The main difference I see in the "Let's do it again!" Sox of '84 vs. the 2006 Sox is that the '84 team was built based on plug-and-play formulas and lateral moves with a GM that largely stood pat in the off-season. They brought pretty much everyone back, and they didn't even have a winning season.

 

Rarely if ever are teams good enough to fool the rest of baseball two years in a row with the same mix of players. Even when you look at a team like Boston between '04 and '05 that was kept largely intact with Pedro Martinez being one of the only exceptions, they could not sustain the success of the year before and they had a team full of All-Stars. A lot of people picked them to go all the way again.

Offensively, the Sox should be far better off in 2006 than they were in 1984. Luzinski was done. Kittle really fell off, Rudy Law wasn't the same ignitor. Fisk hit .231. But who would have thought Hoyt would go 13-18? Bannister wasn't as sharp, Burns was horrible. Dotson's record wasn't as good, but his stats were very similar to 1983. I've heard Roland Hemond talk about the loss of Jerry Koosman from the 1983 team as a reason for the meltdown. He supposedly was very influential in the clubhouse. It could happen to this team. Its nice they have a guy like McCarthy waiting in the wings if someone gets hurt or falters. As long as the pitching holds up, they will be in contention.

Edited February 22, 200620 yr by Dick Allen

hell no regular even hit .300 last year. i dont expect the pitching to be throwing shutouts every game but our offense should be much improved