NorthSideSox72

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:53 PM) Many of the players are just as bad as they've played this year. And if you played this season ten times, you might find this season could get worse. This is a terrible team to start building off of except maybe pitching but even that's looking iffy to me. So Thome, Dye, Konerko, AJP... all terrible players, huh? Not having a bad year, just bad players?

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:42 PM) I disagree...the rookies are playing in near stress-free situation. There's no pennant race. There's no Wild Card berth. It's just play the string the best you can. All of which, if you ask me, will help these players next ST. they can relax. They have seen the best in the division...and they can just play. Call me an optimist (no really, it's ok), but I think the likes of Richar, Fields, Floyd, Danks and maybe even Owens will be much better next year. I'm not sure how this is disagreeing with me. I was just saying you can't know for sure we'd suck - as another poster suggested. In fact I think you just agreed with me.

QUOTE(Yossarian @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:14 PM) Of course some players take a little (or maybe even a lot) longer to develop. Still, you can't ignore the results to date. Based on that, there's no reason to get overly excited about any 2007 Sox rookie. KW really has his work cut out for him this off season. Even if he's at the top of his game, we're probably looking at several seasons more of bad baseball on the south side. All makes sense, except the last sentence, which one cannot possibly know until the dust settles after this offseason.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:11 PM) The problem of course is that there will be times that both of those groups will be 100% correct. There will be many, many, many players who simply don't ever develop into what they originally were thought to be. That's why even 1st round picks have such a high failure rate. No matter what comparison anyone tries to come up with...it's going to be right sometimes and wrong other times. If this game were easy to figure out, then the Yankees would win the series every year. So, all I see that teams can do is try to set themselves up as well as humanly possible. We can't simply go out and spend $150 million next offseason and add in ARod, Hunter, Linebrink, and trade for Johan, no matter how much we want. So we sort of have to pick and choose which holes we're going to try to fill with the money we have, and we're going to just have to hope for the best from our other guys...just as almost every team in baseball must do. Yes, exactly. Of course some players will and some will not develop. Which is why you make sure you get a good look at your own in-house talent whenever possible.

Found the list. Its the world series team, their record for that season, their record the NEXT season, and result... 1982 St. Louis Cardinals, 92-70, 79-83 (no playoffs) 1983 Baltimore Orioles, 98-64, 85-77 (no playoffs) 1984 Detroit Tigers, 104-58, 84-77 (no playoffs) 1985 Kansas City Royals, 91-71, 76-86 (no playoffs) 1986 New York Mets, 108-54, 92-70 (no playoffs) 1987 Minnesota Twins, 85-77, 91-71 (no playoffs) 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers, 94-67, 77-83 (no playoffs) 1989 Oakland A’s, 99-63, 103-59 (lost in WS) 1990 Cincinnati Reds, 91-71, 74-88 (no playoffs) 1991 Minnesota Twins, 95-67, 90-72 (no playoffs) 1992 Toronto Blue Jays, 96-66, 95-67 (repeated as champs) 1993 Toronto Blue Jays, 95-67, 55-60*** (no playoffs, third place, strike) 1994 ***Strike 1995 Atlanta Braves, 90-54, 96-66 (lost in WS) 1996 New York Yankees, 92-70, 96-66 (lost in ALDS) 1997 Florida Marlins, 92-70, 54-108 (no playoffs) 1998 New York Yankees, 114-48, 98-64 (repeated as champs) 1999 New York Yankees, 98-64, 87-74 (repeated as champs) 2000 New York Yankees, 87-74, 95-65 (lost in WS) 2001 Arizona Diamondbacks, 91-71, 98-64 (lost in NLDS) 2002 Anaheim Angels, 99-63, 77-85 (no playoffs) 2003 Florida Marlins, 91-71, 83-79 (no playoffs) 2004 Boston Red Sox, 98-64, 95-67 (lost in ALDS) 2005 Chicago White Sox, 99-63, *85-67 (no playoffs) So, that's 7 teams in 25 (8 in 26 if you include this year's Cards who are below .500 at this point) who fell below .500 ONE year after their WS. That's a significant chunk (28%). So your second year choice is kind of odd. The Sox were still well above .500 in 2006.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:40 AM) Before this season, the Marlins were the only team to finish below .500 2 years after winning the WS. I think they did it both times they won. There were a couple of teams that finish below .500 right after winning but bounced back the next season. Nice cherry-picking, again. 2 years after? I once posted in here (I need to find the post) a list of how teams did the YEAR after they won a WS. As I recall, a significant number played below .500, and I don't think more than half made the playoffs the next year. So looking at 2 years out, this team collapsed, and that is actually not as fast as a number of teams collapsed.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:57 AM) I think we've got realer assessments of Floyd and Owens, in particular, than those who are spouting this "He's better!" nonsense, or who talk about how he's got hot stuff in his arm. realer? That's the whole point. There is no "real" in assessing talent, other than the results of the players' actions. No one has a "realer" assessment than anyone else - they have a different one. And because baseball is so dynamic, and because some players take so long to develop, some of us are willing to give certain younger players a chance to show what they can do (especially when the season is basically a loss anyway). Others, apparently, would rather make a judgement once about a player early in their development, and insist on the idea that no player ever changes or improves.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:26 AM) I changed my mind. Floyd is great, as are Fields, Richar, Gonzalez, and Owens. I will disregard the 7-21 record the last 28 games. The Sox have the best owner, GM , manager and players in the game. It was just a fluke this year it didn't work out. Its worked out so often in the past. At least once since 1917. Its funny guys talk about others egos when stating opinions that differ from theirs. Maybe they are looking in the wrong direction for inflated egos. Ah yes, the time honored response - go to the other extreme where no one actually resides in this discussion.

