Baseball Is Upon Us!

[Era Might]

[quote]2004 Red Sox Postseason ERA: 3.97
2005 White Sox Postseason ERA: 2.61[/quote]

That number doesn't tell us much. Who did the White Sox play in the Playoffs last year? Boston, Anaheim, and Houston. As I said, the Red Sox were inconsistent all year, even though they did have good run production (thanks in large part to Manny and Ortiz, who had MVP type seasons). Anaheim is a small ball team, almost a National League club stuck in the AL. And the Houston offense was non-existent. They were terrible.

Who did the Red Sox face in 2004? Anaheim, who were still a small ball club, but Vladimir Guerrero was MVP that year. Then they played the Yankees who had a brutal lineup (Matsui, Sheffield, Jeter, AROD, etc). And finally, they played the St. Louis Cardinals, an offensive powerhouse in the NL with Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, Larry Walker, Albert Pujols, etc. That first WS game was an anomaly, b/c the Red Sox had 4 errors, and St. Louis scored 9 runs; although we still scored 11. But that St. Louis offense did NOTHING the whole series. They were completely shut down.

Also, the postseason ERA for the Sox staff was skewed in that game 3 against the Yankees where they scored 19 runs.

The Red Sox weren't perfect that year. But when they got it all together in the post season, they were dominant. And they had to go through the Yankees and the Cardinals, the undisputable best competition in both leagues, to do it.

I'll agree that the White Sox were a more well rounded team (the Red Sox were horrendous defensively in the early part of that year, until Cabrera and Mientkevitz shored up the infield). But all in all, I would take that Red Sox club any day of the week, for three reasons: Two hall-of-fame caliber starting pitchers (Schilling and Pedro), a solid bullpen (Timlin and Foulke), and an offense that would outslug you 9 times out of 10, if put to the test.

Edited February 13, 2006 by Era Might

[khouse]

edit: double post

Edited February 13, 2006 by khouse

[khouse]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 12 2006, 06:09 PM']That number doesn't tell us much. Who did the White Sox play in the Playoffs last year? Boston, Anaheim, and Houston. As I said, the Red Sox were inconsistent all year, even though they did have good run production (thanks in large part to Manny and Ortiz, who had MVP type seasons). Anaheim is a small ball team, almost a National League club stuck in the AL. And the Houston offense was non-existent. They were terrible.

Who did the Red Sox face in 2004? Anaheim, who were still a small ball club, but Vladimir Guerrero was MVP that year. Then they played the Yankees who had a brutal lineup (Matsui, Sheffield, Jeter, AROD, etc). And finally, they played the St. Louis Cardinals, an offensive powerhouse in the NL with Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, Larry Walker, Albert Pujols, etc. That first WS game was an anomaly, b/c the Red Sox had 4 errors, and St. Louis scored 9 runs; although we still scored 11. But that St. Louis offense did NOTHING the whole series. They were completely shut down.

Also, the postseason ERA for the Sox staff was skewed in that game 3 against the Yankees where they scored 19 runs.

The Red Sox weren't perfect that year. But when they got it all together in the post season, they were dominant. And they had to go through the Yankees and the Cardinals, the undisputable best competition in both leagues, to do it.

I'll agree that the White Sox were a more well rounded team (the Red Sox were horrendous defensively in the early part of that year, until Cabrera and Mientkevitz shored up the infield). But all in all, I would take that Red Sox club any day of the week, for three reasons: Two hall-of-fame caliber starting pitchers (Schilling and Pedro), a solid bullpen (Timlin and Foulke), and an offense that would outslug you 9 times out of 10, if put to the test.
[right][snapback]885039[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

DUDE! The 2004 Yankees did not have as potent of an offense as the 2005 Red Sox or the 2004 Red Sox. The 2004 Yankees team BA was .268 with only 897 Runs scored. So in theory, the 2004 Red Sox pitchers never faced an opponent as productive as the 2005 Red Sox offense which the White Sox pitching staff shut down.

And any way you slice it, regular season or postseason the White Sox had a better pitching staff from top to bottom. Just look back at the stats I posted in thread.

