PDA

View Full Version : *OFFICIAL* At Least We Did Not Get Swept 4/15/07 Game Day Thread


MCHSoxFan
04-15-2007, 03:40 PM
All we needed was a good outing from Jose and a couple of runs. Hey, at least we did not get swept. Also, a good infield hit by Thome!!! :whiner: :whiner: :whiner: :angry: :angry: :angry:

gobears1987
04-15-2007, 03:40 PM
The defense sucked as did our bats

IlliniSox4Life
04-15-2007, 03:41 PM
The pitching has been great lately. Unfortunately our offense has been cold.

Juice16
04-15-2007, 03:41 PM
Way to show up again boys, fun season so far.

Rockin Robin
04-15-2007, 03:41 PM
What a waste of a Sunday

krohnjw
04-15-2007, 03:41 PM
Bleh....a pathetic showing on both sides of the ball. Outstanding pitching was the only thing that kept us in this game.

MCHSoxFan
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
The defense sucked as did our bats

Yeah. I forgot. 5 errors in all 10 games. 3 today!!! Also, Joe got ejected.
:(:

CLR01
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
12 hours of batting practice tomorrow.

whitesoxfan
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
Contreras wasn't great, but the pitchers combined for a one hitter. Thanks to our defense and our offense, it results in another L.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
Way to show up again boys, fun season so far.

They just went .500 on the road trip which included Oakland. What's the problem?

Ziggy S
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
No one knows how to make a lineup like Ozzie. Starting Erstad in CF (though he was at first, today) AND having him in behind the leadoff man is genuis. BTW, I blame this game on Anderson. His suckiness at the plate is the reason for everyone else's in the starting lineup. At least, we know the bats will come around soon, right?

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
Great job by Aardsma, the bullpen is shaping up very well so far this year. Great job holding a potent tribe offense to just 1 hit too.

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 03:43 PM
The last two games have been absolutely PATHETIC. They gave up ONE hit today and lost! The position players should be embarrased.


I'm sick of seeing this garbage. Get your asses in gear already!

UserNameBlank
04-15-2007, 03:43 PM
Hawk says this "is a pretty good road trip" because we finished 3-3.

What a load of ****.

The Sox got great pitching and played like horse****. There is nothing positive about this at all.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 03:43 PM
Can Aardsma pitch all the time?

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
No one knows how to make a lineup like Ozzie. Starting Erstad in CF AND having him in behind the leadoff man is genuis.

Anderson was in CF today, Erstad was at 1st.

cbotnyse
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
****in one hit loss....brutal

I'm very happy about our bullpen. Thats a big plus. Jose needs to get back on track though.

ChiSox4Life
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
Should the Batting coach be worrying about the security of his job??? This lack of hitting is disgusting!!!

sox1970
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
Might as well assume 0-12 against Santana and Sabathia. I'm done watching these games.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
No one knows how to make a lineup like Ozzie. Starting Erstad in CF AND having him in behind the leadoff man is genuis.

:?:

Anderson started in CF today. Is this supposed to be a teal on top of teal?

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 03:44 PM
Hawk says this "is a pretty good road trip" because we finished 3-3.

What a load of ****.

The Sox got great pitching and played like horse****. There is nothing positive about this at all.


To go on a road trip, have very poor hitting, going to oakland and cleveland, and going 3-3 is amazing. We all want to win every game, but chill out.

UserNameBlank
04-15-2007, 03:45 PM
They just went .500 on the road trip which included Oakland. What's the problem?
The problem is the blown save in Oakland, the miserable failure vs. Paul Byrd, and the POS offense AND defense today. This team could have easily gone 6-0 or at least 5-1 but shot themselves in the foot.

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 03:45 PM
They just went .500 on the road trip which included Oakland. What's the problem?

They're doing absolutely NOTHING on offense and its costing them games?

Realistically they should've gone at the bare minimum 4-2 and maybe 5-1.

Ziggy S
04-15-2007, 03:45 PM
12 hours of batting practice tomorrow.
I'd add some fielding drills in there, as well.

chisoxmike
04-15-2007, 03:45 PM
Not going to win a lot of games when you commit 3 errors, and walk 5 batters.

HartmanSox
04-15-2007, 03:45 PM
corpseball.

70% of our starters look absolutely clueless out there.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 03:46 PM
The problem is the blown save in Oakland, the miserable failure vs. Paul Byrd, and the POS offense AND defense today. This team could have easily gone 6-0 or at least 5-1 but shot themselves in the foot.

Sure, they could have gone 6-0 but the didn't. In terms of the big picture, a .500 road trip is just fine.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 03:46 PM
Hawk says this "is a pretty good road trip" because we finished 3-3.

What a load of ****.

The Sox got great pitching and played like horse****. There is nothing positive about this at all.

You're wrong. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint. Every team is going to go through times when they have trouble scoring runs. The fact that the Sox went 3-3 while having some difficulty swinging the bats is a good thing. Obviously, if the bats do not heat up, then the season will be a struggle. But if this is just a stretch of some offensive difficulties, then I'll take 3-3 at Cleveland and Oakland any time.

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 03:46 PM
****in one hit loss....brutal

I'm very happy about our bullpen. Thats a big plus. Jose needs to get back on track though.

I'd like to see what Jose could've done today if anyone behind or in front of him caught the ball. All things considered he did well today.

cbotnyse
04-15-2007, 03:47 PM
It was not Crede's day today....I predict he has zero 2 error games the rest of the year.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 03:47 PM
Not going to win a lot of games when you commit 3 errors, and walk 5 batters.


not going to lose a lot of games when you surrender just one hit either.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 03:47 PM
I'd like to see what Jose could've done today if anyone behind or in front of him caught the ball. All things considered he did well today.

5 walks and is "doing well"?

VenturaFan23
04-15-2007, 03:47 PM
The Sox offense AND defense deserve a swift kick in the ass from Danks and Contreras

cbotnyse
04-15-2007, 03:47 PM
I'd like to see what Jose could've done today if anyone behind or in front of him caught the ball. All things considered he did well today.very true....but walking in that run turned out to be all they needed....but the guys behind him and at the plate need to back him up for sure.

Tragg
04-15-2007, 03:48 PM
Giving up outs with bunts when we can't score runs. I don't know - Garner did that against us in the 9th inning of game 4, and I was thrilled. Matter of philosophy I guess.

UserNameBlank
04-15-2007, 03:48 PM
To go on a road trip, have very poor hitting, going to oakland and cleveland, and going 3-3 is amazing. We all want to win every game, but chill out.
It wasn't just poor hitting or our offense not hitting its stride. I could live with a slow start offensively. The problem has been lack of execution and failing to capitalize on the most basic of scoring opportunites. You don't always need clutch hits; sometimes sac flies work just as well.

DickAllen72
04-15-2007, 03:48 PM
They just went .500 on the road trip which included Oakland. What's the problem?

Not good enough.

In order to win the division, you have to beat the teams in the division.

After watching the Sox games and hearing the results of the other divisional games this past week I've come to the conclusion that the thing that's going to determine the order in which the first four teams finish will be pure luck.

Ziggy S
04-15-2007, 03:48 PM
5 walks and a wild pitch is "doing well"?
I believe that was a passed ball. At least, that's what the Yahoo Gamechannel was saying.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 03:49 PM
It wasn't just poor hitting or our offense not hitting its stride. I could live with a slow start offensively. The problem has been lack of execution and failing to capitalize on the most basic of scoring opportunites. You don't always need clutch hits; sometimes sac flies work just as well.


There have been plenty of clutch hits in the 5 sox wins.

spiffie
04-15-2007, 03:49 PM
I love that after yet another fine pitching performance people can come in here and bitch. Yeah, we lost, who cares? We all know from the last two years that good pitching will eventually lead to the playoffs. The hitting will come around and once that happens this team will be unstoppable. I don't know about anyone else, but I am excited for the next few weeks. Once the mercury starts to rise above freezing this team is going to run off some huge win streaks! So to all the negative voices bitching about Brian Anderson and Darin Erstad...relax! Enjoy the ride! For the ones who just want to bitch...go buy some diapers so the piss in your pants doesn't leak.

This is the best team in baseball...and the pitching is somewhere between great and awesome. Pitching wins championships.

hi im skot
04-15-2007, 03:49 PM
Depressing couple of days in Cleveland.

Positives: Our pitching. Danks was solid Saturday afternoon, and Jose ended up with a better performance than he had any business having.

The bullpen continues to impress as well. If Aardsma can keep this up, I like our odds.

The offense is not going to continue to be this bad; it just ain't possible.

Hang in there everybody...we're going to be okay. A little home cooking against Texas is just what the doctor ordered.

chisoxmike
04-15-2007, 03:49 PM
Same problem as last year...can't beat lefties. That must be corrected in order to win this division.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 03:49 PM
The last two games have been absolutely PATHETIC. They gave up ONE hit today and lost! The position players should be embarrased.


I'm sick of seeing this garbage. Get your asses in gear already!

1 run in 22 innings. But according to Crede yesterday, they're not pressing yet. It's still the beginning of the season. Well, in 2005, the Indians dug themselves in a hole so bad that one of the most impressive late season runs I have ever seen could not dig them out. Let's not get in a hole like that. Let's stop acting like this is still spring training and that these games are somehow not as important as games later in the season and start playing. (except for the pitching which has been pretty darn good minus the first 2 games)

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 03:50 PM
5 walks and a wild pitch is "doing well"?

That was a passed ball and yes I though he did well considering he had to make 15 extra pitches every inning because the people behind him couldn't catch or throw the ball.

Giving up 2 unearned runs and one hit I think is pitching well with absolutely NO support. It could've been a lot worse.

DickAllen72
04-15-2007, 03:50 PM
5 walks and is "doing well"?

He faced too many batters in tense situations unnecessarily. The defense let him down time after time. He pitched over it a couple of times, but he's not superman.

chisoxmike
04-15-2007, 03:51 PM
not going to lose a lot of games when you surrender just one hit either.

Well yeah. The errors and walks lost the game today coupled with the complete lack of hitting.

UserNameBlank
04-15-2007, 03:51 PM
You're wrong. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint. Every team is going to go through times when they have trouble scoring runs. The fact that the Sox went 3-3 while having some difficulty swinging the bats is a good thing. Obviously, if the bats do not heat up, then the season will be a struggle. But if this is just a stretch of some offensive difficulties, then I'll take 3-3 at Cleveland and Oakland any time.
It is a marathon, and because of that I don't mind those games where nothing goes right and we get blown out. You just lose some games like that.

But today, the blown save in Oakland, and yesterday were all very winnable games. The blown save in Oakland and today especially were games that good teams win, period. You can't win them all but you have to win the games you are supposed to.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 03:51 PM
Not good enough.

In order to win the division, you have to beat the teams in the division.

After watching the Sox games and hearing the results of the other divisional games this past week I've come to the conclusion that the thing that's going to determine the order in which the first four teams finish will be pure luck.

Not good enough? If it was September I would agree with you but the season is two freakin' weeks old. They have played the Twins twice and haven't played the Royals or Tigers at all yet. Sure, they haven't done well against Cleveland so far but they still have 13 more games against them.

sox1970
04-15-2007, 03:52 PM
Not good enough.

In order to win the division, you have to beat the teams in the division.

After watching the Sox games and hearing the results of the other divisional games this past week I've come to the conclusion that the thing that's going to determine the order in which the first four teams finish will be pure luck.

The way I look at it, they needed to take two of three just to get a game back from the opening series. Being down 2-4 head-to-head is a bad position to be in.

Now the Sox have to go 7-5 just to split, and more than likely 4 of the games will be against Sabathia.

Foulke You
04-15-2007, 03:52 PM
Same problem as last year...can't beat lefties. That must be corrected in order to win this division.
Yep, and its games like this where KW had Toby Hall in mind to step in and deliver some big hits. In a 2-1 game, who knows what type of difference Hall could have made. That was a big loss in Spring Training, hopefully, Hall makes a speedy recovery because Molina looks like he can't hit his way out of a paper bag.

Deebs14
04-15-2007, 03:53 PM
I love that after yet another fine pitching performance people can come in here and bitch. Yeah, we lost, who cares? We all know from the last two years that good pitching will eventually lead to the playoffs. The hitting will come around and once that happens this team will be unstoppable. I don't know about anyone else, but I am excited for the next few weeks. Once the mercury starts to rise above freezing this team is going to run off some huge win streaks! So to all the negative voices bitching about Brian Anderson and Darin Erstad...relax! Enjoy the ride! For the ones who just want to bitch...go buy some diapers so the piss in your pants doesn't leak.

This is the best team in baseball...and the pitching is somewhere between great and awesome. Pitching wins championships.

Nice post...if the Sox can linger around .500 while the bats are TKO'd, then I have no doubt in my mind that they will kick ass and take names once the bats decide to wake up.

spiffie
04-15-2007, 03:53 PM
1 run in 22 innings. But according to Crede yesterday, they're not pressing yet. It's still the beginning of the season. Well, in 2005, the Indians dug themselves in a hole so bad that one of the most impressive late season runs I have ever seen could not dig them out. Let's not get in a hole like that. Let's stop acting like this is still spring training and that these games are somehow not as important as games later in the season and start playing. (except for the pitching which has been pretty darn good minus the first 2 games)
We are TWO AND A HALF BACK! Jeez, the season is barely 10 games old, and people are talking about getting into too deep a hole to get out of?!

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 03:54 PM
It is a marathon, and because of that I don't mind those games where nothing goes right and we get blown out. You just lose some games like that.

But today, the blown save in Oakland, and yesterday were all very winnable games. The blown save in Oakland and today especially were games that good teams win, period. You can't win them all but you have to win the games you are supposed to.

Good teams also blow saves and get shutout. It happens. Obviously, if it happens with any regularity they won't go to the playoffs. No one is off to an amazing start in the ALC or even the entire AL. Being around .500 for the first couple of weeks is not the worst thing in the world.

Ziggy S
04-15-2007, 03:54 PM
I love that after yet another fine pitching performance people can come in here and bitch. Yeah, we lost, who cares? We all know from the last two years that good pitching will eventually lead to the playoffs. The hitting will come around and once that happens this team will be unstoppable. I don't know about anyone else, but I am excited for the next few weeks. Once the mercury starts to rise above freezing this team is going to run off some huge win streaks! So to all the negative voices bitching about Brian Anderson and Darin Erstad...relax! Enjoy the ride! For the ones who just want to bitch...go buy some diapers so the piss in your pants doesn't leak.

This is the best team in baseball...and the pitching is somewhere between great and awesome. Pitching wins championships.
I just want the best players on the field at that given time. You're right about pitching, but it feeds on fielding and when a team commits three errors and you add in a passed ball the difficulty meter shoots up to the sky. As far as the temperature rising, if the pitchers continue to excel and the hitters finally wake up, the optimism will be validated. I just see a team with World Seriers Championship talent being wasted, right now. Obviously, circumstances can change within a couple of weeks or even days.

