StatManDu Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Were the 2008 White Sox the slowest Sox team ever? Consider ... *The 13 triples were an all-time franchise low *The 67 steals were the fewest by a Sox team since the 1977 team swiped 42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 but we have paul konerko. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 QUOTE (StatManDu @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 09:53 AM) Were the 2008 White Sox the slowest Sox team ever? Consider ... *The 13 triples were an all-time franchise low *The 67 steals were the fewest by a Sox team since the 1977 team swiped 42 If not the slowest, they are a finalist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 QUOTE (StatManDu @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 09:53 AM) Were the 2008 White Sox the slowest Sox team ever? Consider ... *The 13 triples were an all-time franchise low *The 67 steals were the fewest by a Sox team since the 1977 team swiped 42 In 77, there were quite a few larger ballparks in the AL than there is today, including Old Comiskey. However slow that 77 team was, they were fun to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 (edited) They are definitely in the running. Zing. Edited October 9, 2008 by Steve9347 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 well look at you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 10:40 AM) They are definitely in the running. Zing. but is zing really the best term? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 QUOTE (Reddy @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 08:59 AM) but we have paul konerko. He had 2 of the 67 steals. Here is a fun fact - PK, AJ and Thome represented 6% of this team's stolen bases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 That 77 team was one of the best in sports history to watch all summer. Once everybody went back to school not so good. For a summer to remember that was glorious though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 QUOTE (Reddy @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 09:59 AM) but we have paul konerko. and he can carry a team for a staggering two months out of six. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 ....and yet they still won the division. Why are people so focused on breaking them up and trying to acquire fast, but perhaps not as talented, baseball players? We should focus more on our holes at 3rd, CF, and pitching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 QUOTE (StatManDu @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 09:53 AM) Were the 2008 White Sox the slowest Sox team ever? Consider ... *The 13 triples were an all-time franchise low *The 67 steals were the fewest by a Sox team since the 1977 team swiped 42 By your measure the 1950 White Sox were the slowest of all time, 47 triples and 19 SB. The 2008 team would rank 3rd slowest. However, triples are harder to come by at US Cellular than they were at old Comiskey. If you count 3B + 2B + SB per game the '50 team is still the slowest but the '08 team drops to 40th. The fastest post WWII teams were 2000 (325 2B, 33 3B, 119 SB) and 1983 (270, 42, 165). There are old time teams that double these numbers but it was a different game in those days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted October 10, 2008 Share Posted October 10, 2008 QUOTE (TLAK @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 06:31 AM) By your measure the 1950 White Sox were the slowest of all time, 47 triples and 19 SB. The 2008 team would rank 3rd slowest. However, triples are harder to come by at US Cellular than they were at old Comiskey. If you count 3B + 2B + SB per game the '50 team is still the slowest but the '08 team drops to 40th. The fastest post WWII teams were 2000 (325 2B, 33 3B, 119 SB) and 1983 (270, 42, 165). There are old time teams that double these numbers but it was a different game in those days. Should "we" add bunt singles to that? Very interesting stuff. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 05:43 AM) ....and yet they still won the division. Why are people so focused on breaking them up and trying to acquire fast, but perhaps not as talented, baseball players? We should focus more on our holes at 3rd, CF, and pitching. I agree. We should just add some speed, but not completely focus on it, at those positions (not pitching smart asses). I will be upset if dye, thome or konerko get traded. They provide something greater than speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILMOU Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 05:43 AM) ....and yet they still won the division. Why are people so focused on breaking them up and trying to acquire fast, but perhaps not as talented, baseball players? We should focus more on our holes at 3rd, CF, and pitching. Agreed. Regarding your hot stove selections, however, we definitely don't want Willy Taveras. That's just speed for the sake of speed, with little benefit. Plus, he's become an attitude issue as well, falling out of favor here in Colorado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 Luckily Kenny has a good head on his shoulders and will tinker some and not do what some people on here want: trade everybody. I'm sure he'll keep some power and whether you like it or not some of our minor leaguers are going to be in the plans. My guess is Getz and Fields will play for the Sox next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosox41 Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Oct 10, 2008 -> 05:43 AM) ....and yet they still won the division. Why are people so focused on breaking them up and trying to acquire fast, but perhaps not as talented, baseball players? We should focus more on our holes at 3rd, CF, and pitching. While losing ing PK & or Thome would be great, it's not going to happen. So how about filling the 3 holes with speedsters? If memory serves, this team finished 6th in the AL in runs scored. The Sox have allocated a lot of money to slow, power hitting players. 6th in the league is merely average Edited October 12, 2008 by gosox41 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 I'm not suggesting we blow the team up, but winning the AL Central this year sure as hell didn't make me feel like only slight tinkering is necessary. It kinda felt like the 07 Cubs. We won a division that underachieved as a whole, we barely beat out a 2nd place team that never really took advantage when we slumped and we were a team we knew had no real chance come playoff time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 QUOTE (LosMediasBlancas @ Oct 12, 2008 -> 04:48 PM) It kinda felt like the 07 Cubs. Does that mean we win 97 games next year? 'Cause if so i'm in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted October 12, 2008 Share Posted October 12, 2008 QUOTE (StatManDu @ Oct 9, 2008 -> 10:53 AM) Were the 2008 White Sox the slowest Sox team ever? Consider ... *The 13 triples were an all-time franchise low *The 67 steals were the fewest by a Sox team since the 1977 team swiped 42 Actually, it was the 1877 Chicago White Stumps of the old Legless League that were slower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 12, 2008 -> 04:15 PM) Does that mean we win 97 games next year? 'Cause if so i'm in. Not if we trot that exact same team out there next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 With a few less injuries and a little more luck, this team could have easily won 97 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 While losing ing PK & or Thome would be great, it's not going to happen. Why would it be "great" to lose both of them. Funny how Thome was the only Sox to knock in a run against Minnie (without that shot we would have lost in extras probably) and Konerko was great the last six weeks and we hate on both. I still wouldn't be sure one isn't gone next season. They can agree to trades, you know. Even if they both stay ... we also forget how much our team changed without CQ. CQ was an MVP type player. Sox fans never made excuses to the point where it was ridiculous. Face facts. We had a chance to beat TBay with a healthy CQ in the lineup!!!! I predict Thome is here 100 percent; Konerko 50-50, could agree to deal. Crede gone. OC gone. Griffey gone. Swisher stays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Agreed. Regarding your hot stove selections, however, we definitely don't want Willy Taveras. That's just speed for the sake of speed, with little benefit. Plus, he's become an attitude issue as well, falling out of favor here in Colorado. It's not as much that I want, it's that I think the Sox will be tied to him as he plays CF, runs fast, and there have been posters wanting him since the 2005 World Series. He was also rumored in the Jon Garland traded that didn't go down before the Jason Jennings trade, so there is some smoke. Basically that list is what Soxtalk is going to dedicated a hundred threads to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 We already have a Willy Taveras, only a lot cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.