White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-10-2005, 09:19 AM
infohawk infohawk is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Chatham, IL
Posts: 2,022
Default 2005 Cubs = 2001-2004 Sox?

I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.
__________________
Trust, but verify.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:35 PM
OEO Magglio OEO Magglio is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by infohawk
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.
Yup, I've been saying this for a while now.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:39 PM
gosox41 gosox41 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,027
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by infohawk
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:

"But as it stands now, the Cubs will go to spring training next month with virtually the same offensive questions that vexed them last year: little speed, no pure leadoff man and an abundance of all-or-nothing hitters. The Cubs finished last season 11th in the National League in stolen bases, 11th in on-base percentage and 14th in walks.

Though they ranked first in home runs and second in slugging percentage, the Cubs went 17-33 when failing to homer, suggesting a one-dimensional offense that has problems creating runs in tight, low-scoring games. Other than Moises Alou and Mark Grudzielanek, the same basic cast of characters returns in 2005."

We all know how a team constructed like the above tends to perform over the length of a season. Of course, the Cubs have had a better rotation then the 2001-2004 Sox, but a good rotation doesn't help as much if you are not scoring runs.
Offensively there's similarities, but I'd take the Cubs starting pitching for 2005 over what the Sox had in 2001-2004.


Bob
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:44 PM
HomeFish HomeFish is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 5,908
Default

The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
__________________
"Hope...may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources...but its nature is to be extravagant, and those who go so far as to stake their all upon the venture see it in its true colors only when they are ruined."
-- Thucydides
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:45 PM
Hangar18 Hangar18 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Side, Pilsen, CHICAGO
Posts: 11,041
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gosox41
Offensively there's similarities, but I'd take the Cubs starting pitching for 2005 over what the Sox had in 2001-2004.


Bob
YES, I would take that rotation in that League also.
YOu also have to take into consideration that the FLUBBIES went out and
FILLED holes they had throughout their lineup, either thru sheer LUCK
(marlins and pirates giving away players for bad minor-leaguers)
or thru sheer FISCAL POWER. Though the team doesnt have much to show
for it (They have a Goat), they still were in contention for 2 yrs in a row,
and that has resulted in UNPRECENDENTED ticket sales & popularity,
which has them laughing all the way to the bank (hear that Jerry?)
That organization is STILL riding off the Fumes of 1989 and 1998.
2003 & 2004 simply Icing on the Financial Cake.
__________________
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/v...&postid=343998
" The problem with someone printing Lies all the time, is eventually, people are going to start Believing it, if you don't rebut it " - Hawk Harrelson on what happens when you Ignore The Media
" Ignoring the Issues doesn't make them go away " - Score host Jason Goff
" The 2006 White Sox..... simply didn't have the hunger of the Twins or Tigers" - SunTimes columnist and SOX fan Richard Roeper
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:48 PM
Tekijawa's Avatar
Tekijawa Tekijawa is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Mayfair/Chicago
Posts: 6,681
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeFish
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
I don't know if they have more than one guy that will put up more than 100 RBI though? And I haven't figured out which one of them the 100 RBI might go to

Ramierz?
Garciparra, maybe if he plays the whole season?
Sosa, nope...

I would say that they are the Bizzarro 2001-2004 White Sox, All Starting Pitching very little elsewhere...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-10-2005, 12:50 PM
jackbrohamer's Avatar
jackbrohamer jackbrohamer is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago/Near North
Posts: 1,308
Default

That article understates the value of Moises Alou who was the Flubs' most valuable offensive player last year, and they have not replaced him. And Clement despite his mediocre record kept the Scrubs in pretty much every game he started the first 3-4 months of the season.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:00 PM
OEO Magglio OEO Magglio is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeFish
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
Buehrle>>>>>>>>>Wood
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:04 PM
Ol' No. 2's Avatar
Ol' No. 2 Ol' No. 2 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bullpen Sports Bar
Posts: 11,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OEO Magglio
Buehrle>>>>>>>>>Wood
Agreed. Wood is, quite possibly, the most overrated pitcher in all of baseball. In Buehrle's worst year he won as many games as Wood did in his best.
__________________