IlliniSox4Life
04-15-2007, 03:54 PM
The good news is our bullpen has looked amazing, probably the best in baseball at this point. Our starters have pitched extremely well lately, and when they have gotten into trouble they have gotten out of it for the most part. Uribe and Pods, two of our biggest concerns entering the season have looked good so far.

The other good news is that our offense has been awful, but it won't continue to be awful. Thome, Konerko, Dye, Iguchi, and AJ will all bring their averages up. The defense was awful today but has generally been good this year. It was just a bad day for defense.

If the good things stay good, and the offense starts hitting, we'll go from a .500 team to a .800 team.

spiffie
04-15-2007, 03:56 PM
The good news is our bullpen has looked amazing, probably the best in baseball at this point. Our starters have pitched extremely well lately, and when they have gotten into trouble they have gotten out of it for the most part. Uribe and Pods, two of our biggest concerns entering the season have looked good so far.

The other good news is that our offense has been awful, but it won't continue to be awful. Thome, Konerko, Dye, Iguchi, and AJ will all bring their averages up. The defense was awful today but has generally been good this year. It was just a bad day for defense.

If the good things stay good, and the offense starts hitting, we'll go from a .500 team to a .800 team.
Thank you! This is a 100 win team, BOOK IT!

Tragg
04-15-2007, 03:57 PM
You've got to take advantage of opportunties when presented. In some circumstances, 3-3 could be a good road trip. This time, however, we got impeccable pitching and should have won at least 1 more and could easily have won 2 more.
WE all hope that the hitting turns around...but how long can we count on this level of pitching either?

sox1970
04-15-2007, 03:58 PM
Thank you! This is a 100 win team, BOOK IT!

Care to make it interesting?

CLR01
04-15-2007, 03:58 PM
We are TWO AND A HALF BACK! Jeez, the season is barely 10 games old, and people are talking about getting into too deep a hole to get out of?!

Getting some help from Toronto and Tampa today, too. Hopefully the Rays can hold a lead.

HartmanSox
04-15-2007, 03:58 PM
I love that after yet another fine pitching performance people can come in here and bitch. Yeah, we lost, who cares? We all know from the last two years that good pitching will eventually lead to the playoffs. The hitting will come around and once that happens this team will be unstoppable. I don't know about anyone else, but I am excited for the next few weeks. Once the mercury starts to rise above freezing this team is going to run off some huge win streaks! So to all the negative voices bitching about Brian Anderson and Darin Erstad...relax! Enjoy the ride! For the ones who just want to bitch...go buy some diapers so the piss in your pants doesn't leak.

This is the best team in baseball...and the pitching is somewhere between great and awesome. Pitching wins championships.

"who cares" about winning or loosing? did you really just say that? because the last time I checked, good pitching performances in losing efforts don't mean anything.

RockJock07
04-15-2007, 03:59 PM
.500 is not acceptable when you look at the chances that the Sox had today and yesterday. We just got a bad break when Rob hit C.C. cause that would have scored a run. But there were chances in both games and weather is a lame ass copout. Your a damn professional, you should be expected to play well enough to hit and field regaurdless of coldness. I'm sick of bill melton saying conditions this, conditions that cause that's BS.

Secondly, I saw from the 7th on but what I've seen from David Aardsma so far is simply amazing, this just proves that spring training means nothing.

On a totally unrelated note, ComCast SN is awful. I don;t know about the rest of you but the whole time i was watching there was no score, inning, or count displayed on the screen and the 9th inning my screen was shaking and the color was all (Mod Edit: Language violation read the thread at the top of the forum) up.

Overall, this was a disappointing roadtrip due to the fact that the sox pitched outstanding and the bats could do ANYTHING again subpar pitching. The Sox should have won 5 out 6 and swept the indians, awful effort in cleveland.

DickAllen72
04-15-2007, 04:01 PM
Not good enough? If it was September I would agree with you but the season is two freakin' weeks old. ...... Sure, they haven't done well against Cleveland so far but they still have 13 more games against them.

The games at the beginning of the season count just as much as those in September. Each of these games against Cleveland count as much as each of the remaining thirteen.

Nobody is saying they definitely won't play better than this, but if they continue to play at this rate for the rest of the season they won't make the playoffs. Hence, the answer to your original question, "What's the problem?," is "Not good enough."

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:01 PM
.500 is not acceptable when you look at the chances that the Sox had today and yesterday. We just got a bad break when Rob hit C.C. cause that would have scored a run. But there were chances in both games and weather is a lame ass copout. Your a damn professional, you should be expected to play well enough to hit and field regaurdless of coldness. I'm sick of bill melton saying conditions this, conditions that cause that's BS.

Secondly, I saw from the 7th on but what I've seen from David Aardsma so far is simply amazing, this just proves that spring training means nothing.

On a totally unrelated note, ComCast SN is awful. I don;t know about the rest of you but the whole time i was watching there was no score, inning, or count displayed on the screen and the 9th inning my screen was shaking and the color was all Fuc*** up.

Overall, this was a disappointing roadtrip due to the fact that the sox pitched outstanding and the bats could do ANYTHING again subpar pitching. The Sox should have won 5 out 6 and swept the indians, awful effort in cleveland.



They announced early in the game that there was a graphics problem, and that they would be displaying less graphics than usual.

CLR01
04-15-2007, 04:02 PM
On a totally unrelated note, ComCast SN is awful. I don;t know about the rest of you but the whole time i was watching there was no score, inning, or count displayed on the screen and the 9th inning my screen was shaking and the color was all Fuc*** up.

That part in red is a language filter violation. Do it again and you'll be getting a few days off. Type the word and the filters will remove what needs to be.

spiffie
04-15-2007, 04:02 PM
"who cares" about winning or loosing? did you really just say that? because the last time I checked, good pitching performances in losing efforts don't mean anything.
You have no sense of a bigger picture. 5 months from now this will just be one of many games. But the fact that our pitching has come back to form from 2005 means we will win MANY more games than we lose in the coming months. So if you want to go ahead and dwell on one early April loss and write this team off from it, go ahead. I prefer to look positive and have faith in the team that has been put together, the way Sox fans should.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:03 PM
The games at the beginning of the season count just as much as those in September. Each of these games against Cleveland count as much as each of the remaining thirteen.

Nobody is saying they definitely won't play better than this, but if they continue to play at this rate for the rest of the season they won't make the playoffs. Hence, the answer to your original question, "What's the problem?," is "Not good enough."

I think there is a pretty good chance that the entire middle of the order won't hit less than .250 on the season. Name one team that went through an entire season without struggling at some point.

HartmanSox
04-15-2007, 04:04 PM
You have no sense of a bigger picture. 5 months from now this will just be one of many games. But the fact that our pitching has come back to form from 2005 means we will win MANY more games than we lose in the coming months. So if you want to go ahead and dwell on one early April loss and write this team off from it, go ahead. I prefer to look positive and have faith in the team that has been put together, the way Sox fans should.

I'm not writing the team off. Who knows if the pitching will be this good in the coming months? Blown opportunities like this are very depressing. Hell, with the way the offense is performing right now, it could very well drag down the morale of the pitching staff.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:04 PM
I think there is a pretty good chance that the entire middle of the order won't hit less than .250 on the season. Name one team that went through an entire season without struggling at some point.


Great point. people tend to forget hat the mighty 2005 Sox played 10 times worse than this in August of that year !

oeo
04-15-2007, 04:04 PM
On a totally unrelated note, ComCast SN is awful. I don;t know about the rest of you but the whole time i was watching there was no score, inning, or count displayed on the screen and the 9th inning my screen was shaking and the color was all ****ed up.

So because they didn't have the score up, one time, they're awful? CSN > FSN in hundreds of different ways.

sox1970
04-15-2007, 04:05 PM
Not good enough? If it was September I would agree with you but the season is two freakin' weeks old. They have played the Twins twice and haven't played the Royals or Tigers at all yet. Sure, they haven't done well against Cleveland so far but they still have 13 more games against them.

They play 18 games against each division opponent this year. 12 left against Cleveland.

When I broke down the schedule before the season started, I had the Sox going 42-30 against the division, 42-30 against the rest of the league, and 10-8 against the NL. 94-68.

When I see the Sox starting 2-4 against a team in their own division, it's not a good thing. These division games are all huge even if it's April, and feels like February.

DickAllen72
04-15-2007, 04:05 PM
I think there is a pretty good chance that the entire middle of the order won't hit less than .250 on the season.

I agree. And your point is...? Re-read my post. Do you disagree?

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 04:06 PM
You have no sense of a bigger picture. 5 months from now this will just be one of many games. But the fact that our pitching has come back to form from 2005 means we will win MANY more games than we lose in the coming months. So if you want to go ahead and dwell on one early April loss and write this team off from it, go ahead. I prefer to look positive and have faith in the team that has been put together, the way Sox fans should.

See, these are the kinds of posts that remind me of last summer. The Sox play like garbage, people come here to vent and are yelled at and accused of writing the season off.

I don't believe anyone here has written the season off but if you're satisfied with going 3-3 on the road trip your expectations for this team aren't high enough. THEY PLAYED LIKE ABSOULTE HORSE**** TODAY AND I'M PISSED.


Now, go win 5 out of 6 and shut me up.

Jerko
04-15-2007, 04:08 PM
Look at the Twins last year. They had a losing record in what, May or June??? Yes it sucks to lose to these clowns when the only guy that got a hit was the FIRST BATTER OF THE GAME, but one good streak and we can dust these teams IMO.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 04:09 PM
You're wrong. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint.

No offense, but this saying erks me just a little. Have you watched or run in a marathon? The winners are the guys that separate themselves from the pack in the beginning and then keep up the pace.

And yes, I realize we are only 11 games into the season, but what concerns me is that we are playing so poorly right now, that we could end up in a much bigger hole before we know it while we are all saying, "don't worry, we will come around." When? Yeah, I'm a pessimist. Good guess.

oeo
04-15-2007, 04:09 PM
I think there is a pretty good chance that the entire middle of the order won't hit less than .250 on the season. Name one team that went through an entire season without struggling at some point.

I think the biggest thing is when they're doing it. A lot of people think that four teams in this division are going to win 90 games...I just roll my eyes at that. I liked the Indians coming into the season, to stay up on the top of the division all year with the Sox, but I don't know at this point. Sure they're 4-2 against us, but we should have won two of the games (one was blown, the other was gift wrapped), and they have glaring weaknesses in that pen...most notably Borowski; they're going to have closer problems again.

The Twins do not impress me at all, and they never have, and the Tigers have surprised me...I thought they would start off a little slower.

The reason I'm not worried about the Sox is because they're pitching well. The offense will come around. Our pitching was our biggest question mark coming in, and it's looked damn good...we'll be fine.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:10 PM
No offense, but this saying erks me just a little. Have you watched or run in a marathon? The winners are the guys that separate themselves from the pack in the beginning and then keep up the pace.

And yes, I realize we are only 11 games into the season, but what concerns me is that we are playing so poorly right now, that we could end up in a much bigger hole before we know it while we are all saying, "don't worry, we will come around." When? Yeah, I'm a pessimist. Good guess.


The 2006 Minnesota Twins say hello to the third sentence of your post.

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 04:11 PM
Look at the Twins last year. They had a losing record in what, May or June??? Yes it sucks to lose to these clowns when the only guy that got a hit was the FIRST BATTER OF THE GAME, but one good streak and we can dust these teams IMO.

The Twins went on an AMAZING streak.

Fuller_Schettman
04-15-2007, 04:11 PM
They just went .500 on the road trip which included Oakland. What's the problem?

Thankfully, a voice of reason amidst the cacophony of irrational panic.
Thanks for providing some perspective! :wink:

oeo
04-15-2007, 04:12 PM
And yes, I realize we are only 11 games into the season, but what concerns me is that we are playing so poorly right now, that we could end up in a much bigger hole before we know it while we are all saying, "don't worry, we will come around." When? Yeah, I'm a pessimist. Good guess.

I didn't see most of the game, but it looks like this one was gift-wrapped. Yesterday they couldn't score any runs; and today, the same story, except they decided to give the Indians some runs, as well. I don't think that qualifies as 'playing poorly'. The offense has been a piece of ****, but overall our pitching and defense has been great (minus today). One ****ty game doesn't mean they're playing like **** as a team...the offense is the only thing that needs to step up at this point.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:13 PM
The Twins went on an AMAZING streak.


True but the Sox now are FAR from needing any kind of AMAZING streak (yet) to be in the thick of the race in the central.

Corlose 15
04-15-2007, 04:14 PM
I didn't see most of the game, but it looks like this one was gift-wrapped. Yesterday they couldn't score any runs; and today, the same story, except they decided to give the Indians some runs, as well. I don't think that qualifies as 'playing poorly'. The offense has been a piece of ****, but overall our pitching and defense has been great (minus today). One ****ty game doesn't mean they're playing like **** as a team...the offense is the only thing that needs to step up at this point.


The thing that bothers me is that I see how well the staff is pitching and the offense is just squandering it right now. I see how much poetential this team has and they haven't hit it yet and frustrating as hell.

That said this is a good team and they'll get it going. If I was concerned about anything coming into the season it wasn't offense. Just put it together already, I'm sick of waiting.

SoxxoS
04-15-2007, 04:15 PM
These things even themselves out - as our pitching will go through a rough patch in the future and our offense will bail them out. Im not worried about the offense in the least.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:16 PM
I agree. And your point is...? Re-read my post. Do you disagree?

My point is this:

Numerous people (not singling anyone out) on WSI seem to have never watched an entire baseball season b/c they react as if the team is doomed when they go .500 on a road trip. Good teams go through much worse stretches than 5-6. Obviously, if they continue to play this way, they will not be successful. But there is nothing groundbreaking in saying, "If we continue to struggle with the bats, we probably won't have a great year."

Every sensible person will agree with that above statement. But it seems some people just cannot get over the fact that teams do not play great for 162 games. Again, this is not necessarily directed at you. It's directed at folks who claim they are venting. There's a difference between venting and constant bitching. Venting is an every once in a while type of thing. I don't think there is anyone at this website that hasn't vented. But constant bitching is when people complain after every single loss and even some wins.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying that Crede looks lost at the plate right now. Or that the approach of much of the team at the plate at this point leaves something to be desired. But to say it is completely unacceptable for a team to go through a stretch of 11 games at 5-6 is ridiculous. Of course the team and its fans want to win every game. But the reality is that will not happen. I'd much rather our losses come in close games where we had a chance to win rather than blowouts. And this team has been blown out exactly once this season. In the big picture, that's not too bad, especially considering the collective batting averages of many of our regulars.

TheOldRoman
04-15-2007, 04:17 PM
The good news is our bullpen has looked amazing, probably the best in baseball at this point. Our starters have pitched extremely well lately, and when they have gotten into trouble they have gotten out of it for the most part. Uribe and Pods, two of our biggest concerns entering the season have looked good so far.

