A Cub fan's worst nightmare...

[Soul]

I love how you are throwing out '99 wins' and 'ALDS sweep' as rationalization for calling Williams a great GM. Just because his mediocre and in some cases downright stupid (Lee for Podsednik) moves have miraculously panned out for him doesn't make him smart.

 

That's because you think it's a miracle and it isn't. It was well planned out and executed to provide a ballclub that works with his manager.

 

Lee for Pod is downright stupid if you are trying to build a power-based baseball team. But not so stupid if you intend to put more runners in scoring position and want to improve your defense a little. Oh, and by the way: it didn't hurt the White Sox power numbers a whole lot as it turned out. But that wasn't the point. The point was to give Guillen tools he could work with.

[Andy]

But that's my whole point. Podsednik had a .313 OBP last year, downright Macias-esque. The fact that Scotty improved by a fair amount this season was not entirely unexpected, but it was just as possible that he would not have gotten any better and that is where you throw your chips into the pot and hope for the best, so to speak.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I love how you are throwing out '99 wins' and 'ALDS sweep' as rationalization for calling Williams a great GM. Just because his mediocre and in some cases downright stupid (Lee for Podsednik) moves have miraculously panned out for him doesn't make him smart.

 

That's because you think it's a miracle and it isn't. It was well planned out and executed to provide a ballclub that works with his manager.

 

Lee for Pod is downright stupid if you are trying to build a power-based baseball team. But not so stupid if you intend to put more runners in scoring position and want to improve your defense a little. Oh, and by the way: it didn't hurt the White Sox power numbers a whole lot as it turned out. But that wasn't the point. The point was to give Guillen tools he could work with.

 

It's still stupid when you can get more for Lee than just Scotty Poddy and don't.

[Derwood]

I love this thread. There are people who, should the White Sox not lose another game and sweep their way to the championship, will STILL call it all dumb luck. At least accept the fact that they've won games. No one has lucked their way into 102 wins. You call El Duque's pitching in the 6th inning in Game 3 luck?

 

Listen, if the Sox were mediocre with Maggs, Lee, etc., but are good without them, then getting rid of them = good move. The Cubs tried the same thing in getting rid of Sosa/Alou, but it didn't work out. Why? Different managers, and a huge difference in injuries. The Sox staff remained intact for nearly the entire season, while the Cubs predictably got banged up. If the Cubs had stayed healthy and made the playoffs, would we be calling it dumb luck, as "swapping Alou and Sosa for Hollandsworth and Burnitz is just dumb"?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I love this thread. There are people who, should the White Sox not lose another game and sweep their way to the championship, will STILL call it all dumb luck. At least accept the fact that they've won games. No one has lucked their way into 102 wins. You call El Duque's pitching in the 6th inning in Game 3 luck?

 

Listen, if the Sox were mediocre with Maggs, Lee, etc., but are good without them, then getting rid of them = good move. The Cubs tried the same thing in getting rid of Sosa/Alou, but it didn't work out. Why? Different managers, and a huge difference in injuries. The Sox staff remained intact for nearly the entire season, while the Cubs predictably got banged up. If the Cubs had stayed healthy and made the playoffs, would we be calling it dumb luck, as "swapping Alou and Sosa for Hollandsworth and Burnitz is just dumb"?

 

I would. The Cubs would have had to make the playoffs inspite of relying on Hollandsworth and Burnitz to replace Alou and Sosa's 2004 production.

[Andy]

I would and I'll go further, I thought the Cubs in 2003 were pretty lucky. Not many teams would have gotten away with winning division titles with Alex Gonzalez, Mark Bellhorn, Eric Karros and Damian Miller starting for substantial portions of the season. Even fewer would have done it relying on a rotation of mostly young guys with no real veteran presence (other than maybe Estes) helping them out. Hendry made some great moves that year (Hundley for Grudz/Karros and Hill/Hernandez for Ramirez/Lofton/Simon) but the Cubs would have never gotten where they got without some luck. I just feel the ChiSox have had an inordinate amount of it this year.

