Second Half Blues

[Frater Perdurabo]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

Ibanez was pretty much their starting LF for the majority of the season, until they traded for Ichiro. That's the only big difference there. Otherwise, their bench partially relied on castoffs from the White Sox in Jayson Nix, Dewayne Wise, Chris Stewart, and Andruw Jones.

The Yankees upgraded by trading for Ichiro. The Sox "upgraded" by signing Wise. Big difference.

Wise had an excellent hot streak, but then he regressed to his mean.

[Lip Man 1]

Spivak:

Jones played very well for the Sox remember and Kenny himself was quoted as saying that he'd love to have had him back as a 4th outfielder/ bench guy but for the cost.

Lip

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by Lip Man 1

Vulture:

The Sox apparently "ran out of gas" in 2003, 2006, 2010 and now 2012. The individual circumstances may be different from season to season but the end result is the same. Perhaps the Sox would do well to try to find some common threads in those four seasons and then try to repair them or eliminate them.


Lip

Yeah, but the team wasn't built to win this year anyway, remember? I don't really see a common thread between this team and the past teams. It would be nice to have had Sale and Quintana built up to throw 200+ innings, but at least they are on their way now. We basically saw two young studs establish themselves in a major league rotation, and hints that Santiago might be ready to join them, along with a boatload of rookies in the bullpen, in a season where the Sox were expected to win 80 games at best.

Sure it sucked to watch them blow it over the last two weeks, but I'm not complaining. You could see it coming a mile away considering Sale and Quintana's workload history. It looks like we've got a lot good young arms going forward who got a lot of valuable experience this year.

[palehozenychicty]

Originally Posted by TheVulture

Yeah, but the team wasn't built to win this year anyway, remember? I don't really see a common thread between this team and the past teams. It would be nice to have had Sale and Quintana built up to throw 200+ innings, but at least they are on their way now. We basically saw two young studs establish themselves in a major league rotation, and hints that Santiago might be ready to join them, along with a boatload of rookies in the bullpen, in a season where the Sox were expected to win 80 games at best.

Sure it sucked to watch them blow it over the last two weeks, but I'm not complaining. You could see it coming a mile away considering Sale and Quintana's workload history. It looks like we've got a lot good young arms going forward who got a lot of valuable experience this year.

I think the Sox do a very good job of developing pitchers. It's the lineup that is a problem on a yearly basis. They don't make enough contact, they are not athletic, nor do they get on base. As a result, they are decent offensively, but not dynamic enough to win. Let's see what they can do with some money coming off the books.

[gosox41]

Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo

I disagree. I think it's a function of a shallow roster, which is a function of this organization's long-term refusal to pay for top amateur talent in the draft, inability to develop fundamentally sound position players, and thus necessity to trade its limited supply of promising prospects to fill holes with mediocre and/or expensive veterans.

That may be part of the reason but there's got to be more to it. Some thought Ozzie went with too many Sunday line ups throughout the course of the whole season. He didn't just institute them after the All Star Break. So guys were getting days off (or multiple days off as Ozzie scheduled off days around the schedule) and thus they should have been fresher in the second half.

Also, why do our guys get tired and fade. Didn't Cabrera and Prince play 160 games this year. They didn't fade, and Prince is fat. Verlander has thrown the most pitches of any pitcher in baseball 3 of the last 4 years. He hasn't faded.

There's got to be more to it. I was hoping that when Robin took over, some of those trends that happened under Ozzie would stop (ie second half fades, losing tough luck games to Minnesota, bad west coast trips). To Robin's defense, this years bench was not very good.

But there are some teams that seem to have a history of heating up in the second half. The A's and definitely the Cards come to mind. What is the difference between them and us? Is it the youth of the A's? If they faded, inexperience would be an issue. Is this years A's bench really that much better then ours? They had a tougher schedule and a tiny payroll then the Sox. And the Cardinals have this switch that clicks on in August and runs through October.