The other good news is that our offense has been awful, but it won't continue to be awful. Thome, Konerko, Dye, Iguchi, and AJ will all bring their averages up. The defense was awful today but has generally been good this year. It was just a bad day for defense.

If the good things stay good, and the offense starts hitting, we'll go from a .500 team to a .800 team.I guess that depends on your definition of awful. If you consider it good being terrible against anyone who throws with their left hand, no matter how little talent they have, and being completely unable to hit anyone who throws under 90 mph, than we are doing fine. Our bats will heat up, but how much?

We are seeing the same **** we saw last year, so it isn't easy for me to say that the offense humiliating themselves against the great Paul Byrd and other similar outings are flukes. Paul Byrd is mediocre at best. The Sox overswung, chased garbage outside, and made him look dominant. Santana looked about as bad last Sunday as he has in two years. He couldn't find the strikezone early, so they helped him out. Though he was off, the "greatest offense in baseball" managed one lone hit. Lardass he is good pitcher, but he is far from the greatest. There is no excuse for how terrible the Sox hitters have been against him. I don't know why Greg Walker still has a job. With the talent the Sox have, they shouldn't be shut down by anyone who throws slow. And with a lineup full of righties, they should be able to hit lefthanders. If I was as bad at my job as Walker I would have been fired.

I'm sure a lot of people will say I am overreacting because it is so early in the year, and I hope the results the offense has given are not indicative of how they do this year. However, we are seeing what we saw much of last year, especially during our second half tailspin. Our pitching was bad last year, but we would have still made the playoffs if our offense didn't consistently underperform. We are going to win a lot of games because of our pitching this year, but that doesn't mean it is OK to throw what is nearly an automatic loss up there anytime we face a lefty or a mediocre converted reliever.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:17 PM
My point is this:

Numerous people (not singling anyone out) on WSI seem to have never watched an entire baseball season b/c they react as if the team is doomed when they go .500 on a road trip. Good teams go through much worse stretches than 5-6. Obviously, if they continue to play this way, they will not be successful. But there is nothing groundbreaking in saying, "If we continue to struggle with the bats, we probably won't have a great year."

Every sensible person will agree with that above statement. But it seems some people just cannot get over the fact that teams do not play great for 162 games. Again, this is not necessarily directed at you. It's directed at folks who claim they are venting. There's a difference between venting and constant bitching. Venting is an every once in a while type of thing. I don't think there is anyone at this website that hasn't vented. But constant bitching is when people complain after every single loss and even some wins.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying that Crede looks lost at the plate right now. Or that the approach of much of the team at the plate at this point leaves something to be desired. But to say it is completely unacceptable for a team to go through a stretch of 11 games at 5-6 is ridiculous. Of course the team and its fans want to win every game. But the reality is that will not happen. I'd much rather our losses come in close games where we had a chance to win rather than blowouts. And this team has been blown out exactly once this season. In the big picture, that's not too bad, especially considering the collective batting averages of many of our regulars.



Amen.

RockJock07
04-15-2007, 04:19 PM
I agree with Carlose, we should all be mad at the effort that was displayed in cleveland. They had a legiment shot to sweep the indians and they didn't do it. I also agree that if you are satisfited or accept a 3-3 roadtrip then your on crack because winning games now gives you breathing room later.

I think most people would agree that the losses the sox have suffered this season, except for the opener, have all been winnable games and the fashion that they lose is very familar to 2006 and 2004.

No one is writing anything off, but if they play like this the rest of may what do you say then, Oh it's the cold, it's still early? My schedual says regular season for may, it's time for them to start playing like it's the regular season because they can't just turn it on and off. They'll hit at some point but Tadhito looked like a player suited for A ball with his ab in the 9th against a subpar closer. I'm not asking for homers, i'm asking and expecting better at bats and better effort for our veteren guys.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:20 PM
No offense, but this saying erks me just a little. Have you watched or run in a marathon? The winners are the guys that separate themselves from the pack in the beginning and then keep up the pace.

And yes, I realize we are only 11 games into the season, but what concerns me is that we are playing so poorly right now, that we could end up in a much bigger hole before we know it while we are all saying, "don't worry, we will come around." When? Yeah, I'm a pessimist. Good guess.

It's just a saying that has a regularly accepted meaning throughout society. Whether it actually correlates to an actual marathon really is meaningless b/c of the understanding of what the saying means.

Tragg
04-15-2007, 04:22 PM
We've pitched well above reasonable expectations - allowed 4 runs or less in 9 of 11 games. (inflated team era from the first 2 games)

And we've hit well below reasonable expectations - scored 4 runs or less in 7 of 11 games, and 2 runs or less in 4 of them.

I guess I'm more pessimistic because before the season, I was more worried about O than about the pitching (because of age, a weak-hitting bench, and the odd lineup; and I didn't share others' worry about the 5 starter because they available talent to fill the role towered over what we saw in 03 and 04) so I don't have the confidence that this is complete aberration.

But I think we'll pitch well all year....it just needs to stay close to this well.

DickAllen72
04-15-2007, 04:22 PM
My point is this:

Numerous people (not singling anyone out) on WSI seem to have never watched an entire baseball season b/c they react as if the team is doomed when they go .500 on a road trip. Good teams go through much worse stretches than 5-6. Obviously, if they continue to play this way, they will not be successful. But there is nothing groundbreaking in saying, "If we continue to struggle with the bats, we probably won't have a great year."

Every sensible person will agree with that above statement. But it seems some people just cannot get over the fact that teams do not play great for 162 games. Again, this is not necessarily directed at you. It's directed at folks who claim they are venting. There's a difference between venting and constant bitching. Venting is an every once in a while type of thing. I don't think there is anyone at this website that hasn't vented. But constant bitching is when people complain after every single loss and even some wins.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying that Crede looks lost at the plate right now. Or that the approach of much of the team at the plate at this point leaves something to be desired. But to say it is completely unacceptable for a team to go through a stretch of 11 games at 5-6 is ridiculous. Of course the team and its fans want to win every game. But the reality is that will not happen. I'd much rather our losses come in close games where we had a chance to win rather than blowouts. And this team has been blown out exactly once this season. In the big picture, that's not too bad, especially considering the collective batting averages of many of our regulars.

I guess we do agree then.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 04:23 PM
I agree with Carlose, we should all be mad at the effort that was displayed in cleveland. They had a legiment shot to sweep the indians and they didn't do it. I also agree that if you are satisfited or accept a 3-3 roadtrip then your on crack because winning games now gives you breathing room later.

I think most people would agree that the losses the sox have suffered this season, except for the opener, have all been winnable games and the fashion that they lose is very familar to 2006 and 2004.

No one is writing anything off, but if they play like this the rest of may what do you say then, Oh it's the cold, it's still early? My schedual says regular season for may, it's time for them to start playing like it's the regular season because they can't just turn it on and off. They'll hit at some point but Tadhito looked like a player suited for A ball with his ab in the 9th against a subpar closer. I'm not asking for homers, i'm asking and expecting better at bats and better effort for our veteren guys.



Aren't 99% of games "winnable"? Is every loss supposed to be a 20 -0 score ? Enough of these posts about "if this, the sox would have won that". Here ya go.. "If the sox scored 10 runs a game, and shut the other team out every game, they'd be 11-0 now". Also stop equating effort with results. If you won every game you wanted to, every team would be 162-0.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:24 PM
I guess we do agree then.

I think we do. We just express it differently. :smile:

TheOldRoman
04-15-2007, 04:25 PM
We've pitched well above reasonable expectations - allowed 4 runs or less in 9 of 11 games. (inflated team era from the first 2 games)

And we've hit well below reasonable expectations - scored 4 runs or less in 7 of 11 games, and 2 runs or less in 4 of them.

I guess I'm more pessimistic because before the season, I was more worried about O than about the pitching (because of age, a weak-hitting bench, and the odd lineup) so I don't have the confidence that this is complete aberration.

But I think we'll pitch well all year....it just needs to stay close to this well.
Your what hurts? Show me a team that has a better bench than Ozuna, Mackowiak, Cintron, and Hall (when healthy). When (and if) Hall comes back, we have the best bench in baseball, especially if Anderson can overtake Erstad and put him on the bench.

CLR01
04-15-2007, 04:25 PM
If you won every game you wanted to, every team would be 162-0.


Except the Royals.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:26 PM
No one is writing anything off, but if they play like this the rest of may what do you say then, Oh it's the cold, it's still early? My schedual says regular season for may, it's time for them to start playing like it's the regular season because they can't just turn it on and off. They'll hit at some point but Tadhito looked like a player suited for A ball with his ab in the 9th against a subpar closer. I'm not asking for homers, i'm asking and expecting better at bats and better effort for our veteren guys.

Here's the thing: it isn't the end of May. My schedule says there have been 11 games played. Obviously if they don't hit for the first two months of the season, then there will be dire consequences. But being 5-6 after 11 games is not exactly a nail in the coffin.

chisoxmike
04-15-2007, 04:28 PM
I guess that depends on your definition of awful. If you consider it good being terrible against anyone who throws with their left hand, no matter how little talent they have, and being completely unable to hit anyone who throws under 90 mph, than we are doing fine. Our bats will heat up, but how much?

We are seeing the same **** we saw last year, so it isn't easy for me to say that the offense humiliating themselves against the great Paul Byrd and other similar outings are flukes. Paul Byrd is mediocre at best. The Sox overswung, chased garbage outside, and made him look dominant. Santana looked about as bad last Sunday as he has in two years. He couldn't find the strikezone early, so they helped him out. Though he was off, the "greatest offense in baseball" managed one lone hit. Lardass he is good pitcher, but he is far from the greatest. There is no excuse for how terrible the Sox hitters have been against him. I don't know why Greg Walker still has a job. With the talent the Sox have, they shouldn't be shut down by anyone who throws slow. And with a lineup full of righties, they should be able to hit lefthanders. If I was as bad at my job as Walker I would have been fired.

I'm sure a lot of people will say I am overreacting because it is so early in the year, and I hope the results the offense has given are not indicative of how they do this year. However, we are seeing what we saw much of last year, especially during our second half tailspin. Our pitching was bad last year, but we would have still made the playoffs if our offense didn't consistently underperform. We are going to win a lot of games because of our pitching this year, but that doesn't mean it is OK to throw what is nearly an automatic loss up there anytime we face a lefty or a mediocre converted reliever.

You have taken my main concern about this team right out of my brain. I pretty much agree with everything you just said. The Sox are far from doomed, but this offense, while will score many many runs, scares me against lefties and junk ballers. It's amazing who shuts this team down sometimes.

RockJock07
04-15-2007, 04:31 PM
Aren't 99% of games "winnable"? Is every loss supposed to be a 20 -0 score ? Enough of these posts about "if this, the sox would have won that". Here ya go.. "If the sox scored 10 runs a game, and shut the other team out every game, they'd be 11-0 now". Also stop equating effort with results. If you won every game you wanted to, every team would be 162-0.

winnable game= paul byrd on the mound, shutout, Joe blow closing two days in a row, nothing. Secondly, giving better effort may produce better results. allow me to explain. In the 9th, tadahito looked awful. The 2nd strike he looked awful on and then on the strikeout he chased the same exact hanger that the 2nd strike was. that is poor effort. furthermore, I love a.j. but we know that he is incapable of taking a pitch but when you consider the situation, he need to be selective and not go up there just hacking away. That's what I mean about effort equating to results.

EndemicSox
04-15-2007, 04:33 PM
Oh well, this kind of pitching will win 99 of 100 games...i'll take it everytime. The hitting will get better.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 04:33 PM
You have taken my main concern about this team right out of my brain. I pretty much agree with everything you just said. The Sox are far from doomed, but this offense, while will score many many runs, scares me against lefties and junk ballers. It's amazing who shuts this team down sometimes.

I don't think you'll find too many people who disagree with this. My main issue is the approach many guys have taken at the plate against some of these pitchers. They very well may be going up there looking to hit the ball up the middle or the other way, but it doesn't look like it. Especially when you're struggling, that needs to be your main focus, IMO.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 04:35 PM
It's just a saying that has a regularly accepted meaning throughout society. Whether it actually correlates to an actual marathon really is meaningless b/c of the understanding of what the saying means.

I know that. I just wanted to sound clever and philisophical injecting a bit of fact into an overused cliche to get my point across. My point being that I do not write these games off because of [insert excuse]. The Indians did not play all that well this series, nor did the A's last series. We lost some winnable games, and for all those saying we will turn it around, so will these teams. C.C. looked dominant today, but only because our offense was terrible. He was not that dominant, but he probably wil be later in the season. So will Santana, and so will a number of other teams. Saying things will change for us while ignoring that things will also change for the other teams in our division is silly. These games against our divisional rivals (including KC) are going to be difficult all year long. We need to win them when we are given the opportunity to do so, and today we did not.

TheOldRoman
04-15-2007, 04:37 PM
Oh well, this kind of pitching will win 99 of 100 games...i'll take it everytime. The hitting will get better.This kind of pitching has already lost four games for the Sox this year. And I don't think it is pessimistic to say that Aardsma won't finish the year with a 0.90 ERA and nearly 15K/9IP

IlliniSox4Life
04-15-2007, 04:39 PM
I guess that depends on your definition of awful. If you consider it good being terrible against anyone who throws with their left hand, no matter how little talent they have, and being completely unable to hit anyone who throws under 90 mph, than we are doing fine. Our bats will heat up, but how much?

Obviously it's not good being as bad as we have been offensively. But it won't continue for the rest of the season. That is good news.


We are seeing the same **** we saw last year, so it isn't easy for me to say that the offense humiliating themselves against the great Paul Byrd and other similar outings are flukes. Paul Byrd is mediocre at best. The Sox overswung, chased garbage outside, and made him look dominant. Santana looked about as bad last Sunday as he has in two years. He couldn't find the strikezone early, so they helped him out. Though he was off, the "greatest offense in baseball" managed one lone hit. Lardass he is good pitcher, but he is far from the greatest. There is no excuse for how terrible the Sox hitters have been against him. I don't know why Greg Walker still has a job. With the talent the Sox have, they shouldn't be shut down by anyone who throws slow. And with a lineup full of righties, they should be able to hit lefthanders. If I was as bad at my job as Walker I would have been fired.

I'm sure a lot of people will say I am overreacting because it is so early in the year, and I hope the results the offense has given are not indicative of how they do this year. However, we are seeing what we saw much of last year, especially during our second half tailspin. Our pitching was bad last year, but we would have still made the playoffs if our offense didn't consistently underperform. We are going to win a lot of games because of our pitching this year, but that doesn't mean it is OK to throw what is nearly an automatic loss up there anytime we face a lefty or a mediocre converted reliever.

We've averaged 3.45 runs a game this season. Last year we averaged 5.35 runs a game. The offense had trouble last season at times, but wasn't as bad as we have been this season. If the offense has been performing how we did last year as you state, we would have scored about 5 runs a game. If we did that we would have won every game other than the first two when we had horrible pitching. I just don't get how you can say the offense is performing how they did last year.