 

As for the El Duque comment: ANY team should be able to get one run out of bases loaded and nobody out and most should get two, especially the Boston F---ing Red Sox. I don't care how good the pitcher does you need to get it done and the Red Sox did not. Just because the Cubs constantly screw them up doesn't mean other teams do.

[Soul]

I would and I'll go further, I thought the Cubs in 2003 were pretty lucky. Not many teams would have gotten away with winning division titles with Alex Gonzalez, Mark Bellhorn, Eric Karros and Damian Miller starting for substantial portions of the season. Even fewer would have done it relying on a rotation of mostly young guys with no real veteran presence (other than maybe Estes) helping them out. Hendry made some great moves that year (Hundley for Grudz/Karros and Hill/Hernandez for Ramirez/Lofton/Simon) but the Cubs would have never gotten where they got without some luck. I just feel the ChiSox have had an inordinate amount of it this year.

 

As for the El Duque comment: ANY team should be able to get one run out of bases loaded and nobody out and most should get two, especially the Boston F---ing Red Sox. I don't care how good the pitcher does you need to get it done and the Red Sox did not. Just because the Cubs constantly screw them up doesn't mean other teams do.

 

Red Sox are one of the most explosive offensive teams in the league. That was El Duque pitching from the core of his soul, make no mistake. That pitch to Damon was nothing short of brilliance. D has no idea where that ball was. He swung out of total confusion, and couldn't hold up.

 

Cubs did have some luck in 2003. And I didn't notice anyone pointing it out at the time in Cubdom. So it's a bit disingenuous to claim we would be pointing out our own luck in the heat of a World Series run. Maybe afterwards, but not during. I don't buy that for a second.

[Andy]

I would and I'll go further, I thought the Cubs in 2003 were pretty lucky. Not many teams would have gotten away with winning division titles with Alex Gonzalez, Mark Bellhorn, Eric Karros and Damian Miller starting for substantial portions of the season. Even fewer would have done it relying on a rotation of mostly young guys with no real veteran presence (other than maybe Estes) helping them out. Hendry made some great moves that year (Hundley for Grudz/Karros and Hill/Hernandez for Ramirez/Lofton/Simon) but the Cubs would have never gotten where they got without some luck. I just feel the ChiSox have had an inordinate amount of it this year.

 

As for the El Duque comment: ANY team should be able to get one run out of bases loaded and nobody out and most should get two, especially the Boston F---ing Red Sox. I don't care how good the pitcher does you need to get it done and the Red Sox did not. Just because the Cubs constantly screw them up doesn't mean other teams do.

 

Red Sox are one of the most explosive offensive teams in the league. That was El Duque pitching from the core of his soul, make no mistake. That pitch to Damon was nothing short of brilliance. D has no idea where that ball was. He swung out of total confusion, and couldn't hold up.

 

Cubs did have some luck in 2003. And I didn't notice anyone pointing it out at the time in Cubdom. So it's a bit disingenuous to claim we would be pointing out our own luck in the heat of a World Series run. Maybe afterwards, but not during. I don't buy that for a second.

Well, just like White Sox fans now and most other sports fans on this planet, we have a hard time being logical while our favorite team is making a run. I don't think that makes us any lesser fans. I would be annoyed if a Cub fan played the luck card in the middle of a playoff run because I would want to concentrate on the run itself.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

Come on, luck has nothing to do with what the White Sox have done. In fact, the Sox are very very similar to our own Cubs of 2003. What both teams showed/are showing is that great pitching carries the day every time.

 

The Cubs offense in 2003 stank, it took a great last 2 months of Kenny Lofton and Aramis Ramirez, and an occasional contribution from Randall Simon, to get them any kind of marginally acceptable team offense. Instead, it was Mark Prior posting one of the 100 best single-season ERA+ of all-time, along with huge pitching down the stretch from Wood and Zambrano, that carried the day. Along with some effective relief pitching from Remlinger and Farnsworth, and of course, Sweaty Joe's one big year.

 

Flash forward to the 2005 Sox. The offense is marginally acceptable at best. They can knock around some home runs, but the team OBP stinks and the only truly dangerous hitter in that lineup is Konerko--and you can strike him out. But the starting pitching is decent and the bullpen is deep and effective. Sounds like a familiar formula to me. Not lucky at all.