I am going to cheat and go four... 1. Our relationship with the Middle East and the Islamic world - encompasses Iraq, War on Terror and Palestine/Israel. 2. The Environment and energy independence 3. Education 4. The conduct of our federal government - spending and taxation, but also what services are rendered, how and by whom Who is best on each issue? 1. I think the best candidates on how to move forward in the Middle East are probably the like of Biden (has the ONLY real Iraq plan), Richardson (has the ONLY real resume on foreign policy), or Paul (the ONLY candidate who understands toughness but still sees the wisdom in pulling back in Iraq). 2. Honestly, I haven't heard a single candidate who really seems to have the balls to do what is right for our country here. The closest is probably Kucinich. If Gore ran, he'd have it. 3. Richardson I think has the right ideas here, and its one of the reasons I support him. Romney has a few good ideas too, though. Obama as well. 4. This pretty much has to be a Republican, probably Paul or maybe Thompson (whose record fits the mold nicely). Richardson is best among Dems. Overall, my candidates in order of preference: 1. Richardson 2. Paul 3. Obama 4. Biden 5. Thompson

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:57 AM) I do agree that the government should have an official language to conduct business in. I really think that the extra costs associated with all of the people necesary to add just a single language's worth of materials shouldn't have to be borne by the rest of the country. You don't have to speak English, but in order to conduct business with the government you should be able to. You are free to not learn English, but as in anything there are consequences for your actions. I think that sums it up nicely. In order for the government and the country to function well, there needs to be one language used (and for the most part, this is already the case). If people want to also speak some other language(s), feel free. Or if they want not learn English, then hey, they can not learn math either and drown in their own financial mistakes. Their choice.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:57 AM) Thought about that but decided not to. Think it would work better in that format? Maybe. You could make a list of all the issues, and people can pick their top 3. Then people can post any details they want to about candidates. or, have a second question - which candidate best handles these three issues. I can make up a poll if you'd like.