TheOldRoman
04-15-2007, 04:43 PM
Obviously it's not good being as bad as we have been offensively. But it won't continue for the rest of the season. That is good news.



We've averaged 3.45 runs a game this season. Last year we averaged 5.35 runs a game. The offense had trouble last season at times, but wasn't as bad as we have been this season. If the offense has been performing how we did last year as you state, we would have scored about 5 runs a game. If we did that we would have won every game other than the first two when we had horrible pitching. I just don't get how you can say the offense is performing how they did last year.
The offense was horribly inconsistent last year. They put up loads of runs at a time, and then get shut down for games at a time. It was like a better version of the 2000-2004 offense. Their explosions made their numbers look great, but their inconsistency cost them a lot of games. I won't be happy with 5.35 runs a game if it means we destroy righties who throw hard, and get 1-2 runs against lefties and minor league call-ups.

jabrch
04-15-2007, 05:02 PM
It has been said many times - I'll say it again.

If we get pitching like this from the starters and the pen, we will win a lot of games.

This just wasn't one of them.

IlliniSox4Life
04-15-2007, 05:02 PM
The offense was horribly inconsistent last year. They put up loads of runs at a time, and then get shut down for games at a time. It was like a better version of the 2000-2004 offense. Their explosions made their numbers look great, but their inconsistency cost them a lot of games. I won't be happy with 5.35 runs a game if it means we destroy righties who throw hard, and get 1-2 runs against lefties and minor league call-ups.


The 2006 Sox lost 15 games where 5 runs would have won it for them.
The 2005 Sox lost 19 games where 5 runs would have won it for them.

Offense was not the problem last year, pitching was.

Tragg
04-15-2007, 05:05 PM
Show me a team that has a better bench than Ozuna, Mackowiak, Cintron, and Hall (when healthy). There's not a signficantly above average hitter in the bunch. It's a good bench in the sense that it can cover multiple positions and allow us to substitute a lot of players and to put B teams out there (which is fine with me - keeps people rested). But the statement to which you objected was that it is weak-hitting.

MCHSoxFan
04-15-2007, 05:07 PM
The 2006 Sox lost 15 games where 5 runs would have won it for them.
The 2005 Sox lost 19 games where 5 runs would have won it for them.

Offense was not the problem last year, pitching was.

Great point and good proof!!! :D: Last year, it WAS our PITCHING. However, it is true we could have had more clutch at-bats. Overall, if our pitching was great, we might not have had to have those good clutch at-bats that would make or break our chance of winning the game in late innings.

TomBradley72
04-15-2007, 05:09 PM
Crede get the "goat horns" for today's game. Two errors, horrible at the plate, and then loses his composure after the called 3rd strike. He's a veteran, he needs to avoid getting kicked out of the game. We lost TWO ABs later in the game because he wasn't in the line up. Now a lefty Mack has to go against the Sabathia AND CC can pitch around Jermaine because Mack is in the on deck circle.
The lack of RH "pop" off the bench is the achilles heal of this roster. Against top lefties or in late inning situations...we have Ozuna, Anderson, Cintron and Molina off the bench...it's going to kill us over a long season..especially in our division.

ilsox7
04-15-2007, 05:11 PM
Crede get ths "goat horns" for today's game. Two errors, horrible at the plate, and then loses his composure after the called 3rd strike. He's a veteran, he needs to avoid getting kicked out of the game. We lost TWO ABs later in the game because he wasn't in the line up. Now a lefty Mack has to go against the Sabathia AND CC can pitch around Jermaine because Mack is in the on deck circle.

I was actually glad to see some fire from Joe in that situation. Plus, Mack put a better swing on the ball and made better contact than Joe had all day. Only bad luck prevented him from driving in a run.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 05:52 PM
The games at the beginning of the season count just as much as those in September. Each of these games against Cleveland count as much as each of the remaining thirteen.

Nobody is saying they definitely won't play better than this, but if they continue to play at this rate for the rest of the season they won't make the playoffs. Hence, the answer to your original question, "What's the problem?," is "Not good enough."

My point was that the series is 2-4 in favor of Cleveland but only two weeks into the season. Plenty of times to even those numbers out.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 05:54 PM
No offense, but this saying erks me just a little. Have you watched or run in a marathon? The winners are the guys that separate themselves from the pack in the beginning and then keep up the pace.

Have you ever watched a marathon? How often does the guy who leads early in the race end up winning it all?

In terms of a marathon, the racers haven't even ran two miles yet. You think a runner a few seconds back of the leader at this point is sweating it? I sure don't think so.

slobes
04-15-2007, 06:05 PM
Our starters and bullpen continue to be the only reason a White Sox game is worth watching.

TheVulture
04-15-2007, 06:13 PM
"who cares" about winning or loosing?
Those suffering from constipation?

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 06:19 PM
Look at the Twins last year. They had a losing record in what, May or June??? Yes it sucks to lose to these clowns when the only guy that got a hit was the FIRST BATTER OF THE GAME, but one good streak and we can dust these teams IMO.


We have a good starting rotation but unfortunately the Sox do not have a single guy in the rotation that can carry a team for 3 months as did Johan and Lariano.

And the Twins rarely kicked the ball around last year resulting in beating yourslef.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 06:36 PM
We have a good starting rotation but unfortunately the Sox do not have a single guy in the rotation that can carry a team for 3 months as did Johan and Lariano.

And the Twins rarely kicked the ball around last year resulting in beating yourslef.


Jose says hello. Granted Contreras this minute isnt late 2005 Contreras, but he still renders your statement false.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 06:38 PM
Have you ever watched a marathon? How often does the guy who leads early in the race end up winning it all?

In terms of a marathon, the racers haven't even ran two miles yet. You think a runner a few seconds back of the leader at this point is sweating it? I sure don't think so.

Actually yes, I have and do watch marathons and I have watched the original leader win. What you are missing is the comparison between a five team race and a 35,000 person race. Out of the gates, PK could lead a marathon if he was in front at the starting line, but the winner is always in the top 20%. In baseball there is no pole position. The race is station to station, and the early lead is important. No one has an insurmountable lead at this point, but if the Sox keep playing like this, they will be out of it soon as we have three other top AL teams in our division. That is what some fans here are afraid of, and what some fans here are trying to ignore by saying, "we will turn it around," "the offense will pick it up soon," "if the pitching continues like this, we will win a lot of games," etc. Well, I am not banking on all three of the twins, tigers and indians to falter thoroughly enough for an underperforming White Sox team to pass them all. We need to be at the front of the pack (meaning 1 or 2) at all times, and right now we are 4. 11 games, yes, but no one has played fantastically yet, and everyone is going to pick up their performance. Where will that leave us in the end?

Optimism is good. Arrogance is not. Ignorance will get you a job on ESPN.

Lukin13
04-15-2007, 06:44 PM
In '05 the sox won the ugly ones like this.... all of them. This is two they lost this week.

When you rely on boppers and they don't bop, it is hard to win.

Had plenty of luck getting out of jams today, hate to not capitalize on a gift.:whiner:

Soxfest
04-15-2007, 06:45 PM
CC owns the Sox............:angry:

Deebs14
04-15-2007, 06:49 PM
Just out of curiosity, when was the last time that the Sox beat Sabathia?

Any of you stat-heads care to shed some light on a lazy bum like myself? :gulp:

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 06:51 PM
In '05 the sox won the ugly ones like this.... all of them. This is two they lost this week.

When you rely on boppers and they don't bop, it is hard to win.

Had plenty of luck getting out of jams today, hate to not capitalize on a gift.:whiner:

Gee you must have missed all the ugly losses in August and September of 05.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 06:52 PM
So because they didn't have the score up, one time, they're awful? CSN > FSN in hundreds of different ways.

Kerry Sayers >>> Dyrol Joyner

Brian26
04-15-2007, 06:55 PM
The Twins went on an AMAZING streak.

11-1 in the postseason. That's the only streak that will ever matter around here, and never forget it. The '06 Twins streak meant nothing, and neither did the '05 Indians streak.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 06:58 PM
I love a.j. but we know that he is incapable of taking a pitch but when you consider the situation, he need to be selective and not go up there just hacking away.

I'd pay to see you tell him this to this face.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 06:58 PM
Actually yes, I have and do watch marathons and I have watched the original leader win. What you are missing is the comparison between a five team race and a 35,000 person race. Out of the gates, PK could lead a marathon if he was in front at the starting line, but the winner is always in the top 20%. In baseball there is no pole position. The race is station to station, and the early lead is important. No one has an insurmountable lead at this point, but if the Sox keep playing like this, they will be out of it soon as we have three other top AL teams in our division. That is what some fans here are afraid of, and what some fans here are trying to ignore by saying, "we will turn it around," "the offense will pick it up soon," "if the pitching continues like this, we will win a lot of games," etc. Well, I am not banking on all three of the twins, tigers and indians to falter thoroughly enough for an underperforming White Sox team to pass them all. We need to be at the front of the pack (meaning 1 or 2) at all times, and right now we are 4. 11 games, yes, but no one has played fantastically yet, and everyone is going to pick up their performance. Where will that leave us in the end?

Optimism is good. Arrogance is not. Ignorance will get you a job on ESPN.

To suggest the Sox are not in the pack at this point in this marathon analogy is absurd. The Sox could be leading this division by the end of the week...and there would still be over 22 miles to go.

We need to be in front at all times? Why? The only time you MUST be in front is at the end of the season.

And all the other teams will pick up their performance? So Garko and his .381 average is just warming up? Cuddyer and his .356 average is just a taste of things to come? Guys are going to pick it up and come back to earth accordingly as the season progresses. To extrapolate a season based on the first two weeks is silly.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 06:59 PM
This kind of pitching has already lost four games for the Sox this year. And I don't think it is pessimistic to say that Aardsma won't finish the year with a 0.90 ERA and nearly 15K/9IP

I just picked him up off waivers in my fantasy league, so I expect him to finish with those numbers.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 07:02 PM
We have a good starting rotation but unfortunately the Sox do not have a single guy in the rotation that can carry a team for 3 months as did Johan and Lariano.

I think the Sox have three guys that could do that very easily.

infohawk
04-15-2007, 07:13 PM
You're wrong. Baseball is a marathon, not a sprint. Every team is going to go through times when they have trouble scoring runs. The fact that the Sox went 3-3 while having some difficulty swinging the bats is a good thing. Obviously, if the bats do not heat up, then the season will be a struggle. But if this is just a stretch of some offensive difficulties, then I'll take 3-3 at Cleveland and Oakland any time.
Exactly. Its not like anyone is running away with the division and the Sox are out to a 3-8 start. This division will likely stay bunched for quite a while. Too many good teams will make it hard to just run away with it, especially early. The Sox have had a particularly tough opening couple of weeks and are playing .500 ball. They are in good shape and will start hitting.

Jjav829
04-15-2007, 07:15 PM
Just out of curiosity, when was the last time that the Sox beat Sabathia?

Any of you stat-heads care to shed some light on a lazy bum like myself? :gulp:

You don't really have to be a stat-head to pull up Sabathia's game logs from the past few years. The last time we beat Sabathia himself was July 15th, 2005. We did win two games last year that were started by Sabathia, but we won those games off the Tribe bullpen.

As for today's game, Gustavo Molina, Brian Anderson and Darin Erstad made up 1/3 of our lineup, and the heart of our offense has looked like crap to start the season. And we were facing one of the better starters in the game. Is it any surprise we scored only 1 run?

Craig Grebeck
04-15-2007, 07:25 PM
I think the Sox have three guys that could do that very easily.
Name 'em. We don't have ONE guy in either of their leagues, and certainly not three.
I'd pay to see you tell him this to this face.
Woot he's a tough guy!!! I wish he spent more time trying to regain his pre-Sox hitting form.

robinohio2
04-15-2007, 07:31 PM
Because the division is so strong these games are important but no more or less important than the other division rivals. Last year I would be elated with taking two series from the Sox but this year things are so balanced in the division that it is hard to feel confident.

While our bats cooled down the last two games still winning is a huge boost to Cleveland because last year they won almost none of those games. It is a long season and I honestly gained more respect for the Sox in the series. I don't think I have read one person who was surprised that the Tribe did so well since many people wrote the Tribe off as not even competition.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 07:32 PM
Name 'em. We don't have ONE guy in either of their leagues, and certainly not three.

Woot he's a tough guy!!! I wish he spent more time trying to regain his pre-Sox hitting form.


Hard to give Liriano his own "league", or lump him in with a true star Like Santana, until he proves it over the long haul.

oeo
04-15-2007, 07:33 PM
Because the division is so strong these games are important but no more or less important than the other division rivals. Last year I would be elated with taking two series from the Sox but this year things are so balanced in the division that it is hard to feel confident.

While our bats cooled down the last two games still winning is a huge boost to Cleveland because last year they won almost none of those games. It is a long season and I honestly gained more respect for the Sox in the series. I don't think I have read one person who was surprised that the Tribe did so well since many people wrote the Tribe off as not even competition.

Who wrote them off? You're full of more **** than Twins fans. After winning only 78 games last year, they were picked to win the division by many. Get out from under your rock.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 07:34 PM
Who wrote them off? You're full of more **** than Twins fans. After winning only 78 games last year, they were picked to win the division by many. Get out from under your rock.

I thought it was a good post. What's with all the hate?

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 07:34 PM
Because the division is so strong these games are important but no more or less important than the other division rivals. Last year I would be elated with taking two series from the Sox but this year things are so balanced in the division that it is hard to feel confident.

While our bats cooled down the last two games still winning is a huge boost to Cleveland because last year they won almost none of those games. It is a long season and I honestly gained more respect for the Sox in the series. I don't think I have read one person who was surprised that the Tribe did so well since many people wrote the Tribe off as not even competition.


Many were crowning the Indians pre-season last year, based on their great 2005 surge. If the Tribe still had Belliard and Crisp, they'd have an awesome shot this year too.

oeo
04-15-2007, 07:35 PM
I thought it was a good post. What's with all the hate?

Who wrote them off? You're kidding me...

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 07:37 PM
To suggest the Sox are not in the pack at this point in this marathon analogy is absurd. The Sox could be leading this division by the end of the week...and there would still be over 22 miles to go.

We need to be in front at all times? Why? The only time you MUST be in front is at the end of the season.

And all the other teams will pick up their performance? So Garko and his .381 average is just warming up? Cuddyer and his .356 average is just a taste of things to come? Guys are going to pick it up and come back to earth accordingly as the season progresses. To extrapolate a season based on the first two weeks is silly.

1. The Sox are not in the top 20% of their division at this time. They are not in the top 40%. They are not in the top 60%. By definition, in comparison to a marathon, the Sox are way back. (For every team in the ALCD, there are approximately 7000 runners in a marathon assuming 35,000 to start. So the Sox are somewhere behind the 27,000th runner in the marathon at the 1.78 mile mark. The winner of the marathon is in the top 100 guaranteed.)

