the Tigers. The only true question mark in my opinion is Danks in the 5 spot, but we have much better options than Felix Diaz, Danny Wright, etc. to replace Danks if he falters. So Lets just sit back relax and strap it down because the '07 season should be a good one!

Corlose 15
04-01-2007, 02:07 PM
The bottom line is there are many similarities between the '06 White Sox and '07 Tigers...Let ESPN annoint them if they want, however I will go to battle with our current roster any season. Our team is just as complete as the Tigers. The only true question mark in my opinion is Danks in the 5 spot, but we have much better options than Felix Diaz, Danny Wright, etc. to replace Danks if he falters. So Lets just sit back relax and strap it down because the '07 season should be a good one!

And yet according to mlb.com the Sox pitching staff is in shambles.

Evman5
04-01-2007, 02:18 PM
And yet according to mlb.com the Sox pitching staff is in shambles.


I know....it is a joke

Contreras--Was arguably the best pitcher from the second half of '05-through the first half of '06...he should be recovered from the injuries that slowed him down. Age could start to be a factor I suppose down, but I expect two more great years if healthy.

Garland- Coming into his own. One of the league leaders in victories over past 3 seasons.

Buehrle- Had a down year last year, his ERA was way higher than his career ERA. He should rebound and have a solid season. Also in a contract year.

Vasquez- Has all the tools to become and ace. I think it will help him knowing he is in a more permanent situation with the contract extension. At worst a .500 pitcher.

Danks- The only unproven commodity in the bunch

This is a solid staff most teams in baseball would kill to have our rotation. But who cares what others have to say, we will let our play on the field do the talking.

ondafarm
04-01-2007, 03:12 PM
I really don't think the ALCD will be the divisional race that most people think. The Sox should run away with it. Jeff Passan on Yahoo Sports is calling the Sox "ludicrous" for trading away 2 starting pitchers. Probably getting 3 or 4 back means nothing to them obviously.

JermaineDye05
04-01-2007, 03:22 PM
I really don't think the ALCD will be the divisional race that most people think. The Sox should run away with it. Jeff Passan on Yahoo Sports is calling the Sox "ludicrous" for trading away 2 starting pitchers. Probably getting 3 or 4 back means nothing to them obviously.

I don't see the sox running away with it, it's going to be a tight race until September IMO. I wouldn't mind being wrong though and the sox do end up running away with it.

Corlose 15
04-01-2007, 03:52 PM
I really don't think the ALCD will be the divisional race that most people think. The Sox should run away with it. Jeff Passan on Yahoo Sports is calling the Sox "ludicrous" for trading away 2 starting pitchers. Probably getting 3 or 4 back means nothing to them obviously.

Yeah, I love it when people either say they traded 2 starters or half their rotation. No one seems to be able to realize that they trade one starter and a reliever, both of whom would only have filled one spot in the rotation.

Its kind of like people wondering how they could replace Magglio in 2005 when nobody remembered how many games he missed in 2004.

Of course, that would require doing your homework, so why bother.

Vernam
04-01-2007, 08:12 PM
Two questions:
Why doesn't everybody just crown their ass?
How do the Red Sox come up three times in the column and the White Sox not at all?Vernam

Frontman
04-01-2007, 11:45 PM
This article is almost identical to what was said about us last year.



And we saw how that worked out for the Sox last year, eh? I still don't count them out, but hearing that Rogers is out for a bit gives us a window of opportunity to get some games up on them. With CC questionable as far as how good that arm will be to throw tomorrow, all we need to worry about is Santana with the Twins. Granted, he could trip on an errant shoe left in the clubhouse, but that's my point.

Its all about how the teams play. All that garbage of "they're great....on paper."

The games aren't played on paper, they're played on a field where anything can happen. Moments can make or break an entire season, and I hold zero stock in what any analyst says.

If you look back at the 2005 club, the Sox had so many question marks and so many moments where you could of said, "Well, they're done."

They lost Frank for the year, they won't be able to score runs.

How old exactly is Jose Contreras? He'll never amount to nothing.

Who's this kid named Jenks? WHAT? Double A ball, are you nuts?

They're going to go down with the biggest downfall in baseball history! Fifteen games at the All Star Break, and now the freakin' Indians refuse to loose? It's over.

They'll never beat the mighty Red Sox in the playoffs. Never!

OMG bases are loaded with no outs and Ozzie brought in El Duque? What he blankety-blank-blank-blank is he thinking?

No way AJ could ever steal a base. NO FREAKIN WAY.

Aw geez. The score is tied. Hopefully Ozzie's got a trick up his sleeve, as Pods can't hit home runs.

