Good Lord, 692 runs. That projection is about right, but it's painful to look that. It's amazing this offense could actually be worse than it was last year.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by whitesoxfan101

Good Lord, 692 runs. That projection is about right, but it's painful to look that.

Hey, look on the brightside. That's six runs better then the Royals offense last year.

The question is how the heck do you turn 700 runs into 85 to 90 wins just to give yourself a chance in the AL Central? The defense is going to have to be insanely better, for starters, and the bullpen will have to be top 3 in the American League. Both of those scenarios aren't completely unrealistic, but I think the best option to help is add another bat, and it still can be done.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by whitesoxfan101

can someone dispose of this pointless negative thread into diamond club? Damon's a Tiger. Get over it.

 

i'll repeat so that you can stop claiming that Damon's offensive input would be insignifcant.

 

Dude, drop the straw man arguments. I said that Damon would definitely help and compared to a late '90s Ray Durham. Are you going to argue that Durham was "insignificant" to his teams' offensive production?

 

Without Damon our average offense projections

HR’s : 170

Runs: 692

Without Kotsay and With Damon

Hr’s: 182

R’s: 754

Without Nix and with Damon

Hr’s: 177

R:: 744

 

That's a big step in the right direction.

 

Yeah, it is, but it's also a bunch of hypothetical projections. If Quentin is healthy and Rios has a decent season, I'm pretty sure that the Sox score more than 692 runs.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by WCSox

can someone dispose of this pointless negative thread into diamond club? Damon's a Tiger. Get over it.

 

Why even post in the thread if this is all you have to contribute?

I think it's hilarious that we're all just accepting under 700 runs as an inevitability because projections say so. Team-wide projections are wrong more often than they're right. By a good margin. How many runs did Minny project to score last year? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm gonna guess it wasn't mid-800's.

Why even post in the thread if this is all you have to contribute?

boo f***ing hoo

I think it's hilarious that we're all just accepting under 700 runs as an inevitability because projections say so. Team-wide projections are wrong more often than they're right. By a good margin. How many runs did Minny project to score last year? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm gonna guess it wasn't mid-800's.

 

Well, that's a fair question. I'm not accepting that because it's the projection, persay. The Sox could score a significantly higher run total than that if Quentin returns to 2008 form and Rios returns to mid 2000's form and Andruw Jones has a good bounceback season. Even if only one of those three things happens, the total is probably a little higher, and if two of the three occur, that probably increases the run total into the mid or maybe upper 700's. But odds are more likely those things won't occur, so odds are in favor of the run total being just below 700. However, the good news is those aren't hopeless causes, it is realistic that any or all of those things occur, which is where the hope for 2010 lies. Well that, and the fact we know the pitching should be great. I also think the big wildcard here is how the defense performs. I don't think it's great, but it could and probably should be significantly better than it was in 2009.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by whitesoxfan101

Well, that's a fair question. I'm not accepting that because it's the projection, persay. The Sox could score a significantly higher run total than that if Quentin returns to 2008 form and Rios returns to mid 2000's form and Andruw Jones has a good bounceback season. Even if only one of those three things happens, the total is probably a little higher, and if two of the three occur, that probably increases the run total into the mid or maybe upper 700's. But odds are more likely those things won't occur, so odds are in favor of the run total being just below 700. However, the good news is those aren't hopeless causes, it is realistic that any or all of those things occur, which is where the hope for 2010 lies. Well that, and the fact we know the pitching should be great. I think the big wildcard here is how the defense performs. I don't think it's great, but it could and probably should be significantly better than it was in 2009.

Yah I see where you're coming from here, but the way I see it, this is the most unpredictable offense we've ever had so our attempts at sorting it all out are futile. I can completely realistically see us scoring anywhere from 700-820 runs. That's a pretty wide range of possibility, simply because every player in our lineup has a high upside but fair odds against fruition. I just don't see how everything is doom-and-gloom, because more than any year I can remember, we simply have noooooo idea. I think maybe we're really just scared of the uncertainty.

Yah I see where you're coming from here, but the way I see it, this is the most unpredictable offense we've ever had so our attempts at sorting it all out are futile. I can completely realistically see us scoring anywhere from 700-820 runs. That's a pretty wide range of possibility, simply because every player in our lineup has a high upside but fair odds against fruition. I just don't see how everything is doom-and-gloom, because more than any year I can remember, we simply have noooooo idea. I think maybe we're really just scared of the uncertainty.

FTW

Yah I see where you're coming from here, but the way I see it, this is the most unpredictable offense we've ever had so our attempts at sorting it all out are futile. I can completely realistically see us scoring anywhere from 700-820 runs. That's a pretty wide range of possibility, simply because every player in our lineup has a high upside but fair odds against fruition. I just don't see how everything is doom-and-gloom, because more than any year I can remember, we simply have noooooo idea. I think maybe we're really just scared of the uncertainty.