19 seasons, 9232 AB, 216 SO
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:08 PM
santo=dorf santo=dorf is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,465
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangar18
YES, I would take that rotation in that League also.
YOu also have to take into consideration that the FLUBBIES went out and
FILLED holes they had throughout their lineup, either thru sheer LUCK
(marlins and pirates giving away players for bad minor-leaguers)
or thru sheer FISCAL POWER. Though the team doesnt have much to show
for it (They have a Goat), they still were in contention for 2 yrs in a row,
and that has resulted in UNPRECENDENTED ticket sales & popularity,
which has them laughing all the way to the bank (hear that Jerry?)
That organization is STILL riding off the Fumes of 1989 and 1998.
2003 & 2004 simply Icing on the Financial Cake.
I wouldn't call it "luck." Both of those situations were salary dumps. I saw Hendry on local TV when he was in town for the USF dinner, and he said that when he went into the winter meetings of 2003, he wasn't looking for a first baseman, but because of the Marlins' situation (they were deciding between keeping either Lee or Castillo) they were able to get a good player for nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:11 PM
dcb33
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' No. 2
Agreed. Wood is, quite possibly, the most overrated pitcher in all of baseball. In Buehrle's worst year he won as many games as Wood did in his best.
But Kerry Wood struck out 20 batters once! That has to make him better than Buehrle!

Last edited by dcb33; 01-10-2005 at 02:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:19 PM
maurice maurice is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bridgeport, Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by infohawk
I read the following clip in the Tribune about the Cubs and it immediately reminded me of another team I knew:
Even this pessimistic piece is overly generous, since the cubs have lost several productive players and failed to make any signficiant additions thus far. If cub nation had any sense, they'd be applying lots of heat.

Their offense is worse than last year, since they subtracted their most productive offensive player (and also a halfway-decent IF) without signing a reasonable replacement. Barring a major resurgence by Prior and Wood, their pitching also is worse. They subtratcted a very good starting pitcher and a pretty good relief pitcher. They still have no closer and little bullpen depth.

Fortunately for the Trib, their "fans" don't believe in accountability.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:37 PM
34 Inch Stick 34 Inch Stick is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,301
Default

I do not know how Cubs fans are not absolutely up in arms that the Cubs did not make a bigger move for Beltran. Sammy is there for one more year. All they would have to do is suck up an abnormally large payroll for one year. During that one year they can expect to draw huge numbers as the Cubs are likely to be a contender. After that one year is up they would be left with two great, athletic outfielders and a star that could pick up the mantle that Sosa left off.

We may complain about JR but pound for pound the Cubs are just as cheap of an organization.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-10-2005, 01:57 PM
Tekijawa's Avatar
Tekijawa Tekijawa is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Mayfair/Chicago
Posts: 6,681
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 34 Inch Stick
I do not know how Cubs fans are not absolutely up in arms that the Cubs did not make a bigger move for Beltran. Sammy is there for one more year. All they would have to do is suck up an abnormally large payroll for one year. During that one year they can expect to draw huge numbers as the Cubs are likely to be a contender. After that one year is up they would be left with two great, athletic outfielders and a star that could pick up the mantle that Sosa left off.
On the surface you can think this, but when you look at how many big pay raises will be comming down the pike in the next few years for them, you have to think that, MAN I would much rather keep Prior, Zambrano, and Wood(who's been on one year contracts forever). I think Prior becomes a FA next year with his wierd contract, Patterson isn't that Far behind, I believe Zambrano Starts Arbitration next year.... Most of the Money from Sammy and Alou will be going to these players and that Contract that Ramirez signed last year... it may look like they have a ton of cash right now, but you have to think like a GM for this one, Hendry is probably Glad that Beltran didn't take his low ball offer!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-10-2005, 02:00 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 5,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeFish
The Sox never had the likes of Wood or Prior or, heck, even Zambrano on their staff during that period. There is simply no comparison with the pitching: the accursed ones are light-years ahead of us in that category.
Not in the bullpen!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:19 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.