Last time before 2004 that Boston won the World Series the next year was the LAST year White Sox have been Champs . I hope history repeats itself.

Last time before 2004 that Boston won the World Series the next year was the LAST year White Sox have been Champs . I hope history repeats itself.

looks like it will be the case this year. I'm predicting a twins-sox ALCS.

Last time before 2004 that Boston won the World Series the next year was the LAST year White Sox have been Champs . I hope history repeats itself.

 

That's not right. Boston won in 1918, whereas 1917 was the last time the White Sox won the series. They SHOULD have won in 1919, but that was the infamous "Black Sox" series.

That's not right.  Boston won in 1918, whereas 1917 was the last time the White Sox won the series.  They SHOULD have won in 1919, but that was the infamous "Black Sox" series.

 

You are correct my bad actually prior to 2004 last 2 times Red Sox won series, White Sox made the WS next year, winning in 1917 and losing in 1919 still great karma to get to WS.

If we get to the ALCS, I hope the Twins aren't there.

You are correct my bad actually prior to 2004 last 2 times Red Sox won series, White Sox made the WS next year, winning in 1917 and losing in 1919 still great karma to get to WS.

 

I still think the better karma is that of the top 5 teams on the list with leads in games, yada yada yada, that have actually finished the season, no team has won fewer than 92 games of that group. The team who did have the most, the 55 Dodgers, won the Series.

 

So ya, go Sox.

If we get to the ALCS, I hope the Twins aren't there.

 

Could be worse. We could actually face a team with a legit 1-2-3 combo, instead of just a 1-2 punch, with the 2 tending to be pretty inconsistent.

If we get to the ALCS, I hope the Twins aren't there.

If they get to the ALCS, I don't care who they're facing!

I think they'd be psyched to face the Twinks in any playoff series.

If they get to the ALCS, I don't care who they're facing!

 

Yeah, unless it's Oakland. :puke

Yeah, unless it's Oakland.  :puke

 

After what I saw on the road in Oakland this year, I like our chances against the A's. We played a competitive series out there, even with the A's having 4 extra guys on the field against us.

Santana is enough of a reason to NOT want to play the Twins in the playoffs.

The one things thats scares me, (even though we shouldnt be thinking about the playoffs yet) is the lack of experience this teams has in a playoff enviroment.....With the exception of MB and Garland our pitchers have some experience amongst them, but if Garland keeps pitching this way I could see it being MB, Garcia, JG with duque and jose coming out of the pen....As long as MB and JG dont get the jitters it sounds pretty solid to me.....the only thing is the offense

Agreed, it's early. It didn't seem to hurt the Angels and Marlins though.

The one things thats scares me, (even though we shouldnt be thinking about the playoffs yet) is the lack of experience this teams has in a playoff enviroment.....With the exception of MB and Garland our pitchers have some experience amongst them, but if Garland keeps pitching this way I could see it being MB, Garcia, JG with duque and jose coming out of the pen....As long as MB and JG dont get the jitters it sounds pretty solid to me.....the only thing is the offense

Personally if we had one game to win in the playoffs, I'd go with the Duke just based on his track record. Nothing against our other guys, Mark included , but that's just me.

That's not right.  Boston won in 1918, whereas 1917 was the last time the White Sox won the series.  They SHOULD have won in 1919, but that was the infamous "Black Sox" series.

 

Just to nitpick:

 

The name "Black Sox" did not come about due to the fixing of the Series. The team had actually been called that for years, due to Comiskey being a cheapskate and NOT getting the teams uniforms cleaned. But since history will not remember the small things such as that, it goes by the newspaper headlines using that nickname and people think that is where it originated.

Personally if we had one game to win in the playoffs, I'd go with the Duke just based on his track record.  Nothing against our other guys, Mark included  , but that's just me.

 

I def see your point on this....but i am getting mad at myself even having thoughts about this in may......

 

Me -->

Edited May 9, 200520 yr by DABearSoX

Just to nitpick:

 

The name "Black Sox" did not come about due to the fixing of the Series. The team had actually been called that for years, due to Comiskey being a cheapskate and NOT getting the teams uniforms cleaned. But since history will not remember the small things such as that, it goes by the newspaper headlines using that nickname and people think that is where it originated.

 

I realize its a movie, and not necessarily accurate, but 8 Men Out makes it sound like that name came during 1919's series. Do you have any proof?

Give me a few...

Here is one source, The Joe Jackson society FAQ section:

 

Where did the name Black Sox come from??

Contrary to popular belief, the name Black Sox was not given to the 1919 White Sox because of the 1919 World Series scandal. The name was given to them because they played in dirty uniforms because their owner Charles Comiskey used to charge the players .25 cents for cleaning their uniforms. The players refused to pay to have their uniforms cleaned and chose instead to play in dirty uniforms, hence the name Black Sox.

 

http://www.blackbetsy.com/jjfaq.htm

 

I also believe it is mentioned in numerous books, including "The Glory of Their Times : The Story of Baseball Told By the Men Who Played It".

Edited May 9, 200520 yr by Kid Gleason