[khouse]

And one more thing, how can you keep calling the 2005 Red Sox offense "inconsistent" when they ranked 1st in runs scored and in team BA?

[Tony]

[quote name='crazymaine catholic' date='Feb 12 2006, 06:24 PM']what do you cleavland fans think about coco crisp coming to the sox?
[right][snapback]885002[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

he is no Manny Ramirez, but he is decent, smells of elderberries to lose him.

[Era Might]

[quote name='khouse' date='Feb 13 2006, 12:54 AM']DUDE!  The 2004 Yankees did not have as potent of an offense as the 2005 Red Sox or the 2004 Red Sox.  The 2004 Yankees team BA was .268 with only 897 Runs scored.  So in theory, the 2004 Red Sox pitchers never faced an opponent as productive as the 2005 Red Sox offense which the White Sox pitching staff shut down. 

And any way you slice it, regular season or postseason the White Sox had a better pitching staff from top to bottom.  Just look back at the stats I posted in thread.
[right][snapback]885500[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

ONLY 897 runs scored? Is that all? By comparison, the '05 White Sox scored 741.

The Yankees weren't far behind the Red Sox offensively that year. Slugging percentage was almost identical (.458 to .473). as was On Base percentage (.356 to .363). Compare that to the '05 White Sox (.262 average, .322 OBP, and .425 Slugging).

There's no doubt the Red Sox were the best offense that year. But stellar as they were, the Yankees were right behind them, which makes the Yankees darn good themselves. And they were a power club in the middle of that lineup, with Jeter, AROD, Matsui, and Sheffield. Matsui in particular was a Red Sox killer.

St. Louis was just as good. They had a .278 average, . 460 slugging, and .348 OBP.

Anaheim in 2004 had a .282 average, .343 OBP, and a .429 slugging. In 2005, they had a ..270 average, .325 OBP, and .409 slugging. Vladimir Guerrero batted .337 with 39 homers in 2004. In 2005 he batted .317 with 32 homers.

So the one common opponent between 2004 and 2005, Anaheim, was vastly superior in 2004, including their biggest threat, who was MVP in '04. They were a small ball club in 2005.

How does '05 Houston stack up to the '04 Yankees? '05 Houston (.256 average, .322 OBP, .408 slugging) vs '04 New York (.268, .356 OBP, .458 Slugging)

So of the ALCS and World Series opponents for the '04 Red Sox and '05 White Sox, the '04 Red Sox faced far stiffer offensive competition. And not just statistic wise, but they faced big time hitters in both the St. Louis and New York lineups. Other than Guerrero for Anaheim, the White Sox really didn't face a daunting lineup. They played two small ball clubs.

In addition to the two anomalies mentioned before (game 1 of the WS and game 3 against NY), this accounts for the difference in staff ERA between the '04 Red Sox and the '05 White Sox.

Which leaves only the head to head matchup, and your final question:

[quote name='khouse' date='Feb 13 2006, 12:57 AM']And one more thing, how can you keep calling the 2005 Red Sox offense "inconsistent" when they ranked 1st in runs scored and in team BA?
[right][snapback]885504[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Numbers can be deceiving. Trust me on this one. I watched the Red Sox the whole year. It's easy to pile on runs in a season (single game blowouts help that out). While runs scored are an important factor, they don't tell the story of consistency. The Red Sox were horrendously inconsistent that year. They would break out one night, and not be able to hit anything the next. They would go on long stretches at a time doing nothing. I couldn't find the story, but David Ortiz admitted a few months ago that he knew early on in the season the 2005 Red Sox didn't have what it took. They were not consistent enough.

That's not to take away from Chicago's pitching. They had excellent pitching against the Red Sox, and it's one of the reasons why they won (the other one being our pitching stunk).




So, to sum up, the Red Sox pitching staff faced a far superior opposing offense throughout the 2004 playoffs than Chicago did in 2005. They did so with two hall of fame caliber pitchers (Schilling and Pedro), with Derek Lowe (who was unhittable, clinching each deciding game in the playoffs that year), with Tim Wakefield (who's just a solid pitcher in general), with a dominant bullpen (Keith Foulke and Mike Timlin were amazing that year), and with the best offense in baseball for about 3 or 4 years now.