There's more to this. I wish I had answers.


Bob

[gosox41]

Originally Posted by palehozenychicty

I think the Sox do a very good job of developing pitchers. It's the lineup that is a problem on a yearly basis. They don't make enough contact, they are not athletic, nor do they get on base. As a result, they are decent offensively, but not dynamic enough to win. Let's see what they can do with some money coming off the books.

I also think the cooler weather in April and September hurts a team a lot more when it lives and dies by the long ball. When was the last time the Sox had a great April? When was the last time they started the season better then 2-0? My selective memory goes back to 2000 for a team that seemed to come out swinging well offensively.


Bob

[Frater Perdurabo]

Originally Posted by gosox41

I also think the cooler weather in April and September hurts a team a lot more when it lives and dies by the long ball. When was the last time the Sox had a great April? When was the last time they started the season better then 2-0? My selective memory goes back to 2000 for a team that seemed to come out swinging well offensively.

Bob

2000 was before the Sox brought in the fences, when it still played "neutral." They had bigger gaps, which helped their roster full of doubles hitter.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by gosox41

There's more to this. I wish I had answers.

I think 99.9% of it can be explained by baseball being super difficult and generally unexplainable.

Other .1% is probably that other teams just have better players than we do.

[TheVulture]

Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo

I disagree. I think it's a function of a shallow roster, which is a function of this organization's long-term refusal to pay for top amateur talent in the draft, inability to develop fundamentally sound position players, and thus necessity to trade its limited supply of promising prospects to fill holes with mediocre and/or expensive veterans.

I think that was definitely the case this year, but looking at the benches of the past teams I don't think that was the case. The Sox have had some of the strongest benches in the league at times over the last ten years.

[JB98]

Originally Posted by gosox41

That may be part of the reason but there's got to be more to it. Some thought Ozzie went with too many Sunday line ups throughout the course of the whole season. He didn't just institute them after the All Star Break. So guys were getting days off (or multiple days off as Ozzie scheduled off days around the schedule) and thus they should have been fresher in the second half.

Also, why do our guys get tired and fade. Didn't Cabrera and Prince play 160 games this year. They didn't fade, and Prince is fat. Verlander has thrown the most pitches of any pitcher in baseball 3 of the last 4 years. He hasn't faded.

There's got to be more to it. I was hoping that when Robin took over, some of those trends that happened under Ozzie would stop (ie second half fades, losing tough luck games to Minnesota, bad west coast trips). To Robin's defense, this years bench was not very good.

But there are some teams that seem to have a history of heating up in the second half. The A's and definitely the Cards come to mind. What is the difference between them and us? Is it the youth of the A's? If they faded, inexperience would be an issue. Is this years A's bench really that much better then ours? They had a tougher schedule and a tiny payroll then the Sox. And the Cardinals have this switch that clicks on in August and runs through October.

There's more to this. I wish I had answers.


Bob

They did, but they are 29 and 28 years old, respectively. In the prime of their careers. When Paul Konerko was that age, he was enjoying some of his finest seasons. He led us to a World Series title at age 29. Now, Paul is 36 and more prone to injury. He's not the only older player in the Sox lineup who struggled down the stretch either.

It is worth noting Alex Rios led the Sox in games played with 157, and he did not fade at all. He played some of his best baseball down the stretch while teammates were crumbling around him. Rios is 31, a little older than Cabrera and Fielder, but still young enough to handle a huge workload. Two of the five games Rios did not appear in this season were the final two meaningless contests in Cleveland.

As for Verlander, check his August and September numbers for his first full year in Detroit's rotation. That was 2006. I think you'll see he had some struggles as a young pitcher, much like a couple young pitchers in the Sox rotation this year. It takes a little time to build up the kind of arm strength where a pitcher can handle a 200-plus innings haul. He's at a much different place in his career than say, Chris Sale.