[Careless]

Not many teams would have gotten away with winning division titles with Alex Gonzalez, Mark Bellhorn, Eric Karros and Damian Miller starting for substantial portions of the season..

True, but 100% irrelevant. The cubs were not just any team, they were a team with fantastic starting pitching which you've completely ignored in this statement. not many teams would have gotten away with using the white sox's position players, but they still got to the playoffs.

[Careless]

I love this thread. There are people who, should the White Sox not lose another game and sweep their way to the championship, will STILL call it all dumb luck. At least accept the fact that they've won games. No one has lucked their way into 102 wins. You call El Duque's pitching in the 6th inning in Game 3 luck?

 

Listen, if the Sox were mediocre with Maggs, Lee, etc., but are good without them, then getting rid of them = good move. The Cubs tried the same thing in getting rid of Sosa/Alou, but it didn't work out. Why? Different managers, and a huge difference in injuries. The Sox staff remained intact for nearly the entire season, while the Cubs predictably got banged up. If the Cubs had stayed healthy and made the playoffs, would we be calling it dumb luck, as "swapping Alou and Sosa for Hollandsworth and Burnitz is just dumb"?

30 teams play 162 games a year for decades, you don't think a team can ever have, say, a 20 game luck swing? If that's what you think, you're wrong. If doesn't take that many runs to swing a season like that. It takes even fewer hits if they come at the right times (that is, lucky times)

[Diffusion]

The job that a General Manager does simply cannot be measured in terms of the number of wins in one single season. That is a gross simplification.

 

No, the job of the GM is to turn payroll (and other resources, such as draft picks) into talent as efficiently as possible, and to put that talent at the disposal of his manager as best he can. Free agency, trade, arbitration, waivers, drafts, all other form of talent acquisition, and 25 and 40-man roster presentation, that is all that there is to it. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

It is then the job of the manager and the players themselves to turn that talent into performance. At this stage the GM is absolutely powerless. He can only hope that the job he has already done in terms of talent acquisition and roster management facilitates efficient conversion of talent into performance. For instance, promoting a player before he's ready for the majors won't help at all.

 

And then there is the somewhat uncomprehendable conversion of performance into wins. Again, the GM at this stage is completely powerless, he can only hope that the job he's already done facilitates. The players and manager have some input at this stage, but I think in the general scheme of things that this conversion is somewhat random and involves a great deal of fortune, perhaps there are cosmic forces at work. But two teams over the course of the season can perform absolutely identically in terms of their final totals of hits, walks, hit by pitches, outs, strikeouts, home runs, errors, in both halves of the inning, but the distribution of all these events over the course of the season can lead to completely different results in terms of the number of wins. Why does a player get a hit there, but not there, there or there? Because a pitcher threw him a bad pitch there, but not there, there or there? Why did the pitcher throw him a bad pitch there, but not there, there or there? Why did the catcher call that pitch there, but not there, there or there? Why did the hitter connect with that bad pitch exactly right, whereas he failed to hit that bad pitch there, there or there? Why? Anyone that can explain all that is either Joe Morgan or a liar, or both.

 

Raw resources to talent, talent to performance, performance to wins, there are inefficiencies at all three stages, some that are the product of ineptitude, some of competence, some of ill fortune, some of good fortune, some that simply cannot be eliminated, some that certainly could be done away with. It's complicated.

 

And because it's so complicated, the bottom line is that it is completely RIDICULOUS to say something along the lines of "Ken Williams' team won 99 games in 2005, therefore he's a good GM".

 

It may well be that he is a good GM, but you simply cannot justify it solely on those grounds, the grounds that in a single season he won 99 games.

 

I don't have time now, but maybe I'll take a closer look at what exactly Williams did this year, how good he was at actually doing his job, raw resources to talent. Go ahead and do that yourself if you wish while I'm not here to do it.

 

But that's the only basis on which you can judge Williams. This efficiency at turning raw resources into talent. It is often the case that such a competency in that area partially contributes to teams winning more games. Indeed, I bet that there is a significant correlation between a GM's ability to turn raw resources into talent and the number of games that his team wins. But it is not a perfect correlation, and therefore you cannot simply say that because a GM's team won 99 games, the GM by default did his job, and did it well.