The 2005 White Sox were an excellent club. But compared to the 2004 Red Sox, they would be virtually a National League team facing an American League team.

For these various and sundry reasons, the 2004 Red Sox would dismiss the 2005 White Sox, I'd say, in 5 games.

Edited February 13, 2006 by Era Might

[Era Might]

[quote name='Tony' date='Feb 13 2006, 01:20 AM']he is no Manny Ramirez, but  he is decent, smells of elderberries to lose him.
[right][snapback]885529[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Is he at least a Johnny Damon?

[khouse]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 12 2006, 11:40 PM']ONLY 897 runs scored? Is that all? By comparison, the '05 White Sox scored 741.

The Yankees weren't far behind the Red Sox offensively that year. Slugging percentage was almost identical (.458 to .473). as was On Base percentage (.356 to .363). Compare that to the '05 White Sox (.262 average, .322 OBP, and .425 Slugging).

There's no doubt the Red Sox were the best offense that year. But stellar as they were, the Yankees were right behind them, which makes the Yankees darn good themselves. And they were a power club in the middle of that lineup, with Jeter, AROD, Matsui, and Sheffield. Matsui in particular was a Red Sox killer.

St. Louis was just as good. They had a .278 average, . 460 slugging, and .348 OBP.

Anaheim in 2004 had a .282 average, .343 OBP, and a .429 slugging. In 2005, they had a ..270 average, .325 OBP, and .409 slugging. Vladimir Guerrero batted .337 with 39 homers in 2004. In 2005 he batted .317 with 32 homers.

So the one common opponent between 2004 and 2005, Anaheim, was vastly superior in 2004, including their biggest threat, who was MVP in '04. They were a small ball club in 2005.

How does '05 Houston stack up to the '04 Yankees? '05 Houston (.256 average, .322 OBP, .408 slugging) vs '04 New York (.268, .356 OBP, .458 Slugging)

So of the ALCS and World Series opponents for the '04 Red Sox and '05 White Sox, the '04 Red Sox faced far stiffer offensive competition. And not just statistic wise, but they faced big time hitters in both the St. Louis and New York lineups. Other than Guerrero for Anaheim, the White Sox really didn't face a daunting lineup. They played two small ball clubs.

In addition to the two anomalies mentioned before (game 1 of the WS and game 3 against NY), this accounts for the difference in staff ERA between the '04 Red Sox and the '05 White Sox.

Which leaves only the head to head matchup, and your final question:
Numbers can be deceiving. Trust me on this one. I watched the Red Sox the whole year. It's easy to pile on runs in a season (single game blowouts help that out). While runs scored are an important factor, they don't tell the story of consistency. The Red Sox were horrendously inconsistent that year. They would break out one night, and not be able to hit anything the next. They would go on long stretches at a time doing nothing. I couldn't find the story, but David Ortiz admitted a few months ago that he knew early on in the season the 2005 Red Sox didn't have what it took. They were not consistent enough.

That's not to take away from Chicago's pitching. They had excellent pitching against the Red Sox, and it's one of the reasons why they won (the other one being our pitching stunk).
So, to sum up, the Red Sox pitching staff faced a far superior opposing offense throughout the 2004 playoffs than Chicago did in 2005. They did so with two hall of fame caliber pitchers (Schilling and Pedro), with Derek Lowe (who was unhittable, clinching each deciding game in the playoffs that year), with Tim Wakefield (who's just a solid pitcher in general), with a dominant bullpen (Keith Foulke and Mike Timlin were amazing that year), and with the best offense in baseball for about 3 or 4 years now.

The 2005 White Sox were an excellent club. But compared to the 2004 Red Sox, they would be virtually a National League team facing an American League team.

For these various and sundry reasons, the 2004 Red Sox would dismiss the 2005 White Sox, I'd say, in 5 games.
[right][snapback]885542[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The oldest saying in baseball is good pitching beats good hitting.

