How important is this 2 game series with CLE

[RockRaines]

It was important, and they done good.

"Hey Cleveland, we are better than you, remember?"

[Chisoxfn]

I have five words for you: two, thousand, five, White, and Sox.

 

I'm not saying; I'm just saying.

And I don't get this. Just cause some idiots at baseball prospectuses projected us to suck, didn't mean the rest of the league did. I know I thought on paper, entering that season, we had an awesome chance at making some noise and considered ourselves a favorite for the division. For pete sakes, the Sox have been favorites for the majority of the decade by most of the analysts in the know. Sadly, they haven't lived up to that status too often.

 

But this BS about comparing this years Cleveland team to the 2005 White Sox has to stop. It is a baseless argument.

[Chisoxfn]

Pretty much the entire pitching staff minus Garcia and El Duque had flukish years, and then they got hot at the right time in order to win a world series. I'm not trying to take away from what they accomplished, though. I'm just trying to say that one shouldn't count out a team because they don't appear to be talented.

That right there is 2/5ths of the rotation and I'm not buying it. Buehrle didn't have a flukish year.

 

If you want to say Garland did, thats fine, but Garland outside of a first 6 to 8 bad starts was more dominant in 2006 (just look at the splits, once Garland started pitching, he took his ERA down).

 

Contreras was nasty and that nastiness lasted as long as his back held up. Once his back went to crap, he went back to being mediocre. But post all star break, I couldn't think of a pitcher who had better stuff that year than Jose Contreras. Guy was unhittable.

[RockRaines]

And I don't get this. Just cause some idiots at baseball prospectuses projected us to suck, didn't mean the rest of the league did. I know I thought on paper, entering that season, we had an awesome chance at making some noise and considered ourselves a favorite for the division. For pete sakes, the Sox have been favorites for the majority of the decade by most of the analysts in the know. Sadly, they haven't lived up to that status too often.

 

But this BS about comparing this years Cleveland team to the 2005 White Sox has to stop. It is a baseless argument.

From that team you still have many players playing prominent roles on the Sox and other teams. There were a few flash in the pans in the pen, but outside of that it was a solid team. Every member of that starting rotation is still pitching in the majors.

[Chisoxfn]

From that team you still have many players playing prominent roles on the Sox and other teams. There were a few flash in the pans in the pen, but outside of that it was a solid team. Every member of that starting rotation is still pitching in the majors.

Agreed, Sans Duque, but you can factor in BMac (who was Duque's backup) who when healthy has been nothing but a productive big leaguer (albeit, he's rarely healthy).

[Chisoxfn]

By the way. Do you guys realize Garland has put up an ERA plus > 100 in 5 of the last 6 years. Given his durability, thats a pretty damn valuable commodity.

 

While 05 was his best ERA+ of his career, lets not act like the guy has been a turd most of his career.

 

[RockRaines]

Agreed, Sans Duque, but you can factor in BMac (who was Duque's backup) who when healthy has been nothing but a productive big leaguer (albeit, he's rarely healthy).

Ah yeah, I should have said playoff rotation.

 

 

[Rowand44]

That right there is 2/5ths of the rotation and I'm not buying it. Buehrle didn't have a flukish year.

 

If you want to say Garland did, thats fine, but Garland outside of a first 6 to 8 bad starts was more dominant in 2006 (just look at the splits, once Garland started pitching, he took his ERA down).

 

Contreras was nasty and that nastiness lasted as long as his back held up. Once his back went to crap, he went back to being mediocre. But post all star break, I couldn't think of a pitcher who had better stuff that year than Jose Contreras. Guy was unhittable.

The fluke years were from the bullpen that season, not the rotation imo.

 

You're right though, that 05 team actually had a decent amount of expectations going into the season, maybe not as much by the media but I know Sox fans(and this site to be more specific) thought that team had a chance to be real good.

[witesoxfan]

Of games Indians have remaining that aren't against us, over 60% of them are against teams above .500. If a lot of their players don't continue to play ahead of their career averages, they will have a tough time holding on to first place.

 

This was my gut instinct. If I had to guess, I would say that Cleveland is going to play about .450 ball from here on out, which leaves them right around .500 for the year.