2. Why must we be in front? Like I said, not in the very first slot at all times, but near the front so that in a 3-5 game swing, you can take the lead. Yes, the winner is the team in front at the end, but if you are not close to the leader towards the end, it will be tough if not impossible to overtake them in the final stretch.

3. No, Garko will probably not be hitting >381+ at the end of the year, and Cuddyer will not be hitting .354+, but Cleveland's pitching is tough and will stay tough. Plus, by the end of the year, Hafner will be hitting .300 +/- .20 (.212 now) with much higher power numbers; Barfield will bring his average well over .200 (.182 now); Blake will bring his average well over .200 (.194 now); Martinez will return from the DL and manage a .300 +/- .20 average; Cuddyer will not slip that much (I'm guessing he will hit .300 +/- .10); the pirhannas will raise their average around .100 points; Ordonez will raise his average, Rodriguez will raise his average; Guillen will raise his average; monroe will raise his average; Sheffield will raise his average; Casey will raise his average; Inge will raise his average; Thames will raise his average; and all while the pitching among the ALCD stays as is. All teams in this division have strong pitching and defense, and they have all won thus far based on it since the offense across the division has been down.

So what makes some people here assume that only the White Sox pitching will remain as strong as it has been thus far; only the White Sox offense will get better than it has; and only the White Sox defense will stay strong (today excluded). That's like saying in a marathon, after 2 miles, I know I have more than 27,000 people to pass, but I expect them all to slow down while I speed up. That is absurd.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 07:38 PM
Who wrote them off? You're kidding me...

Who wrote them off? Intelligent baseball writers and intelligent fans, that's who. But it is only two weeks into the season. Why do so many people think it is the middle of September?

palehozenychicty
04-15-2007, 07:38 PM
Many were crowning the Indians pre-season last year, based on their great 2005 surge. If the Tribe still had Belliard and Crisp, they'd have an awesome shot this year too.

Exactly. The man-love for a team that has done nothing is unreal. People have been talking about the Indians for the past three years. This weekend they took advantage of the Sox's shaky play and pulled out two games. They didn't outplay the Sox at all. Time will tell, though.

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 07:39 PM
1. The Sox are not in the top 20% of their division at this time. They are not in the top 40%. They are not in the top 60%. By definition, in comparison to a marathon, the Sox are way back. (For every team in the ALCD, there are approximately 7000 runners in a marathon assuming 35,000 to start. So the Sox are somewhere behind the 27,000th runner in the marathon at the 1.78 mile mark. The winner of the marathon is in the top 100 guaranteed.)

2. Why must we be in front? Like I said, not in the very first slot at all times, but near the front so that in a 3-5 game swing, you can take the lead. Yes, the winner is the team in front at the end, but if you are not close to the leader towards the end, it will be tough if not impossible to overtake them in the final stretch.

3. No, Garko will probably not be hitting >381+ at the end of the year, and Cuddyer will not be hitting .354+, but Cleveland's pitching is tough and will stay tough. Plus, by the end of the year, Hafner will be hitting .300 +/- .20 (.212 now) with much higher power numbers; Barfield will bring his average well over .200 (.182 now); Blake will bring his average well over .200 (.194 now); Martinez will return from the DL and manage a .300 +/- .20 average; Cuddyer will not slip that much (I'm guessing he will hit .300 +/- .10); the pirhannas will raise their average around .100 points; Ordonez will raise his average, Rodriguez will raise his average; Guillen will raise his average; monroe will raise his average; Sheffield will raise his average; Casey will raise his average; Inge will raise his average; Thames will raise his average; and all while the pitching among the ALCD stays as is. All teams in this division have strong pitching and defense, and they have all won thus far based on it since the offense across the division has been down.

So what makes some people here assume that only the White Sox pitching will remain as strong as it has been thus far; only the White Sox offense will get better than it has; and only the White Sox defense will stay strong (today excluded). That's like saying in a marathon, after 2 miles, I know I have more than 27,000 people to pass, but I expect them all to slow down while I speed up. That is absurd.

Is this post supposed to be a joke?

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 07:40 PM
Jose says hello. Granted Contreras this minute isnt late 2005 Contreras, but he still renders your statement false.

To mention Jose in the same sentence as Johan right now, you have to be kidding me?

oeo
04-15-2007, 07:41 PM
Who wrote them off? Intelligent baseball writers and intelligent fans, that's who. But it is only two weeks into the season. Why do so many people think it is the middle of September?

Look back at that crap, and there were plenty picking the Indians to either win the division or finish 2nd or 3rd. I don't think anyone picked them behind the Sox, who won 90 games last year.

He's trying to come in here saying that there people doubting them like they were going to be in the cellar all year, a la the 2005 White Sox. It was nothing like that, it is nothing like that. Maybe this guy doubted his team, but the majority of the media did not. The Sox are the team that's supposed to finish fourth, not the Indians. I don't want to hear this proving them wrong bull****.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 07:41 PM
I think the Sox have three guys that could do that very easily.


Please name them

oeo
04-15-2007, 07:44 PM
Please name them

Both Buehlre and Contreras can do it and have done it.

That's besides the point, though, because Johan and Liriano didn't carry the team last year. And we definitely don't need a starting pitcher to carry our team either.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 07:46 PM
Name 'em. We don't have ONE guy in either of their leagues, and certainly not three.


The poster said that "the Sox don't have a single starting pitcher who can carry the team for three months." That's the exact quote. He wasn't comparing our pitchers to Santana or Sabathia.

Like I said, we have at least three guys who can carry this team.

1.) Contreras, who won 17 games in a row between the 2nd half of '05 and first half of last year.

2.) Garland started '05 season 8-0 and certainly carried the sox staff in the first half. In '06, he went 10-4 in the 2nd half and helped pick up the slack when Contreras and Buehrle cooled off.

3.) The third guy who can do it is Vazquez. Watch what happens this year.

I don't think Buehrle can necessarily carry the staff as unbeatable for an extended period because he throws too much junk and has tendencies to have in-between bad outings.

Brian26
04-15-2007, 07:48 PM
To mention Jose in the same sentence as Johan right now, you have to be kidding me?

Should we just pack up and end the season now then? Certainly Contreras, who was unhittable at this time last year, will never win another game again.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 07:50 PM
Is this post supposed to be a joke?

Are you laughing?

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 07:51 PM
Are you laughing?

I was laughing when I read it.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 07:52 PM
The poster said that "the Sox don't have a single starting pitcher who can carry the team for three months." That's the exact quote. He wasn't comparing our pitchers to Santana or Sabathia.

Like I said, we have at least three guys who can carry this team.

1.) Contreras, who won 17 games in a row between the 2nd half of '05 and first half of last year.

2.) Garland started '05 season 8-0 and certainly carried the sox staff in the first half. In '06, he went 10-4 in the 2nd half and helped pick up the slack when Contreras and Buehrle cooled off.

3.) The third guy who can do it is Vazquez. Watch what happens this year.

I don't think Buehrle can necessarily carry the staff as unbeatable for an extended period because he throws too much junk and has tendencies to have in-between bad outings.

I think Contreras and Garland are in the same boat as Buehrle, they have become nibblers since they have lost velocity.

Vazques is the only guy of that group I can see putting up a Johan type run or even a Contreras run like the one in the second half of 2005.

oeo
04-15-2007, 07:57 PM
I think Contreras and Garland are in the same boat as Buehrle, they have become nibblers since they have lost velocity.

Vazques is the only guy of that group I can see putting up a Johan type run or even a Contreras run like the one in the second half of 2005.

You're kidding, right? Vazquez is the biggest 'nibbler' on this staff. That's the biggest thing that pisses me off about him.

Has everyone on the Sox either lost 'velocity' or 'a step'? You people are amazing; I really wonder how you go through life without freaking out over every little thing.

whitesoxfan
04-15-2007, 07:58 PM
I think Contreras and Garland are in the same boat as Buehrle, they have become nibblers since they have lost velocity.

Vazques is the only guy of that group I can see putting up a Johan type run or even a Contreras run like the one in the second half of 2005.

Contreras has always been a nibbler, even when he was dominant the second half of 05 and the start of 06.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 07:59 PM
Should we just pack up and end the season now then? Certainly Contreras, who was unhittable at this time last year, will never win another game again.


No way in hell should they pack up.

But the offesne definately needs to get their heads of their ass before they put this team in a deep hole. Yes it is only 2.5 games from 1st place but please remember we are chasing 3 teams here and not just one.

And each one of those teams being chased has an ACE on the top of that staff that makes you say "Oh my God." (Twins = Johan, Indians = CC, Tigers = Verlander / Bonderman / Rogers (When healthy, we make him look like Cy Young also)
We don't have that "Oh my God" type pitcher here. Vazquez can be that guy but we have to wait and see if he will get it done.

whitesoxfan
04-15-2007, 07:59 PM
You're kidding, right? Vazquez is the biggest 'nibbler' on this staff. That's the biggest thing that pisses me off about him.

Has everyone on the Sox either lost 'velocity' or 'a step'? You people are amazing.

Yeah, none of these pitchers have lost velocity. I think Garland does a fine job of going after the hitters. Same with Buehrle. Vazquez is a huge nibbler, and Contreras does it as well. But try to find a starting staff that doesn't have guys like that.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 08:02 PM
You're kidding, right? Vazquez is the biggest 'nibbler' on this staff. That's the biggest thing that pisses me off about him.

Has everyone on the Sox either lost 'velocity' or 'a step'? You people are amazing; I really wonder how you go through life without freaking out over every little thing.

Vazquez has changed his ways a bit this year. He went right after Twin hitters in his first start and then did the same to the Indian hitters when he ran into jams on Friday.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 08:05 PM
Contreras has always been a nibbler, even when he was dominant the second half of 05 and the start of 06.

Go pick up tape of all of his starts in the '05 play offs and you will see a different pitcher. They guy was 0-2 & 1-2 exclusively and everything was hard in the zone. Pretty much his attitude was, you want to hit me, here it is.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 08:06 PM
Exactly. The man-love for a team that has done nothing is unreal. People have been talking about the Indians for the past three years. This weekend they took advantage of the Sox's shaky play and pulled out two games. They didn't outplay the Sox at all. Time will tell, though.

This is what annoys me the most as a Sox fan. Since 2000, a majority of Sox fans have been giving the "man-love" to the Sox despite them losing to the Twins almost every year (2005 excluded) based on pre-season (paper) expectations. And other than 2005, how many times did the Sox win? Now, when another team gets the same "man-love" based on past performance (paper), some Sox fans jump all over it like it is ridiculous. Pre-Season predictions are just that, pre-season, based on career states and last year's performance.

I love the Sox, and always will. At the beginning of every year, I think they are the best team in baseball, and sometimes they make me look smart (2005), and sometimes not. Things can always change. In fact, in all probability, they will. But ignoring the fact that there are four potential playoff teams in this division, and three of them are ahead of us right now, is crazy. I love this division now because it is so tough. That's what makes winning it so awesome. But losing is always disappointing.

PorkChopExpress
04-15-2007, 08:11 PM
I was laughing when I read it.

Was it funny for being awesome?

oeo
04-15-2007, 08:17 PM
Vazquez has changed his ways a bit this year. He went right after Twin hitters in his first start and then did the same to the Indian hitters when he ran into jams on Friday.

You must have been watching a different game than I was on Friday then. Repeatedly, Javy would go 0-2, and then work the count to full. That's his biggest problem...he can't just finish guys. He gets ahead and then starts nibbling, hoping they'll chase something. He throws too many pitches, which leads to later inning collapses because the hitters know what to expect, and also a tired arm because he's up close to 100 around the 5th inning. He's afraid to pitch for contact...he needs to learn that he has a defense behind him and doesn't have to strike every guy out. It's frustrating as all hell to watch him get ahead of every guy and end up throwing 6, 7, 8 pitches.

If he learns to stop nibbling, of course he can be the ace of this staff. I actually predicted that he would be before the season...but I haven't seen many changes.

Palehose Pete
04-15-2007, 08:20 PM
This post is for the public record that I am, like the White Sox, more than a little disappointed in the offense at the present time.

About today's game, I say, "Guh!"

At least it's only April 15. We'll bounce back against the Tiggers next week.

And now back your regularly scheduled programming.

oeo
04-15-2007, 08:30 PM
This post is for the public record that I am, like the White Sox, more than a little disappointed in the offense at the present time.

About today's game, I say, "Guh!"

At least it's only April 15. We'll bounce back against the Tiggers next week.

And now back your regularly scheduled programming.

I hope we hand it to the Rangers, first. They're definitely struggling to start the season, so a sweep would be great.

Grzegorz
04-15-2007, 08:30 PM
The hitting will come around and once that happens this team will be unstoppable. I don't know about anyone else, but I am excited for the next few weeks.

This is the best team in baseball...and the pitching is somewhere between great and awesome. Pitching wins championships.

The Chicago White Sox are not going to be unstoppable. This is the toughest division in baseball and April is a tough month.

I am damned excited about the next couple of weeks and through out the season. This is going to be a slug fest down to the wire.

I wouldn't have it any other way.

BanditJimmy
04-15-2007, 08:32 PM
You must have been watching a different game than I was on Friday then. Repeatedly, Javy would go 0-2, and then work the count to full. That's his biggest problem...he can't just finish guys. He gets ahead and then starts nibbling, hoping they'll chase something. He throws too many pitches, which leads to later inning collapses because the hitters know what to expect, and also a tired arm because he's up close to 100 around the 5th inning. He's afraid to pitch for contact...he needs to learn that he has a defense behind him and doesn't have to strike every guy out. It's frustrating as all hell to watch him get ahead of every guy and end up throwing 6, 7, 8 pitches.

If he learns to stop nibbling, of course he can be the ace of this staff. I actually predicted that he would be before the season...but I haven't seen many changes.

If pitch count is a problem with Javy then your guy Jose is right there with him. The 2nd half last year and so far this year he is usually around 50 pitches before the National Anthem.

Palehose Pete
04-15-2007, 08:46 PM
I hope we hand it to the Rangers, first. They're definitely struggling to start the season, so a sweep would be great.

Agreed. The Rangers will hopefully be a good confidence booster for the Sox for when they have to face the Tigers on the road and at home in the next couple of weeks.

schmitty9800
04-15-2007, 09:57 PM
I'm not singling anyone out but I have to wonder if there's a bit of racism in some of today's criticism of Contreras. John Danks allows eight baserunners and 2 earned runs in 5.1 IP, and it's a promising start that he should've won. Contreras allows six baserunners in [EDIT: I had 6 IP here but he only went 5] and 0 ER he didn't do enough to win?

Brian26
04-15-2007, 10:00 PM
I'm not singling anyone out but I have to wonder if there's a bit of racism in some of today's criticism of Contreras.

