I got bored so I decided to take stats from some World Series winners, and play with them. First I determined the "core" players. (Players that played nearly every game, or were main part of team when not injured) Then I averaged all of the core players' stats to get a typical winning player's statistics.

 

.282

 

18 HR

 

82 RBI

 

.352 OBP

 

.452 SLG

 

12 SB

thats some damn good offensive numbers for a team average

eek

well remember this is like starting lineup only....but god damn who said defense wins championships?

So why did we trade Carlos?

thats some damn good offensive numbers for a team average

eek

But it's not just an "average" team. It's an average championship team. Winning it all is a whole different ballgame.

 

And to person who asked "Who said defense wins championships?", well, nobody. It's pitching and defense. Take a look at the Red Sox. They led the world in runs scored in the season, but in the final 3 games of the WS, their pitching completely dominated the Cardinals' offense. Game, set, and match.

So why did we trade Carlos?

Because he doesn't have what it takes to be a winner.

So why did we trade Carlos?

Apparently, the Sox felt Duque+Pods+Vizcaino+PTBNL+even more financial flexibility > Lee

 

I would tend to agree

That is a great sig witesoxfan.

That is a great sig witesoxfan.

Ditto!

 

An awesome sig for an awesome poster.

I liked it too.

 

Give knightni the props though...he is the creator.

 

Knight

Very interesting stats there.

But at the same time the Red Sox of 2003 were far and away the better offensive club, if I'm not mistaken it was when they almost set records for team avg, team slg, and runs scored. But they lost that year to the Yankees because the Yankees had the three keys to winning a championship:

1) A dominant closer in Mariano Rivera

2) A great rotation with shutdown pitchers (Clemens, Petitte, Mussina)

3) Solid defense

 

What did the BoSox do differently this year to win it all with a still good, but less inferior offense to the year before:

1) Acquire a dominant closer (Keith Foulke)

2) Acquire another shutdown pitcher (Schilling)

3) Acquire solid defense (Cabrera, Minkerasdhjfadksjz)

 

So yes offense definately wins games, but pitching and defense win championships!

But at the same time the Red Sox of 2003 were far and away the better offensive club, if I'm not mistaken it was when they almost set records for team avg, team slg, and runs scored.  But they lost that year to the Yankees because the Yankees had the three keys to winning a championship:

1) A dominant closer in Mariano Rivera

2) A great rotation with shutdown pitchers (Clemens, Petitte, Mussina)

3) Solid defense

 

What did the BoSox do differently this year to win it all with a still good, but less inferior offense to the year before:

1) Acquire a dominant closer (Keith Foulke)

2) Acquire another shutdown pitcher (Schilling)

3) Acquire solid defense (Cabrera, Minkerasdhjfadksjz)

 

So yes offense definately wins games, but pitching and defense win championships!

I agree with most of that

 

But Keith FOulke is far from being a Dominant closer

I agree with most of that

 

But Keith FOulke is far from being a Dominant closer

Actually, compared to everyone but Rivera and Gagne, he's about the best there is.

No Doubt he's good. But he's not Dominant, At least for the Sox he wasn't .

 

Foulke always had trouble with the closing big game IMO

No Doubt he's good. But he's not Dominant, At least for the Sox he wasn't .

 

Foulke always had trouble with the  closing big game IMO

I forget the method that was used, sinced it has been awhile, but one publication calculated Foulke as the 2nd best AL closer (to Rivera) after the 2002 season. If anyone remembers what this was and can retreive it, I'd be greatly appreciative.

I forget the method that was used, sinced it has been awhile, but one publication calculated Foulke as the 2nd best AL closer (to Rivera) after the 2002 season.  If anyone remembers what this was and can retreive it, I'd be greatly appreciative.

I think you mean 2001. He came in second in the rolaids relief to rivera.

I forget the method that was used, sinced it has been awhile, but one publication calculated Foulke as the 2nd best AL closer (to Rivera) after the 2002 season.  If anyone remembers what this was and can retreive it, I'd be greatly appreciative.

YAS, I remember there was an article a couple years ago on espn about all the different closers but I'm not sure if that is the one you're talking about.

I think you mean 2001. He came in second in the rolaids relief to rivera.

If definitely was not the Rolaids award.

If definitely was not the Rolaids award.

YAS, I remember the exact article you are talking about. I am just not sure I could find it.

YAS, I remember the exact article you are talking about.  I am just not sure I could find it.

Ok. At least I know I'm not going crazy.

Foulke was dominating, except in 2002. He had a lot of Blown Saves that year, IIRC.

Apparently, the Sox felt Duque+Pods+Vizcaino+PTBNL+even more financial flexibility > Lee

 

I would tend to agree

I love math...math, YES!!!

Your average winning fielder:

 

9 E

.982 FPG

I remember the article as well, but I can't find it.

 

Will post it if I do though.