As a matter of fact, Detroit's best players are all in their primes. The Sox best players are mostly on the back end of their careers, or in the case of a few pitchers, just getting started. That makes a difference.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by JB98

As for Verlander, check his August and September numbers for his first full year in Detroit's rotation. That was 2006. I think you'll see he had some struggles as a young pitcher, much like a couple young pitchers in the Sox rotation this year. It takes a little time to build up the kind of arm strength where a pitcher can handle a 200-plus innings haul. He's at a much different place in his career than say, Chris Sale.

Verlander is also just a freak of nature. He's just the best pitcher in baseball right now, that's all you can say about it. It'd be like complaining why Viciedo can't be more like Frank Thomas; the Big Hurt, in his prime, was probably the best right handed hitter in baseball history. You can't set the bar at that level, no one will ever measure up.

[WhiteSox5187]

Originally Posted by doublem23

Verlander is also just a freak of nature. He's just the best pitcher in baseball right now, that's all you can say about it. It'd be like complaining why Viciedo can't be more like Frank Thomas; the Big Hurt, in his prime, was probably the best right handed hitter in baseball history. You can't set the bar at that level, no one will ever measure up.

While that is true I also think that because it was Sale's first year in the rotation it is harder to complain about him fading down the stretch than it would be if a guy like Danks started to struggle were he around. Sale was just out of gas and it stands to reason as to why he would be.

[JB98]

Originally Posted by doublem23

Verlander is also just a freak of nature. He's just the best pitcher in baseball right now, that's all you can say about it. It'd be like complaining why Viciedo can't be more like Frank Thomas; the Big Hurt, in his prime, was probably the best right handed hitter in baseball history. You can't set the bar at that level, no one will ever measure up.

Agreed. Verlander is a freak. Even if Sale establishes himself as a legitimate ace over the next two or three years, he may still not be as good as Verlander is right now.

As much as I hate Verlander's guts, I have no problem admitting the guy is unbelievable. He had thrown over 130 pitches last night, and he was still hitting 98 on the gun in the ninth inning. That's sick.

[asindc]

Originally Posted by JB98

They did, but they are 29 and 28 years old, respectively. In the prime of their careers. When Paul Konerko was that age, he was enjoying some of his finest seasons. He led us to a World Series title at age 29. Now, Paul is 36 and more prone to injury. He's not the only older player in the Sox lineup who struggled down the stretch either.

It is worth noting Alex Rios led the Sox in games played with 157, and he did not fade at all. He played some of his best baseball down the stretch while teammates were crumbling around him. Rios is 31, a little older than Cabrera and Fielder, but still young enough to handle a huge workload. Two of the five games Rios did not appear in this season were the final two meaningless contests in Cleveland.

As for Verlander, check his August and September numbers for his first full year in Detroit's rotation. That was 2006. I think you'll see he had some struggles as a young pitcher, much like a couple young pitchers in the Sox rotation this year. It takes a little time to build up the kind of arm strength where a pitcher can handle a 200-plus innings haul. He's at a much different place in his career than say, Chris Sale.

As a matter of fact, Detroit's best players are all in their primes. The Sox best players are mostly on the back end of their careers, or in the case of a few pitchers, just getting started. That makes a difference.

Excellent post.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187

While that is true I also think that because it was Sale's first year in the rotation it is harder to complain about him fading down the stretch than it would be if a guy like Danks started to struggle were he around. Sale was just out of gas and it stands to reason as to why he would be.

Absolutely, I think many people had very legitimate fears that Sale wouldn't be able to hold up for the entire season, it's stressful for any pitcher let alone a twig like Sale who fell to the Sox in the draft precisely because there were some legitimate concerns if he had the build to hold up as a starter. He really progressed as a pitcher this year who used location and pitch selection to get guys out rather than relying on pure velocity. It's was a very, very encouraging year.

I think going into this year, anyone who would have projected Sale for 29 starts and 192 innings with an ERA under 3 for almost the entire season would have been labeled as a polyanna. He pretty much exceeded every realistic expectation.