People simply have different expectations for the Opening Day starter than they do for the #5 starter who wasn't even supposed to make the big league club this year. Racism has nothing to do with it.

Aside from that, blame has to go to the offense today more than anything the hurlers did.

WSox597
04-15-2007, 10:06 PM
Contreras allows six baserunners in 6 IP and 0 ER he didn't do enough to win?

Conveniently left off that first inning of opening day there.

Racism is just a silly charge. Sox fans mostly love Contreras. The Sox would not have won in '05 without him. He had a rough second half last year, there is no denying that. He wasn't the only one who did.

Lip Man 1
04-15-2007, 10:25 PM
This is the 3rd time in franchise history the Sox lost a game where they allowed one hit. Here are the other two times:

1. May 18, 1983 at Baltimore. Rich Dotson allows only an opposite field 308 foot home run into the first row of seats at Memorial Stadium to "Disco" Danny Ford but it's enough to beat him 1-0.

2. August 23, 2005 at Minnesota. Sox-killer Jacque Jones takes a Freddy Garcia pitch deep into right center field for a home run. The only hit Garcia allows in the 1-0 loss.

Lip

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 10:29 PM
I'm not singling anyone out but I have to wonder if there's a bit of racism in some of today's criticism of Contreras. John Danks allows eight baserunners and 2 earned runs in 5.1 IP, and it's a promising start that he should've won. Contreras allows six baserunners in 6 IP and 0 ER he didn't do enough to win?

Danks is a 22 year old rookie earning $375k. Contreras is an established veteran earning $9 million. There are about 8.6 million reasons right there to be more critical of Contreras.

To suggest racism is idiotic.

Palehose Pete
04-15-2007, 10:45 PM
Ummm... racism? My goodness, what a dumb thing to infer.

Patrick134
04-15-2007, 10:45 PM
This is the 3rd time in franchise history the Sox lost a game where they allowed one hit. Here are the other two times:

1. May 18, 1983 at Baltimore. Rich Dotson allows only an opposite field 308 foot home run into the first row of seats at Memorial Stadium to "Disco" Danny Ford but it's enough to beat him 1-0.

2. August 23, 2005 at Minnesota. Sox-killer Jacque Jones takes a Freddy Garcia pitch deep into right center field for a home run. The only hit Garcia allows in the 1-0 loss.

Lip


Ahh, so the Sox always win the division when that happens. Everyone can relax now. :D:

TomBradley72
04-15-2007, 10:48 PM
I'm not singling anyone out but I have to wonder if there's a bit of racism in some of today's criticism of Contreras. John Danks allows eight baserunners and 2 earned runs in 5.1 IP, and it's a promising start that he should've won. Contreras allows six baserunners in 6 IP and 0 ER he didn't do enough to win?

:o:

Danks is an umproven rookie. Contreras is a veteran in his mid/late 30's...expectations are different. What other evidence do you have of racism?

TomBradley72
04-15-2007, 10:50 PM
This is the 3rd time in franchise history the Sox lost a game where they allowed one hit. Here are the other two times:

1. May 18, 1983 at Baltimore. Rich Dotson allows only an opposite field 308 foot home run into the first row of seats at Memorial Stadium to "Disco" Danny Ford but it's enough to beat him 1-0.

2. August 23, 2005 at Minnesota. Sox-killer Jacque Jones takes a Freddy Garcia pitch deep into right center field for a home run. The only hit Garcia allows in the 1-0 loss.

Lip

We won the division both years...let's take it as a positive sign. :gulp:

itsnotrequired
04-15-2007, 11:00 PM
:o:

Danks is an umproven rookie. Contreras is a veteran in his mid/late 30's...expectations are different. What other evidence do you have of racism?

I remember listening to the post-game show on the drive home from Opening Day and some wag called in suggesting the only reason Contreras got the start was because he was Latin.

:rolleyes:

oeo
04-15-2007, 11:10 PM
I'm not singling anyone out but I have to wonder if there's a bit of racism in some of today's criticism of Contreras.

Is racism the answer to everything? :?:

I know it might be surprising, but most people are not racists.

schmitty9800
04-15-2007, 11:46 PM
Danks is a 22 year old rookie earning $375k. Contreras is an established veteran earning $9 million. There are about 8.6 million reasons right there to be more critical of Contreras.

To suggest racism is idiotic.
I think the criticism is a bit harsh for what he did today, and if it was Garland or Buehrle who put up Contreras's line today (I only chose Danks because it happened yesterday and was a similar situation) I think I'd be hearing about how gritty they were instead of people complaining "too many walks".

I'll concede that it probably isn't anything racist, but IMO Contreras and Vazquez get treated too harshly around here for what they do for this ballclub. I haven't really noticed any other player getting singled out though. It might just be because of their status as "outsiders" (Vazquez wasn't on the WS team, and Contreras is a Cuban defector. They also both spent time with the Yankees, something that gives a lot of people pause.)

Conveniently left off that first inning of opening day there.

I meant 5 IP with 0 ER just how he did today.

oeo
04-15-2007, 11:57 PM
I'll concede that it probably isn't anything racist, but IMO Contreras and Vazquez get treated too harshly around here for what they do for this ballclub. I haven't really noticed any other player getting singled out though. It might just be because of their status as "outsiders" (Vazquez wasn't on the WS team, and Contreras is a Cuban defector. They also both spent time with the Yankees, something that gives a lot of people pause.)

I agree that Contreras gets too much crap, but I guarantee it has nothing to do with his nationality.

As for Vazquez...he's getting paid a lot to do what he does, and each day he goes out there, he frustrates the hell out of people. Again, it has nothing to do with nationality or whether he was on the 2005 team or not...it has to do with being a mental midget, and not performing up to what he's being paid.

I'm not sure where this is coming from because for years Garland got a load of **** for no reason, and Buehrle has been getting it since August of last year.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:05 AM
I think the criticism is a bit harsh for what he did today, and if it was Garland or Buehrle who put up Contreras's line today (I only chose Danks because it happened yesterday and was a similar situation) I think I'd be hearing about how gritty they were instead of people complaining "too many walks".

I'll concede that it probably isn't anything racist, but IMO Contreras and Vazquez get treated too harshly around here for what they do for this ballclub. I haven't really noticed any other player getting singled out though. It might just be because of their status as "outsiders" (Vazquez wasn't on the WS team, and Contreras is a Cuban defector. They also both spent time with the Yankees, something that gives a lot of people pause.)



I meant 5 IP with 0 ER just how he did today.

Here you go:

I think AJ, Paulie, Erstad, & Crede all suck right now!

Happy now?


The white guys also get their beatings here on this board.

The other night Bobby Jenks took a beating also.

Has nothing to do with race here my friend.

Even our good friend at 2B from Japan will take his beating here.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:08 AM
I agree that Contreras gets too much crap, but I guarantee it has nothing to do with his nationality.



Contreras gets crap because we all saw how good he can be (2005).

He says he is not injured so there is something going wrong up there that has turned him back to his Yankee days. We don't want that as Sox fans.

oeo
04-16-2007, 12:14 AM
Contreras gets crap because we all saw how good he can be (2005).

He says he is not injured so there is something going wrong up there that has turned him back to his Yankee days. We don't want that as Sox fans.

What the hell are you talking about? He had a bad start on Opening Day...that's it.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:17 AM
What the hell are you talking about? He had a bad start on Opening Day...that's it.

Did you miss the entire 2nd half last year?

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:20 AM
What the hell are you talking about? He had a bad start on Opening Day...that's it.





he has walked 10 guys in 12 innings so far..... call me crazy but in my league that is not considered being "good."

hi im skot
04-16-2007, 12:22 AM
Wow.

I'm glad I've missed most of the "action" in this thread...

oeo
04-16-2007, 12:22 AM
Did you miss the entire 2nd half last year?

No, I didn't. He had injury problems last year, though.

he has walked 10 guys in 12 innings so far..... call me crazy but in my league that is not considered being "good."

He had some control issues today, which equated to 5 of those walks. So he's 'back to his Yankees days' because of that? :rolleyes:

You act as if he just got shellacked today. He should have gotten a W, if not for the offense laying a complete turd.

TheOldRoman
04-16-2007, 12:22 AM
I remember listening to the post-game show on the drive home from Opening Day and some wag called in suggesting the only reason Contreras got the start was because he was Latin.

:rolleyes:
Yeah, there are a lot of those imbeciles. They congregate at Soxtalk. Oh, that is the reason Anderson isn't playing, also.

TheOldRoman
04-16-2007, 12:25 AM
There's not a signficantly above average hitter in the bunch. It's a good bench in the sense that it can cover multiple positions and allow us to substitute a lot of players and to put B teams out there (which is fine with me - keeps people rested). But the statement to which you objected was that it is weak-hitting.
What the hell do you expect? Name me a single bench with a "significantly above average hitter", let alone several. There is a reason the bench players are on the bench. We might not have Pujols waiting to pinch hit, but nobody does. With Hall, we have the best bench in baseball. The bench might not be "great hitting", but it is certainly not weak hitting. I stand by my comment.

TheOldRoman
04-16-2007, 12:29 AM
And each one of those teams being chased has an ACE on the top of that staff that makes you say "Oh my God." (Twins = Johan, Indians = CC, Tigers = Verlander / Bonderman / Rogers (When healthy, we make him look like Cy Young also)
We don't have that "Oh my God" type pitcher here. Vazquez can be that guy but we have to wait and see if he will get it done.
Are you kidding? There are very few "oh my god" pitchers in baseball. Santana is one of them. Liriano was last year. Rogers is far from it, and last year was a fluke. Bonderman is very good, but not unbeatable. Verlander got knocked around by the Sox last year, and he will have a much worse year considering his increased workload last year. Sabathia is a good pitcher, but he is not one of the elites - watch him pitch against teams other than the Sox. To say that those guys are aces, and the Sox have none, is ridiculous.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:34 AM
No, I didn't. He had injury problems last year, though.



He had some control issues today, which equated to 5 of those walks. So he's 'back to his Yankees days' because of that? :rolleyes:

You act as if he just got shellacked today. He should have gotten a W, if not for the offense laying a complete turd.


Keep watching games with your rose-colored glasses.

I have faith that Jose can turn his wildness around but I'm sure not going to to stand here with a set of pom poms and hand out praises for what has been 12 innings of mediocre baseball by Jose.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:38 AM
Are you kidding? There are very few "oh my god" pitchers in baseball. Santana is one of them. Liriano was last year. Rogers is far from it, and last year was a fluke. Bonderman is very good, but not unbeatable. Verlander got knocked around by the Sox last year, and he will have a much worse year considering his increased workload last year. Sabathia is a good pitcher, but he is not one of the elites - watch him pitch against teams other than the Sox. To say that those guys are aces, and the Sox have none, is ridiculous.


From a stat that was flashed on the game today, Kenny Rogers has 15 career wins (the most) against the Sox. Don't tell me that we do not make him look like Cy Young out there.


I don't say "Oh my God" to Kenny Rogers, but it looks like our White Sox hitters fear him for some odd reason.

Bonderman? There was a game where Paulie was quoted in saying that his slider is un-hittable and the best one he has ever seen. If that's our best hitter saying that .... I call this "Oh my God."

UserNameBlank
04-16-2007, 07:11 AM
I guess that depends on your definition of awful. If you consider it good being terrible against anyone who throws with their left hand, no matter how little talent they have, and being completely unable to hit anyone who throws under 90 mph, than we are doing fine. Our bats will heat up, but how much?

We are seeing the same **** we saw last year, so it isn't easy for me to say that the offense humiliating themselves against the great Paul Byrd and other similar outings are flukes. Paul Byrd is mediocre at best. The Sox overswung, chased garbage outside, and made him look dominant. Santana looked about as bad last Sunday as he has in two years. He couldn't find the strikezone early, so they helped him out. Though he was off, the "greatest offense in baseball" managed one lone hit. Lardass he is good pitcher, but he is far from the greatest. There is no excuse for how terrible the Sox hitters have been against him. I don't know why Greg Walker still has a job. With the talent the Sox have, they shouldn't be shut down by anyone who throws slow. And with a lineup full of righties, they should be able to hit lefthanders. If I was as bad at my job as Walker I would have been fired.

I'm sure a lot of people will say I am overreacting because it is so early in the year, and I hope the results the offense has given are not indicative of how they do this year. However, we are seeing what we saw much of last year, especially during our second half tailspin. Our pitching was bad last year, but we would have still made the playoffs if our offense didn't consistently underperform. We are going to win a lot of games because of our pitching this year, but that doesn't mean it is OK to throw what is nearly an automatic loss up there anytime we face a lefty or a mediocre converted reliever.

Agreed. Since when was getting pissed off about a terrible offensive performance wrong around here?

Posters here always love to throw up that dark clouds pic and complain about people who aren't satisfied with piss-poor efforts, and in most cases it is warranted. But how about all those bright clouds? How about the people that always stay way too positive?

The offense is struggling now and the pitching is carrying the team. I can live with that because the offense will pick up, but the constant failure to bring in baserunners on 3rd with less than 2 outs or baserunners on 2nd woth no outs is really ****ing annoying. I don't expect this team to go out and light up the scoreboards every night, especially against left handers since they have been historically incompetent in that area, but they need to capitalize on golden opportunities. Why? Because that is called balance, and that is the reason the Sox won games like this in '05 and the reason the Twins have beaten us in games like this since 2001.

UserNameBlank
04-16-2007, 07:20 AM
Yeah, there are a lot of those imbeciles. They congregate at Soxtalk. Oh, that is the reason Anderson isn't playing, also.
LMAO

You are correct, sir.

(Although the futuresox guys know what they are talking about. Even so, the others ruin the main forum.)

TomBradley72
04-16-2007, 08:00 AM
I'll concede that it probably isn't anything racist, but IMO Contreras and Vazquez get treated too harshly around here for what they do for this ballclub. I haven't really noticed any other player getting singled out though. It might just be because of their status as "outsiders" (Vazquez wasn't on the WS team, and Contreras is a Cuban defector. They also both spent time with the Yankees, something that gives a lot of people pause.)

Nobody gives a **** if Jose was a Cuban defector (if anything it makes him a hero..what he put up with) or that he was a Yankee, or holds it against Vazquez because he wasn't on the WS team. Garland and Buehrle get a ton of grief when the deserve it. Contreras hasn't consistently pitched well since the 1st half of 2006...so there's increasing concerns about him. We gave up one of the best prospects in MLB (Young), El Duque, and an innings eater (Vizcaino) for Vazquez who was an overall disappointment in 2006...

kobo
04-16-2007, 09:28 AM
I guess that depends on your definition of awful. If you consider it good being terrible against anyone who throws with their left hand, no matter how little talent they have, and being completely unable to hit anyone who throws under 90 mph, than we are doing fine. Our bats will heat up, but how much?