Shall we make this a poll?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:21 AM) And Andy Gonzalez continues to play 3rd base, and Mike Myers continues to get called in from the bullpen and............................. I almost kind of hope they keep running them both out there now, because I wouldn't want to see either of them on the 2008 roster and the more they play, the more they make Ozzie and KW aware of their failings. Still though, more ideally, they just give up on Gonzalez and Cintron now and bring up Bourgeois.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:05 AM) We have a huge border. It's neither realistic nor feasible to think that we can catch every illegal alien that crosses the border. The best way to stop the illegal flow of labor is to stop allowing businesses to hire them. Ideally, you do it all. You enforce big time on businesses to lower the demand, but you also try to secure the border to the extent possible and allow local law enforcement to deport on arrest if they elect to, to address the supply side. Do all three, combined with setting more realistic immigration levels based on economic need, and you will get somewhere.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:48 AM) But hey, I'm going to leave this thread to the "believers" and the "converted" Just to be clear, I'm not ready to crown the guy either. I am simply willing to see what he can do, and therefore have been hoping he'd get this opportunity, just like I am happy to see a lot of the other younger players (Owens, Fields, etc.) get their time in. And so far, given the opportunity to start with some regularity, he has done better than I expected he would. In other words, I feel the same way Ozzie says he does in that quote. Now let's see how he finishes the season.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:47 AM) THAT ARTICLE! Says that Ozzie isn't sold which is polite. S'not his call. Ozzie already tried moving him to the pen and was overruled. The "I Still Wonder" quote? OK, I figured there had been something more than that. Yes, he still isn't sure, nor should he be. That is different than saying he doesn't believe it. That is just Ozzie being smart - not trusting its permanent, and keeping Gavin on his toes.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:42 AM) Umm, like Ozzie. You keep saying that, but I haven't seen Ozzie say anything negative about his starts since his last debacle in early August - which of course was deserved. Where are you getting that Ozzie doesn't believe what he sees in Floyd? Do you have a quote or something?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:34 AM) It would be very foolish to make Floyd part of 2008's rotation based on a few September starts, totalling ignoring what has gone on before, not just this year but the 3 previous seasons as well. He's not very good. Its funny that Floyd's fastball is solid when he's 91-93, but if Contreras throws 91-93 he's washed up. Like Contreras, he must keep people off base because they run at will off of him. I'm not buying his success. So, in other words, we should all not ignore his previous debacles, but you are going to ignore his recent success? Got it.

Floyd's August/September starts: 08/05: 6.0 IP, 7 H, 0 ER, 0 BB, 6 K 08/11: 4.0 IP, 7 H, 7 ER, 1 BB, 2 K 08/28: 6.0 IP, 6 H, 3 ER, 2 BB, 4 K 09/05: 6.0 IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 2 BB, 6 K 09/10: 6.1 IP, 5 H, 2 ER, 2 BB, 4 K Totals for those 5 starts: 4.13 ERA 1.34 WHIP 22/7 K/BB That includes the awful start on 8/11. His last three starts: 2.95 ERA 1.25 WHIP 14/6 K/BB I am starting to feel a little better about Floyd joining the rotation in 2008. If he can keep this up for his last couple or three starts, I'd say he should have the inside track. His lack of velocity from the stretch, and his inability to hold runners on, still scare me though.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 09:04 PM) maybe he just mentioned eckstein because the Cardinals are in town to play the Cubs. hope. our defense is soooooo bad. Fields couldn't even throw the ball to the cutoff man in the infield on the fly. if Crede doesn't come back next season, we're hosed. Fields' arm is not that weak - its pouring rain out there. And you can't really translate his LF play to 3B play anyway. Crede is still a better defender (assuming he is healthy), but its not as if Fields is a butcher out there like Gonzalez or Cintron.

QUOTE(ottawa_sox @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 08:53 PM) Who knows what to think of these guns. Gameday has him topping out at 94. He's probably between. And in this rain, I wouldn't read too much into velocity in any case.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 07:36 PM) So five minutes after a thrown away DP ball, Hawk just goes, "Yeeee-esuh," and then talks about how happy he is because you've got to be happy after a team this "inept" finally makes good with the bases loaded. Ha ha. Yeah, Hawk was just saying the Sox have 9 SF's for the entire year as a club. Is that right? That really is pathetic. And I agree by the way that Floyd's top end, at this point, is probably a 5th starter.

Game now underway.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 07:11 PM) s***, no, please have this game. I was really hoping that Gavin would jumpstart Hafner. You know, the more I read stuff like this, the more I am starting to understand the posters that are frustrated with the whole "get the number one pick" thing. Not that I care too much one way or the other about games now, or that I don't want a high pick. But for crying out loud, why is it so hard for people to have the patience to see what this guy can do? He's had 3 of his last 4 starts go very well, and even with the bad one he is sporting a 4.50 ERA. I think some of you are way more interested in being right about your hunches than you are about the team or its future being good.

Looking at the radar, I'll be surprised if they get a regulation game in tonight.