 

I think Detroit is probably the favorite to win the division, but neither the Sox nor Twins can be ruled out. Nobody can really.

[RockRaines]

The fluke years were from the bullpen that season, not the rotation imo.

 

You're right though, that 05 team actually had a decent amount of expectations going into the season, maybe not as much by the media but I know Sox fans(and this site to be more specific) thought that team had a chance to be real good.

Yeah, but thats pretty much every good pen.

 

Cotts still hasnt pitched in the majors since he got hurt, Polite and Hermanson were done shortly after that season. However Gascanino, Marte and Jenks have been legit.

[Balta1701]

Yeah, but thats pretty much every good pen.

 

Cotts still hasnt pitched in the majors since he got hurt, Polite and Hermanson were done shortly after that season. However Gascanino, Marte and Jenks have been legit.

Polite and Hermanson also were done because they got hurt the next year and that year.

[gatnom]

That right there is 2/5ths of the rotation and I'm not buying it. Buehrle didn't have a flukish year.

 

If you want to say Garland did, thats fine, but Garland outside of a first 6 to 8 bad starts was more dominant in 2006 (just look at the splits, once Garland started pitching, he took his ERA down).

 

Contreras was nasty and that nastiness lasted as long as his back held up. Once his back went to crap, he went back to being mediocre. But post all star break, I couldn't think of a pitcher who had better stuff that year than Jose Contreras. Guy was unhittable.

 

Buehrle had the closest thing to a fluke year as far as our starting pitching went (his ERA was .7 lower than his career average), and if you throw out 6-8 bad starts from every pitcher, they'd all be worth $20 million. You are right in that Contreras was more or less the best pitcher in baseball over that stretch of time, but he's also been pretty mediocre for his career. Yes, I understand he's been injured, but my entire point was that it's completely possible that maybe this is just the tribe's year where everything goes right for them. I mean, even if you don't see 2005 as partially a fluke, you have to admit that a lot of things just went right that year.

 

It's fair to say you don't think that the Indians are going to keep it up, but I think completely counting them out is a little ridiculous.

 

 

[jenksycat]

I still live by you don't "fluke" into 99 wins and only 1 playoff loss.

[T R U]

Buehrle had the closest thing to a fluke year as far as our starting pitching went (his ERA was .7 lower than his career average), and if you throw out 6-8 bad starts from every pitcher, they'd all be worth $20 million. You are right in that Contreras was more or less the best pitcher in baseball over that stretch of time, but he's also been pretty mediocre for his career. Yes, I understand he's been injured, but my entire point was that it's completely possible that maybe this is just the tribe's year where everything goes right for them. I mean, even if you don't see 2005 as partially a fluke, you have to admit that a lot of things just went right that year.

 

It's fair to say you don't think that the Indians are going to keep it up, but I think completely counting them out is a little ridiculous.

 

they won 69 games last year, 65 the year before that.. now they are all of the sudden going to win 100 with essentially the same team?

 

I don't buy it, and history would tend to agree with Cleveland sliding back eventually here.. If they are on a 100 win pace at the All Star break, then we can crown em'

[Balta1701]

they won 69 games last year, 65 the year before that.. now they are all of the sudden going to win 100 with essentially the same team?

Tampa Bay did it.

[Chisoxfn]

Tampa Bay did it.

Another bad comparison (just like other people's comparison to the White Sox of 05). Tampa Bay was an incredibly talented team with numerous top 100, hell, top 50 baseball prospects. Them being good wasn't a shock to anyone. I don't think people thought they'd be that dominant, but everyone knew the talent was there. This Indians team has had a lot of guys that aren't elite prospects or baseball talents turning it on and having career years.

 

Heck, most of there best prospects are either still in the minors or have just recently been called up.

[T R U]

Another bad comparison (just like other people's comparison to the White Sox of 05). Tampa Bay was an incredibly talented team with numerous top 100, hell, top 50 baseball prospects. Them being good wasn't a shock to anyone. I don't think people thought they'd be that dominant, but everyone knew the talent was there. This Indians team has had a lot of guys that aren't elite prospects or baseball talents turning it on and having career years.

 

Heck, most of there best prospects are either still in the minors or have just recently been called up.

 

thanks for saving me the time of saying this..