We are seeing the same **** we saw last year, so it isn't easy for me to say that the offense humiliating themselves against the great Paul Byrd and other similar outings are flukes. Paul Byrd is mediocre at best. The Sox overswung, chased garbage outside, and made him look dominant. Santana looked about as bad last Sunday as he has in two years. He couldn't find the strikezone early, so they helped him out. Though he was off, the "greatest offense in baseball" managed one lone hit. Lardass he is good pitcher, but he is far from the greatest. There is no excuse for how terrible the Sox hitters have been against him. I don't know why Greg Walker still has a job. With the talent the Sox have, they shouldn't be shut down by anyone who throws slow. And with a lineup full of righties, they should be able to hit lefthanders. If I was as bad at my job as Walker I would have been fired.

I'm sure a lot of people will say I am overreacting because it is so early in the year, and I hope the results the offense has given are not indicative of how they do this year. However, we are seeing what we saw much of last year, especially during our second half tailspin. Our pitching was bad last year, but we would have still made the playoffs if our offense didn't consistently underperform. We are going to win a lot of games because of our pitching this year, but that doesn't mean it is OK to throw what is nearly an automatic loss up there anytime we face a lefty or a mediocre converted reliever.
Completely agree with you. It's the same as when the Sox face a new pitcher, it's almost as if everyone forgets how to hit. There seems to be this stigma that if you are an ace or someone pitching for the first time in the ML then the Sox will not be able to hit you. This is the toughest division in baseball, the Sox are going to have to face Santana and CC probably 5 more times this season, and they haven't even played the Tigers yet. We all point out how the Sox should be patient, should be working counts when facing these pitchers, yet they do the complete opposite. We can blame the players for not getting the job done, but Walker also has to take some of the blame here, because this **** has been going on for far too long.

oeo
04-16-2007, 10:26 AM
Keep watching games with your rose-colored glasses.

:?:

I have faith that Jose can turn his wildness around but I'm sure not going to to stand here with a set of pom poms and hand out praises for what has been 12 innings of mediocre baseball by Jose.

I think it's official...you just look at the stat sheet and don't watch the games.

jenn2080
04-16-2007, 10:53 AM
I agree that Contreras gets too much crap, but I guarantee it has nothing to do with his nationality.

As for Vazquez...he's getting paid a lot to do what he does, and each day he goes out there, he frustrates the hell out of people. Again, it has nothing to do with nationality or whether he was on the 2005 team or not...it has to do with being a mental midget, and not performing up to what he's being paid.

I'm not sure where this is coming from because for years Garland got a load of **** for no reason, and Buehrle has been getting it since August of last year.

Here you go:

I think AJ, Paulie, Erstad, & Crede all suck right now!

Happy now?


The white guys also get their beatings here on this board.

The other night Bobby Jenks took a beating also.

Has nothing to do with race here my friend.

Even our good friend at 2B from Japan will take his beating here.


Don't forget about Pods. Pods gets his fair share especially last year.

chopperjc
04-16-2007, 10:55 AM
Wow looking at the threads you would think we are really a bad team.

My 2 cents.

1. Does anyone on this board actually think we will not hit. (My fantasy team depends on it)

2. Our questions going into the season was pitching. The team ERA was up a run from the world series team. I have seen the starters overall throw well. Contreras pitched twice in very cold weather and looked very bad to very wild. Pitched ok in Oakland. Still should have two wins pitched good enough to win yesterday. The bullpen has looked very good. Yes some concern over Bobby and the velocity but again let's worry if he is doing this in late may. The replacement parts seem to be fitting very nicely.


I am still very positive for a great year.

oeo
04-16-2007, 11:02 AM
I am still very positive for a great year.

And why shouldn't you be?

We just have people coming in here telling us that they are being realistic. They're whining and crying; it's actually pretty annoying. They seem to disappear when the Sox win, though. :dunno:

So Sox, please start winning consistently so the babies leave.

champagne030
04-16-2007, 11:24 AM
Nobody will accuse me of sugar coating the Sox, but people do need to remember that 3 of our 6 losses this season are to Captain Cheeseburger and Santana. And 2 of our other 3 losses were blown leads late in the game.

Yes, it's frustrating that we get completely stymied by the likes of Bryd, Gaudin and Kennedy, but that's been happening for years (including 2005).

That said, if our pitching stays close to what they've done over the first 11 games the Sox will have a very good chance of winning their division even if Ozzie continues to baffle the mind with some of his moves and they continue to exhibit problems generating offense:

1.) without the homerun
2.) against powderpuff pitching
3.) and LH's in general.

schmitty9800
04-16-2007, 11:37 AM
We gave up one of the best prospects in MLB (Young), El Duque, and an innings eater (Vizcaino) for Vazquez who was an overall disappointment in 2006...

Not really a reason to hold it against him, if KW makes a bad trade I'm still going to cheer for the guys he brings in.

jabrch
04-16-2007, 11:39 AM
Keep watching games with your rose-colored glasses.

I have faith that Jose can turn his wildness around but I'm sure not going to to stand here with a set of pom poms and hand out praises for what has been 12 innings of mediocre baseball by Jose.

Are you out of your mind?

In his last 11 IP, Jose has had a 0.818 ERA and a 1.273 WHIP. There is nothing mediocre about that.

He STUNK on opening day. But he has DOMINATED since then.

jabrch
04-16-2007, 11:47 AM
We gave up one of the best prospects in MLB (Young), El Duque, and an innings eater (Vizcaino) for Vazquez who was an overall disappointment in 2006...

Well - that prospect would still not have a role on this team. He'd still be a mediocre hitter (.267/.358/.501 minor league numbmers don't translate well to the majors - and his start in the big is less than impressive). And that "innings eater" (I've never heard of that term being used for a reliever who throws about 60-70 innings with an ERA about 4 - but whatever) would not be a significant upgrade over our current bullpen.

What we got was a true innings eater - a starter who has gone 198+ IP for 7 straight years, strikes out about 190 hitters per season, keeps his ERA respectable, and is very dependable in the middle/back of a rotation. Oh - and we didn't have to pay all of his salary either.

Chris Young has yet to show anything to lead me to believe that this was a bad deal.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:14 PM
Are you out of your mind?

In his last 11 IP, Jose has had a 0.818 ERA and a 1.273 WHIP. There is nothing mediocre about that.

He STUNK on opening day. But he has DOMINATED since then.


Jbarch, your stats mentions nothing about those 10 walks in the 12 innings.


And how about his pitch counts?



Let's be realistic here and acknowledge that Jose has been very wild.


The only game he appeared to not be wild and in the strike zone was opening day ...... end result he got hit hard.


So what now, does he have to be effectively wild in order to get outs?

So he has to be Danny Wright out there, not what I want to se from my "ACE."

In Jose's 3 games there have been a possible 26 innings (only 8 innings yesterday) for Sox pitching. Jose has only pitched in 12 of those innings. That's 14 innnings of bullpen use when Jose takes the mound so far.... not good for an "ACE."


Once again, I know it is early and Jose can turn things around with his control like he did 2nd half of 2005. But so far I'm not too thrilled at what I'm getting from my "ACE." The offense sure has not helped me feel any better in suppoting our starters.

TomBradley72
04-16-2007, 12:15 PM
Not really a reason to hold it against him, if KW makes a bad trade I'm still going to cheer for the guys he brings in.

Of course I'm cheering for him..but when you give up that much talent...expectations are high for results. I think he'll have a very good seasn this year.

ilsox7
04-16-2007, 12:16 PM
Jbarch, your stats mentions nothing about those 10 walks in the 12 innings.



You may want to look-up the definition of WHIP . . .

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:19 PM
You may want to look-up the definition of WHIP . . .

so you have a low WHIP but 100 pitches by the 5th inning..... tell me how does this help the bullpen?

ilsox7
04-16-2007, 12:20 PM
so you have a low WHIP but 100 pitches by the 5th inning..... tell me how does this help the bullpen?

I was simply commenting on the inaccuracy of your statement about not accounting for the walks.

oeo
04-16-2007, 12:21 PM
so you have a low WHIP but 100 pitches by the 5th inning..... tell me how does this help the bullpen?

What does the bullpen have to do with anything? :?:

We're talking about Jose, who you say has not been very good, but outside of the Opening Day start, he's been great. Please tell me you're kidding.

TomBradley72
04-16-2007, 12:22 PM
Well - that prospect would still not have a role on this team. He'd still be a mediocre hitter (.267/.358/.501 minor league numbmers don't translate well to the majors - and his start in the big is less than impressive). And that "innings eater" (I've never heard of that term being used for a reliever who throws about 60-70 innings with an ERA about 4 - but whatever) would not be a significant upgrade over our current bullpen.

What we got was a true innings eater - a starter who has gone 198+ IP for 7 straight years, strikes out about 190 hitters per season, keeps his ERA respectable, and is very dependable in the middle/back of a rotation. Oh - and we didn't have to pay all of his salary either.

Chris Young has yet to show anything to lead me to believe that this was a bad deal.

My point wasn't to slam Vazquez...the reality is El Duque had very similar numbers to his (albeit in the NL) last year. We could have used Vizcaino last year, and Young would be our starting CF ahead of Anderson/Erstad. I'm not second guessing the trade...my original point was that with the amount of talent we gave up...we have high expectations for Vazquez. After his recent three year extension..those expectations remain.

skottyj242
04-16-2007, 12:27 PM
There was no yellow mustard for my two hot dogs yesterday at Jacobs. What a crock.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 12:32 PM
What does the bullpen have to do with anything? :?:

We're talking about Jose, who you say has not been very good, but outside of the Opening Day start, he's been great. Please tell me you're kidding.


What kind of standards do we have for greatness here?

jabrch
04-16-2007, 12:44 PM
Jbarch, your stats mentions nothing about those 10 walks in the 12 innings.

So? If they don't score, I don't really care. His WHIP is more relevant to me than his walks. He allowed 14 baserunners in 11 IP. That's damn effective.

And how about his pitch counts?

Overrated - he want 5 and 6 innings. We have a pen that is good enough to pick him up.

Let's be realistic here and acknowledge that Jose has been very wild.

He had one very bad start.

So what now, does he have to be effectively wild in order to get outs? So he has to be Danny Wright out there, not what I want to se from my "ACE."

That's completely ridiculous.

jabrch
04-16-2007, 12:47 PM
My point wasn't to slam Vazquez...the reality is El Duque had very similar numbers to his (albeit in the NL) last year. We could have used Vizcaino last year, and Young would be our starting CF ahead of Anderson/Erstad. I'm not second guessing the trade...my original point was that with the amount of talent we gave up...we have high expectations for Vazquez. After his recent three year extension..those expectations remain.

Tom - Young has been very bad. I'm not sure he was ever going to be the starting CF on this team. He's just not a good hitter. Look at his career minor league numbers - and then convert them to hitting against MLB pitchers. He's not that good.

JB98
04-16-2007, 01:18 PM
What does the bullpen have to do with anything? :?:

We're talking about Jose, who you say has not been very good, but outside of the Opening Day start, he's been great. Please tell me you're kidding.

Unless a starter gets us into the seventh inning, I will never refer to one of his outings as "great." Jose was extremely wild yesterday, and he got no help from his defense. He did a good job of keeping us in the game without his best stuff, but in my eyes, the only thing great about yesterday's game was Aardsma's performance in relief. I expect more than five innings from a top-of-the-rotation starter like Contreras. If he's only going to give us five or six innings a start, our bullpen is going to get taxed over a long season. I don't care how good our bullpen is. We shouldn't be relying upon it this much.

Tragg
04-16-2007, 02:03 PM
Tom - Young has been very bad. I'm not sure he was ever going to be the starting CF on this team. He's just not a good hitter. Look at his career minor league numbers - and then convert them to hitting against MLB pitchers. He's not that good.

You may be right.
But one thing the Sox did after 2005 was a)trade their starting CF; b)trade one of 2 top CF prospects they had.
That left Anderson. Presumably, Kenny identified Anderson as #1 with GUillen "buying in" (and KW has been pretty good at trading prospects who don't amount to much).
Which makes it even more curious as to why he's not starting this year, especially considering a)he did improve in the 2nd half of last year and b)he's being replaced by someone who can generously be described as "average".

The Braves broadcst said that the Astros were going to get one of TB's stud outfielders for Lidge. Eegads, we could certainly put together a more attractive package than that.

oeo
04-16-2007, 02:16 PM
Unless a starter gets us into the seventh inning, I will never refer to one of his outings as "great." Jose was extremely wild yesterday, and he got no help from his defense. He did a good job of keeping us in the game without his best stuff, but in my eyes, the only thing great about yesterday's game was Aardsma's performance in relief. I expect more than five innings from a top-of-the-rotation starter like Contreras. If he's only going to give us five or six innings a start, our bullpen is going to get taxed over a long season. I don't care how good our bullpen is. We shouldn't be relying upon it this much.

He's given us a great chance to win in his last two starts. Maybe he didn't pitch a complete game yesterday, but he did give us a pitching performance that deserved a win. He hasn't had his best stuff in any of his starts, yet he's fought through it and given us two performances that deserved W's.

SBSoxFan
04-16-2007, 02:30 PM
He's given us a great chance to win in his last two starts. Maybe he didn't pitch a complete game yesterday, but he did give us a pitching performance that deserved a win. He hasn't had his best stuff in any of his starts, yet he's fought through it and given us two performances that deserved W's.

There still seem to be a fair number of starters who aren't going very deep in games. Contreras only threw 101 pitches yesterday, so he certainly could have come out for the sixth. However, I think Ozzie is trying to pace the starters.

Actually, the thing that worries me most is CF. Erstad has certainly cooled off after a hot start, and BA has been bad at the plate. I love to see Erstad batting second as it appears he can bunt anything, but If Erstad is not in the lineup, who bats second? I think that's happened once (?) this year, and BA batted second which doesn't sound right. I suspect Ozzie doesn't want to keep flipping Iguchi between 2 and 6/7. So, again, who bats second? I that point in time, I would actually have to go with Uribe. :o:

schmitty9800
04-16-2007, 03:34 PM
Unless a starter gets us into the seventh inning, I will never refer to one of his outings as "great." Jose was extremely wild yesterday, and he got no help from his defense. He did a good job of keeping us in the game without his best stuff, but in my eyes, the only thing great about yesterday's game was Aardsma's performance in relief. I expect more than five innings from a top-of-the-rotation starter like Contreras. If he's only going to give us five or six innings a start, our bullpen is going to get taxed over a long season. I don't care how good our bullpen is. We shouldn't be relying upon it this much.
Yeah, he might've been out of those innings faster if the defense had helped him out. My point is that you can't blame Jose for this loss, he didn't have his best stuff and he still kept us in the game despite horrid defense. If you don't want to call that great pitching that's fine, but by that definition we only get great pitching once every two weeks.

Why would you want Jose to do the sixth if he's already thrown 101 and the bullpen is rested? You're just begging for arm trouble then.

jenn2080
04-16-2007, 04:28 PM
800 miles to see the White Sox, $46 a ticket, and 1 run = hell. Fun times, but that series was crap. Dye and his 3 swing no contact your out was a bunch of ****. We should have beat Cleveland, but apparently getting hits wasn't really an option.