 

If the Sox can somehow score 800 runs, they are without question the favorite in the AL Central as far as I'm concerned. Even 750 puts them in pretty good shape. I will say I'm also scared of the uncertainty. Uncertainty is just a bad thing in sports usually, because Murphy's Law seems to occur so often in them.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by whitesoxfan101

I just meant he'd pull the production from the DH spot itself from worst to average. Considering how important DH production is in the AL, that'd have been a big deal.

 

Sorry, I think that I misread your original post. I agree with this point.

 

I think it's hilarious that we're all just accepting under 700 runs as an inevitability because projections say so. Team-wide projections are wrong more often than they're right. By a good margin. How many runs did Minny project to score last year? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm gonna guess it wasn't mid-800's.

 

Yep, projections are essentially worthless. There are way too many variables (including the fact that teams are still signing FAs) to even semi-accurately project total offensive production in February.

 

That said, I agree with their overarching point that the Sox will struggle to score runs this year. This team's OBP will be a lot like the '05 squad's. They definitely have the starting pitching (on paper, at least), but replicating that '05 bullpen will be nearly impossible. I think that this team could win 88-89 games, but who knows if that'll be enough for a division title.

 

I don’t think statistical projections are the end –all—be-all of baseball predictions. I do think they lead to the right direction. And the directions they point the White Sox offense towards are not positive ones.

I don’t think statistical projections are the end –all—be-all of baseball predictions. I do think they lead to the right direction. And the directions they point the White Sox offense towards are not positive ones.

I think you look at nearly every position in the starting lineup, and look at the replacements and changes, there are a lot of guys who are likelier to improve then diminish in performance. I think this offense hits for a notably higher average, and slightly higher OBP, than we saw last year. But there will definitely be a slugging drop. The DH slot is the one place in the lineup that really bothers me.

 

I'll bet we score more runs this year than last, but not by much.

 

I'll bet we score more runs this year than last, but not by much.

 

The Sox scored 724 runs last year and 693 runs in 2007. The '07 team featured thee players with 300+ ABs who had an OPS+ below 75 (Uribe, Owens, and Erstad). Pods put up a 73 OPS+ in 214 ABs. Getz (OPS+ 74) and Wise (OPS+ 61) and Fields (OPS+ 68) are also gone. The Sox probably won't hit 190 HRs this year, but there aren't as many automatic outs in the lineup either. Even Teahen has averaged an OPS+ in the mid-90s over the past few years. Jones was at 100 last year (although he's admittedly a question mark due to health). Jones/Kotsay at DH is obviously a problem but, unlike previous years, that lack of offensive production is limited to one position.

 

Unless Quentin misses most of the season with an injury, I don't see the Sox falling below 700 runs this year. But, like I said, a lot can happen that can alter projections to the point of worthlessness.

 

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by WCSox

Ok, I just emailed Kenny about Parra. Lol. How kickass would it be if he responded and said he would look into him? I would cream my shorts.

Hah, Ranger. That extra 6% is the real killer, eh?

 

Shack, the difference is the deferred money. You're more perceptive than that.

Ok, I just emailed Kenny about Parra. Lol. How kickass would it be if he responded and said he would look into him? I would cream my shorts.

 

If he went and got him, would your brain explode?

If he went and got him, would your brain explode?

 

Yes.

 

The only player (under the radar) I have ever predicted the Sox were going to sign was Jayson Nix, and I even freaked out a little on that one too.

Ahh, I know what he was trying to say, I just like to give him hell once in a while...

 

I also find it a bit humorous that all the sudden we are considering deferred money in a 1 year contract to fit into some form of customary. It simply is not.

 

It doesn't matter if it's customary or not, that's completely beside the point. The point is that spending around 4.5 on Damon this season is a lot different than spending 8 this season

It doesn't matter if it's customary or not, that's completely beside the point. The point is that spending around 4.5 on Damon this season is a lot different than spending 8 this season

 

 

It's clear we drove the price way up on Detroit. I wouldnt be surprised if we knew what we were doing all along.

 

Not to say we didnt want Damon, but just that we had some desire to mess with Detroit's future budget, knowing they needed a leadoff way too badly right now.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by Princess Dye

It's clear we drove the price way up on Detroit. I wouldnt be surprised if we knew what we were doing all along.

 

Not to say we didnt want Damon, but just that we had some desire to mess with Detroit's future budget, knowing they needed a leadoff way too badly right now.

The Tigers traded away Granderson for Financial Reasons, who will make $5.5 million this year, and signed Damon for that same role at $8 million.

The Tigers traded away Granderson for Financial Reasons, who will make $5.5 million this year, and signed Damon for that same role at $8 million.

 

The Tigers are following suit with the rest of their city in terms of the level of sense and intelligence in their financial decisions apparently.

Edited February 21, 201016 yr by whitesoxfan101

The Tigers traded away Granderson for Financial Reasons, who will make $5.5 million this year, and signed Damon for that same role at $8 million.

 

Good God can you imagine if the Sox had an off season like that? This place is ready to burn to the ground after a fraction of that.