RME JICO

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 08:15 PM) The only reason it would be acceptable to remove Buehrle from starting opening day would be if he was hurt. He doesn't sound hurt. This is a garbage move, from what I currently can see. Yeah, was it because of Javy's strong outing? That would be silly since it is only March 12th.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cs-08...1,7121916.story So: JV, MB, GF, JC, and JD

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 05:58 AM) There is no way he can be serious... That would leave off both Massett and Wasserman, right? Ozzie has already said the starters are set in MB, JV, JC, GF, and JD, so that means he would go the pen. There must be some miscommunication somewhere. He could replace MMac, he was not mentioned.

Has any former White Sox pitcher ever stayed healthy?

The Sox have logjams at 2B, 3B, and OF. Isn't that better than not having any options at all? Now the Sox can at least go into the season with the best team available and look at moving others to improve the ball club. This also gives the Sox a couple of nice trading chips at the deadline.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Mar 7, 2008 -> 06:10 PM) Yeah if a double header like this were to happen in the seaons I'd be pretty pissed off. omg, this board would be classic.

Wow, we lost 21-1 today. Ouch.

QUOTE(pierard @ Mar 7, 2008 -> 10:28 AM) I like the Brewers at 30-1. Yeah, those are some great odds. Turn $100 into $3,000.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ah0i...n&type=lgns Just saw this article on Yahoo with the WS Odds. For how bad people think the Sox are going to do, those are pretty good odds. Anyone remember what our odds were before 2005?

We even have more triples (4) than Home Runs (3). Not that is crazy.

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 02:34 PM) Who doesn't have a chance at making this team's pitching staff Ohka?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 08:59 AM) You could take the schedules the team has anyway, which overlaps at most one or two games, and put them together pretty easily with minimal fuss. Those 1 or 2 days, you would have to adjust, which should be no problem. If it is a problem, then you only have that double-header situation once or twice the entire season. Nothing too huge. For 2008, the Sox and Cubs play 12 games at home on the same day. This was less than I originally expected. Now the odd thing was 10 of those days occurred in August and 2 in April. May, June, July, and September had no overlap.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Feb 28, 2008 -> 07:34 AM) If you have a 1 PM game and a 7PM game, you'd be fine 99.9% of the time. The issue would be an extra inning game. Parking and traffic would be brutal. You have thousands of cars leaving the area right before you have thousands coming in. Also, if there are rain delays and other issues, it would complicate the scheduling. It would be possible, but it could get ugly really quick.

Wouldn't this cause a huge scheduling problem? In order to have a nice homestand, the other team would have to have an extra long road trip.

Great piece CC. I've been crunching numbers since as long as I can remember. I would get the newspaper and record the box scores of every game in a notebook to track players batting averages and pitcher's ERAs. Now I can just get that information instantly on the internet, which is sweet. I do love the numbers, but I still watch the game for the fun of it. A win is a win. Also, the internet gives me the opportunity to experience more baseball than I ever could before.

Woo Hoo, I almost thought they would never sign him.

Crede not being traded is the most probable. It also is the only true statement at this time.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Feb 22, 2008 -> 02:38 AM) Why in the blue hell is O'Dowd in there? For 2 winning seasons in 8 years? Probably because of their recent success. It is a waste to put Epstein and Cashman on there, probably Minaya too. Who can't put winning teams together with those payrolls?

1 year, $4 million, with a opening day roster bonus, other performance incentives, and a 2nd year option. +annual supply of Honey Buns.

I hope he can get back to his 2006 level.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 12:05 AM) factoring in some strength of schedule, they rounded the Sox up to 78 wins http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=762 Now are they basing their SoS on their own projections? If that is the case, the Sox have a fairly easy schedule, because a team with a losing record would have to play more teams worse then them to gain in this situation.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 07:16 PM) I thought your 100+ run differential was comparing what we *actually* did in 2007 vs what PECOTA has in store for us in 2008. If I was mistaken and you meant a comparison between PECOTA 2007 vs PECOTA 2008, then I don't have an answer to that question. Yeah, that was what I was referring to. I guess it was hard to determine since our actual win total matched their projection last year. That is why I think a 5 win increase on their projection seems a little bit on the low side when they project a +104 run differential. Also, not having to face Johan should be 2 wins right there, and like Balta said, just replacing Gonzalez, Erstad, and Pods with league average players brings us a couple of wins. I think the loss of Garland will be the worse decline, but that should be offset by the bullpen.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 04:20 PM) You're looking at the wrong thing. Our pythag had us at 67 wins last seasons, so technically the 100+ runs is, in fact, a ten win improvement. So what are they saying in terms of Pythagorean this year? I was saying that PECOTA had us at 72 wins last year and 77 this year. That is +5 wins with over a +100 run differential. +104 runs should equate to about 8-10 wins, not 5.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 03:56 PM) For reference...last year we scored 693 runs, put up a .318 OBP, ,246 BA, and .404 Slug. 780 runs scored would have been 8th in the AL last year, right behind Seattle. We gave up 839 runs last year, 4th most in the AL. 822 would still have us giving up the 4th most runs in the AL last year. So they have us improving marginally on both the pitching and the hitting, but not nearly enough to be competitive. Which means that we're going to have to outperform on either one or both of those estimated numbers if we really want to have a shot. So our run margin is going to increase by 104 runs, yet we are only going to win 5 more games? The disappointing part is that we will probably have to win somewhere in the mid-90's to have a shot at the playoffs, and that would be a 20 win improvement. Key the Jim Mora press conference.

77-85 seems like the low end. The median is probably about 83 wins +/- 5. They have the Rays in 4th in the East at 82-80. We are 9th in the AL. They say we'll have a .261 BA, .332 OBP, .433 SLG, 780 Runs Scored, 822 Runs Allowed