JB98
04-16-2007, 05:59 PM
Yeah, he might've been out of those innings faster if the defense had helped him out. My point is that you can't blame Jose for this loss, he didn't have his best stuff and he still kept us in the game despite horrid defense. If you don't want to call that great pitching that's fine, but by that definition we only get great pitching once every two weeks.

Why would you want Jose to do the sixth if he's already thrown 101 and the bullpen is rested? You're just begging for arm trouble then.

I'm not blaming Jose for the loss. As I indicated, he did a good job of keeping us in the game on a day where he did not have his best stuff. At no point did I indicate that Jose should have started the sixth. Ozzie took him out at precisely the right time.

Here's what I'm saying: A five-inning performance that included five walks is not a "great" outing from a top-of-the-rotation pitcher such as Contreras. Jose walked in a run in the fourth inning, for God's sake. There's nothing great about walking in runs.

BanditJimmy
04-16-2007, 06:44 PM
Unless a starter gets us into the seventh inning, I will never refer to one of his outings as "great." Jose was extremely wild yesterday, and he got no help from his defense. He did a good job of keeping us in the game without his best stuff, but in my eyes, the only thing great about yesterday's game was Aardsma's performance in relief. I expect more than five innings from a top-of-the-rotation starter like Contreras. If he's only going to give us five or six innings a start, our bullpen is going to get taxed over a long season. I don't care how good our bullpen is. We shouldn't be relying upon it this much.

Finaly a voice of reason !!!

The Immigrant
04-16-2007, 07:10 PM
I'm not blaming Jose for the loss. As I indicated, he did a good job of keeping us in the game on a day where he did not have his best stuff. At no point did I indicate that Jose should have started the sixth. Ozzie took him out at precisely the right time.

Here's what I'm saying: A five-inning performance that included five walks is not a "great" outing from a top-of-the-rotation pitcher such as Contreras. Jose walked in a run in the fourth inning, for God's sake. There's nothing great about walking in runs.

To be fair, if the defense didn't make 3 errors behind him Jose would have gone at least six innings, and he probably would not have been in the position to walk in that run. He had no confidence in the Keystone Cops behind him to make a play so he started nibbling, and that's when he got into trouble.

JB98
04-16-2007, 07:16 PM
To be fair, if the defense didn't make 3 errors behind him Jose would have gone at least six innings, and he probably would not have been in the position to walk in that run. He had no confidence in the Keystone Cops behind him to make a play so he started nibbling, and that's when he got into trouble.

Jose is an experienced pitcher. He knows better than to start nibbling because errors were committed behind him. I actually don't think he was nibbling. I thought he was just damn wild. At any rate, it's his job to make pitches and get easy grounders. If infielders kick them all over the place, then that's their problem. The walks are Jose's problem.

Again, let me say I'm not condemning Jose's outing yesterday. It wasn't terrible. He could have very easily let the game get away from us, but he didn't do that. He kept us in it. I just took exception to someone categorizing it as "great" performance. Jose had several great performances in late 2005 and the first two months of 2006. Yesterday's outing was simply not in that class. That's all I'm saying.

jabrch
04-16-2007, 07:51 PM
The fact that there are people with negative things to say about a start where your pitcher gave up 0 ER and only 1 freaking hit is ridiculous.

Tragg
04-16-2007, 08:05 PM
I love to see Erstad batting second as it appears he can bunt anything.
My question is why in the world do we want him bunting anything (barring a tie game in the late innings) in the 2 hole. If he's bunting that means somebody's one base....after Erstad come Thome, Konerko and Dye. So we want to give up an out - and perhaps let only 1 of the 3 bat, with the table already set? I don't see the point.
I guess Thome could hit into a DP, but other than that it seems we're reducing the chances our best RBI men have.
I can see bunting down in the order, but taking the at out of Thome, Dye or Konerko's hands seems bizarre to me.

JB98
04-16-2007, 08:52 PM
The fact that there are people with negative things to say about a start where your pitcher gave up 0 ER and only 1 freaking hit is ridiculous.

Personally, I think it's ridiculous for an ace pitcher to issue five walks in five innings. But apparently, that's just me.

champagne030
04-16-2007, 10:50 PM
Personally, I think it's ridiculous for an ace pitcher to issue five walks in five innings. But apparently, that's just me.

It's not just you. Some people like to make asinine comments and stick their head in the sand. If Danks puts up Jose's line yesterday, great. Your number 1 starter?....No, I'm not calling drooling and call it great.

FarWestChicago
04-16-2007, 11:18 PM
The fact that there are people with negative things to say about a start where your pitcher gave up 0 ER and only 1 freaking hit is ridiculous.We do have some newer folks trying to give Lip and Homefish a run for their money. :o:

Brian26
04-16-2007, 11:23 PM
Personally, I think it's ridiculous for an ace pitcher to issue five walks in five innings. But apparently, that's just me.

Generally walks are going to catch up to you, but good pitchers can overcome mistakes too. If he's able to get out of it without any earned runs, so be it.

Jurr
04-16-2007, 11:38 PM
We do have some newer folks trying to give Lip and Homefish a run for their money. :o:
Yup, and I wonder how many of them could name the original starting rotation from the '04 Opening Day roster.

Yeah, this team has been struggling. Yeah, we now expect the Sox to win 100 games a season without a hitch. I'm right there with the pack.

I'm not too happy with a 3-5 record in the division so far. However, I have seen the Sox (even the mighty '05 version) struggle its ass off against Sabathia and Santana for years. They've faced these guys 3 times already. Everything looks terrible.

Maybe our boys need a little of that Rangers pitching to get the bats started. I look forward to seeing a little improvement this week, postgame threads of around 45-50 posts (signifying wins), and all to be well by Friday.

Everybody knew that the AL Central was going to be an absolute dogfight this year, and we've now seen the truth to that theory. We've also seen that the Sox have been competitive in every game so far except 1 (the opener), and this has been occurring despite a consistently terrible offensive output.

Everybody's question mark going into the season was the pitching, and it has been very good. One can assume that our hitting is going to come around, and if the starting rotation can keep up their effort, things will be awesome this year.

Nobody likes 5-6. However, there is enough here with this Sox team to feel pretty optimistic.

JB98
04-16-2007, 11:50 PM
Yup, and I wonder how many of them could name the original starting rotation from the '04 Opening Day roster.

Yeah, this team has been struggling. Yeah, we now expect the Sox to win 100 games a season without a hitch. I'm right there with the pack.

I'm not too happy with a 3-5 record in the division so far. However, I have seen the Sox (even the mighty '05 version) struggle its ass off against Sabathia and Santana for years. They've faced these guys 3 times already. Everything looks terrible.

Maybe our boys need a little of that Rangers pitching to get the bats started. I look forward to seeing a little improvement this week, postgame threads of around 45-50 posts (signifying wins), and all to be well by Friday.

Everybody knew that the AL Central was going to be an absolute dogfight this year, and we've now seen the truth to that theory. We've also seen that the Sox have been competitive in every game so far except 1 (the opener), and this has been occurring despite a consistently terrible offensive output.

Everybody's question mark going into the season was the pitching, and it has been very good. One can assume that our hitting is going to come around, and if the starting rotation can keep up their effort, things will be awesome this year.

Nobody likes 5-6. However, there is enough here with this Sox team to feel pretty optimistic.

Mark Buerhle, Esteban Loaiza, Jon Garland, Scott Schoeneweis and Dan Wright.

Did I get them all? :D:

Jurr
04-16-2007, 11:55 PM
Mark Buerhle, Esteban Loaiza, Jon Garland, Scott Schoeneweis and Dan Wright.

Did I get them all? :D:
You da man!
Though, you're not what we would consider "new and overwhelmingly malcontent", either.

JB98
04-16-2007, 11:56 PM
You da man!

What do I win? Do I get to bitch about Contreras walking guys with impunity now? :cool:

Jurr
04-17-2007, 12:00 AM
What do I win? Do I get to bitch about Contreras walking guys with impunity now? :cool:
As long as you write down (for the world to see) the number of runs he surrendered while doing so in his last start. Then, given that number, calculate his ERA for that start. Then, tell me how many starters would love to have an outing like that.

Jose had one of the worst outings this side of Artie Munoz to open the season. Since then, he's been pretty stout, as has the rest of the rotation. Yeah, they're giving up some walks, but they're doing a pretty decent job getting out of the messes they create. The problem so far has been the offensive output, something I see coming around shortly.

JB98
04-17-2007, 12:18 AM
As long as you write down (for the world to see) the number of runs he surrendered while doing so in his last start. Then, given that number, calculate his ERA for that start. Then, tell me how many starters would love to have an outing like that.

Jose had one of the worst outings this side of Artie Munoz to open the season. Since then, he's been pretty stout, as has the rest of the rotation. Yeah, they're giving up some walks, but they're doing a pretty decent job getting out of the messes they create. The problem so far has been the offensive output, something I see coming around shortly.

I'll agree to all of that, as long as you agree that a five-inning outing with five walks does not qualify as a "great" start by Jose's standards. I thought Jose was pretty damn good in Game 1 of the 2005 ALDS and Game 5 of the 2005 ALCS. Now, THOSE were great starts.

kitekrazy
04-17-2007, 12:37 AM
Yup, and I wonder how many of them could name the original starting rotation from the '04 Opening Day roster.

Yeah, this team has been struggling. Yeah, we now expect the Sox to win 100 games a season without a hitch. I'm right there with the pack.

I'm not too happy with a 3-5 record in the division so far. However, I have seen the Sox (even the mighty '05 version) struggle its ass off against Sabathia and Santana for years. They've faced these guys 3 times already. Everything looks terrible.

Maybe our boys need a little of that Rangers pitching to get the bats started. I look forward to seeing a little improvement this week, postgame threads of around 45-50 posts (signifying wins), and all to be well by Friday.

Everybody knew that the AL Central was going to be an absolute dogfight this year, and we've now seen the truth to that theory. We've also seen that the Sox have been competitive in every game so far except 1 (the opener), and this has been occurring despite a consistently terrible offensive output.

Everybody's question mark going into the season was the pitching, and it has been very good. One can assume that our hitting is going to come around, and if the starting rotation can keep up their effort, things will be awesome this year.

Nobody likes 5-6. However, there is enough here with this Sox team to feel pretty optimistic.

Rumor has it that all of MLB seems to have problems with that Santana dude. He's the one who's name is not Carlos. I can't remember what those awards he has. I think they are called Neil Young awards.

I'm waiting for hell to freeze over since Vasquez is 3-0.

I'd rather they slump now. Without the good pitching so far they could be 2-9.

SBSoxFan
04-17-2007, 09:02 AM
My question is why in the world do we want him bunting anything (barring a tie game in the late innings) in the 2 hole. If he's bunting that means somebody's one base....after Erstad come Thome, Konerko and Dye. So we want to give up an out - and perhaps let only 1 of the 3 bat, with the table already set? I don't see the point.
I guess Thome could hit into a DP, but other than that it seems we're reducing the chances our best RBI men have.
I can see bunting down in the order, but taking the at out of Thome, Dye or Konerko's hands seems bizarre to me.

The approach seemed to work well in '05. How does Erstad bunting only let 1 of Thome, Konerko, or Dye hit? Are you saying Thome would be walked and Konerko could hit into a double play? In addition, Erstad could also hit into a double play. Ideally, Scotty gets on base, gets to third via a SB+sac combo, then the #3 batter, whoever it is, gets him in. I'll take the chance to score without needing a hit every time.

BanditJimmy
04-17-2007, 02:25 PM
I'll agree to all of that, as long as you agree that a five-inning outing with five walks does not qualify as a "great" start by Jose's standards. I thought Jose was pretty damn good in Game 1 of the 2005 ALDS and Game 5 of the 2005 ALCS. Now, THOSE were great starts.


The entire play off run by Jose and also his 2nd half run is what I come to expect from him. Getting away with allowing 0 runs after walking 5 (even though one of the runs was walked in) is called living on the edge. Good teams will eat you alive in this league if you continue to live on the edge.

His outing on Sunday was not "GREAT" as some have suggested but it was LUCKY. I bet you ask Cooper, Ozzie, & even Jose, they will agree to this.

Unfortunately none of this would matter if the Sox would be hitting the damn baseball. But when a team is struggling, every little thing matters.

Tragg
04-17-2007, 02:48 PM
The approach seemed to work well in '05.
We didn't do it that much 05. We also got 15+ homers and .350 OBP out of the 2 whole, of which a hitter the quality of Erstad has zero chance of coming close to.


How does Erstad bunting only let 1 of Thome, Konerko, or Dye hit? Are you saying Thome would be walked and Konerko could hit into a double play? In addition, Erstad could also hit into a double play. Ideally, Scotty gets on base, gets to third via a SB+sac combo, then the #3 batter, whoever it is, gets him in. I'll take the chance to score without needing a hit every time.I am saying that by bunting Erstad we are giving up an out. It reduces the chances that all of Dye, Konerko and Thome can hit. The notion of Pods getting on base then stealing and then Erstad bunting is pie in the sky happens infrequently.
Look what happened on Sunday. We're down a run and Pods gets on. One problem - we have an automatic out coming up next. So that we can get something out of him, we bunt Erstad, giving up one of only SIX outs we had left. That was a Phil Garner move - Astros can't score, so he gives up 33% of the remaining outs on a bunt.
In this case, we really had no choice because Erstad is such a poor hitter and he'll likely make an out anyway.
Iguchi on the other hand can actually hit.

UserNameBlank
04-17-2007, 02:55 PM
We didn't do it that much 05. We also got 15+ homers and .350 OBP out of the 2 whole, of which a hitter the quality of Erstad has zero chance of coming close to.

I am saying that by bunting Erstad we are giving up an out. It reduces the chances that all of Dye, Konerko and Thome can hit. The notion of Pods getting on base then stealing and then Erstad bunting is pie in the sky happens infrequently.
Look what happened on Sunday. We're down a run and Pods gets on. One problem - we have an automatic out coming up next. So that we can get something out of him, we bunt Erstad, giving up one of only SIX outs we had left. That was a Phil Garner move - Astros can't score, so he gives up 33% of the remaining outs on a bunt.
In this case, we really had no choice because Erstad is such a poor hitter and he'll likely make an out anyway.
Iguchi on the other hand can actually hit.
The way the Sox offense is going right now it doesn't matter. If you don't give up the out with a bunt then instead of Pods being stranded at second to end the inning he is stranded at first to end the inning.

When the offense is struggling you have to take chances. When when of the most prolific offenses in baseball makes Paul Byrd-type pitchers look unhittable, you can't just sit there and wait for basehits and homeruns.

BTW, I thought Phil Garner did a good job managing the WS. His players didn't hit though, so what are you going to do? Houston's offense kept leaving runners stranded, not Phil Garner.