Who the heck is Geoff Blum?

Well, that ball is foul, no way Uribe will catch it.

Wait, they DID get beyond all those moments.

With some luck, hard work, and heart; the Sox will compete for the playoffs. Anyone who picks them or any of the other teams to be in the Series or to win it outright is just fooling themselves. Any injury, and move, any one moment will make or break the season.

Sports writers are just like the rest of us. They think they can look at any given player/team/franchise and go "They're the next champs."

No way. Even with everything the Sox did wrong last year, they were in contention for the playoffs up until the final 10 games of the seasons, and still won 90 games. Any other division, they would of won.

But, if ESPN did say all those types of things about the Sox last season, I'm glad they said it about the Tiger THIS season.

You never know if THAT's the moment that makes or breaks the Tigers season. :wink:

Iwritecode
04-02-2007, 12:23 AM
So if the Tigers are SOO good, why did they lose the division lead on the last day of the season and why does everyone seem to forget that?

soxfan13
04-02-2007, 10:51 AM
So if the Tigers are SOO good, why did they lose the division lead on the last day of the season and why does everyone seem to forget that?

because they went on to win the AL pennant

oeo
04-02-2007, 10:56 AM
because they went on to win the AL pennant

And the Cardinals won the World Series...does that mean they're a good team?

The Tigers had a magical first half last year...that was it. I'd be very skeptical of that team.

Dan Mega
04-02-2007, 11:14 AM
If anyone listened to Mike & Mike this morning, Greenberg picked the White Sox to make the playoffs. He made a comment on how he thinks the pitching staff is still too good to not make a run and he likes the bullpen. At least someone gives us credit.

Mike North told Reinsdorf that everyone was picking the Sox to finish third. Reinsdorf's reply: "good".

soxfan13
04-02-2007, 11:17 AM
And the Cardinals won the World Series...does that mean they're a good team?

The Tigers had a magical first half last year...that was it. I'd be very skeptical of that team.

Yes, in the playoffs they were both really good. The Cardinals got healthy at the right time and say what you want about detroit they put it all back together to be the AL representive in the World Series. Add Shefield to the mix and the fact those young starters got another year experience, alot of people would pic them to repeat the year they had.

Moses_Scurry
04-02-2007, 11:24 AM
I really don't think the ALCD will be the divisional race that most people think. The Sox should run away with it. Jeff Passan on Yahoo Sports is calling the Sox "ludicrous" for trading away 2 starting pitchers. Probably getting 3 or 4 back means nothing to them obviously.

I've heard a mistake similar to this made by TWO different analysts on XM Homeplate. The statement was that the White Sox have traded away 2/5 of the rotation!

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Beuhrle, Contreras, Garland, and Vazquez still on the team? They still have 4/5 of the rotation, but have somehow lost 2/5 of it!

What these morons don't seem to know is that McCarthy was never part of the rotation last year or the year before unless someone was injured or Ozzie was resting starters.

oeo
04-02-2007, 11:53 AM
Yes, in the playoffs they were both really good. The Cardinals got healthy at the right time and say what you want about detroit they put it all back together to be the AL representive in the World Series. Add Shefield to the mix and the fact those young starters got another year experience, alot of people would pic them to repeat the year they had.

The Cardinals were a mediocre team that got hot at the right time. They got unbelievable performances from Jeff Weaver, their young guys stepped up, but they were in no way the best team in baseball. There were five or six AL teams that were more deserving.

The Tigers have a young pitching staff that threw a lot of innings last year, they show no plate discipline, cannot manufacture runs, still have no left-handed power (or lefties in general), and downgraded their bullpen.

soxfan13
04-02-2007, 11:55 AM
The Cardinals were a mediocre team that got hot at the right time. They got unbelievable performances from Jeff Weaver, their young guys stepped up, but they were in no way the best team in baseball. There were five or six AL teams that were more deserving.

I didnt say they were the best team in baseball. I said they got healthy and yes hot at the right time.

jdm2662
04-02-2007, 12:38 PM
The Cardinals were a mediocre team that got hot at the right time. They got unbelievable performances from Jeff Weaver, their young guys stepped up, but they were in no way the best team in baseball. There were five or six AL teams that were more deserving.

The Tigers have a young pitching staff that threw a lot of innings last year, they show no plate discipline, cannot manufacture runs, still have no left-handed power (or lefties in general), and downgraded their bullpen.

I love how people downgrade success of other teams yet we are still the same fan base that gets upset when people do it to our respective team. They both won their respective pennants. What does this mean for 2007? The same thing it meant for the Sox in 2006. Nothing. However, they earned their pennants, like it or not.