This debate is going to start going in circles. I am going to keep bringing up the fact the White Sox have a better team pitching staff bring up numbers from the postseason and regular season and you will say those numbers aren't a fair assesment even though the 2004 Red Sox never faced a offense as productive as the 2005 Red Sox in the playoffs . While you say 2004 Yankees are nearly similar in the numbers you go on to say that the Angels are "VASTLY" better in 2004 when the same difference in numbers is about the difference between 2005 Red Sox and 2004 Yankees. So, that would make the 2005 Red Sox vastly better than the 2004 Yankees, according to your own math.

If the postseason does not give you a good idea about how much of a better pitching staff the White Sox had look at the regular season numbers:

2004 Red Sox:
768 Runs Allowed with a team ERA of 4.18

2005 White Sox:
645 Runs allowed with a 3.61 ERA

The White Sox also finished in 1st place with IP by their starters. Fact is, the White Sox pitching staff is "vastly" better than the 2004 Red Sox.

When I said the Yankees only scored 897 runs I was saying only in comparing them with the 2005 Red Sox. It is true the White Sox did not score a lot of runs this past year but the fact that they won 99 games with a weak offense goes to show how great their pitching and grinder style of baseball was. Another factor into the White Sox not scoring a lot of runs has to do with the fact they have to go against CLE and MIN on a regular basis who are both in the top 5 in ERA and they still managed to beat all those teams who had better pitching than the Red Sox.

And all this talk about the 2005 Red Sox having an inconsistent offense is bull. ALL OFFENSES ARE INCONSISNET IN BASEBALL! That is why when you hit the ball 1/3 of the time for your lifetime BA you go to the Hall of Fame. Maybe you have been spoiled by watching the Red Sox hit the cover off the ball the last few years but their offense was still #1 in the MLB this year and you put that offense in any other team next to the Yankees and their fans would not call them inconsistent. You can not pitch the way the Red Sox did this year and win 95 games with an "inconsistent" offense. In fact, they only won 3 less games than the 2004 Red Sox. There is no in consistencey about that.

I will give that the Astros are hardly a threat on offense but they had an amazing pitching staff as well. 3.51 ERA with 609 Runs allowed. Compare that to the 3 teams the Red Sox played in the playoffs and the only team that comes close to that is the Cardinals. So the Red Sox never faced a pitching staff as dominant as the 2005 Astros whom which the White Sox beat. The White Sox beat the best hitting team in the AL and the best pitching staff from the NL in the 2005 playoffs and they went 11-1, which happens to tie the best postseason record since the Wild Card format.

This is starting to get exhausting though. The 2004 had the better offense with good pitching while 2005 White Sox had more of a small ball and timely hitting team with a better pitching staff. But pitching wins in the playoffs.

[Tony]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Feb 13 2006, 12:41 AM']Is he at least a Johnny Damon?   
[right][snapback]885543[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

2005 stats:

Avg HR RBI Runs SB
Crisp .300 16 69 86 15
Damon .316 10 75 117 18

thank you yahoo sports

[crazymaine catholic]

looks like crisp will be a fantastic replacement. by the way, THREEDAYS TILL PITCHERS AND CATCHERS REPORT!!! :

[God the Father]

[quote name='crazymaine catholic' date='Feb 12 2006, 06:24 PM']what do you cleavland fans think about coco crisp coming to the sox?
[right][snapback]885002[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I guess we're rebuilding again this year. I bet Crisp makes the All-Star Team, especially now that he plays in such a big market.

[crazymaine catholic]

*dances around* spring training spring training spring training spring training!!!!! : excited? me? oh heck yes. :

[EAnn246]

[quote name='God the Father' date='Feb 19 2006, 07:15 AM']I guess we're rebuilding again this year. I bet Crisp makes the All-Star Team, especially now that he plays in such a big market.
[right][snapback]891680[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


I'll miss Coco Crisp playing for the Indians.

[khouse]

[quote name='EAnn246' date='Feb 19 2006, 11:15 AM']I'll miss Coco Crisp playing for the Indians.
[right][snapback]891801[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
As a White Sox fan, I won't! :

It really does seem like the Indians took a step in the wrong direction this offseason.

[Tony]

is anyone looking forward to the World Baseball Classic?

It's about time baseball had it's own World Cup type deal!