[Diffusion]

Dismissing absolutely everything that has "panned out" for Ken Williams as dumb luck though is equally stupid and ridiculous.

[Backtobanks]

Congratulations to the White Sox for the success they have acheived this year. They have played exceptional baseball and have combined very good pitching with timely hitting to get this far. That being said, I do think that the Sox will have trouble repeating their success next year. They have had "career years" from 6 or 7 players who are not likely to repeat those numbers. There is a very good chance that they won't resign Konerko, who I think is one of the keys to their success. Also, this was a year when the perennial champs (Twins) had a horrible season in a weak division. The Indians showed signs of promise, but their youth caught up with them. So congrats to Guillen & Williams on this year, but things could get ugly pretty quick.

[J.R.]

Plus, they're Bear fans don't forget that.

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

[ZMovieman]

It'll all work out when Los Angeles plants the White Sox on their butts. Seriously, I'd be surprised if the White Sox win two against them. Kudos to a great season and then welcome back down to earth next year. For those of you interested in the "great" general managing of Kenny Williams, take a read at this article about the Lee-Pods trade:

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/jacob_luft/10/07/oct07.chatter/index.html

[Soul]

It'll all work out when Los Angeles plants the White Sox on their butts. Seriously, I'd be surprised if the White Sox win two against them. Kudos to a great season and then welcome back down to earth next year. For those of you interested in the "great" general managing of Kenny Williams, take a read at this article about the Lee-Pods trade:

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/jacob_luft/10/07/oct07.chatter/index.html

 

Some buffoon writes a web article and that means something somehow? You oughtta know better than that.

 

Who's in the playoffs and who isn't? That's all that matters. Like I said, individual stats: overrated. Team wins: the name of the game.

[Soul]

Plus, they're Bear fans don't forget that.

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

If you're a Bear fan, it has everything to do with.......everything. These are the same fans you will be hugging at Soldier field after the Bears score a winning touchdown (if they ever do.........that's another story). It's a very, very good reason to root for Chicago and therefore the White Sox.

 

We're all Chicago fans, and that's the bottom line. Certainly most Cub & Sox fans have Chicago in their hearts, and that's more than enough reason to root for the White Sox over the hated, despicable, Cardinals.

 

If you aren't a Bear fan, then perhaps it doesn't mean anything to you. Many Cub fans are though, including myself.

[J.R.]

If you're a Bear fan, it has everything to do with.......everything. These are the same fans you will be hugging at Soldier field after the Bears score a winning touchdown (if they ever do.........that's another story). It's a very, very good reason to root for Chicago and therefore the White Sox.

 

We're all Chicago fans, and that's the bottom line. Certainly most Cub & Sox fans have Chicago in their hearts, and that's more than enough reason to root for the White Sox over the hated, despicable, Cardinals.

 

If you aren't a Bear fan, then perhaps it doesn't mean anything to you. Many Cub fans are though, including myself.

 

I'm sure plenty of Sox fans also like money and weekends. The fact that I share some traits with them doesn't make me hate them any less.

 

The goings on at Wrigley are what matters, and the Sox and their fans have looked way more dispicable there over the last eight years than St. Louis has. The Cardinals at least can claim some class as an organization.

[ZMovieman]

It'll all work out when Los Angeles plants the White Sox on their butts. Seriously, I'd be surprised if the White Sox win two against them. Kudos to a great season and then welcome back down to earth next year. For those of you interested in the "great" general managing of Kenny Williams, take a read at this article about the Lee-Pods trade:

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/jacob_luft/10/07/oct07.chatter/index.html

 

Some buffoon writes a web article and that means something somehow? You oughtta know better than that.

 

Who's in the playoffs and who isn't? That's all that matters. Like I said, individual stats: overrated. Team wins: the name of the game.

 

Wow Soul. You're missing the point. What CPatt and the rest have been saying is true, Kenny Williams simply isn't a good GM. The article proves it without discrediting Pods' year. Lee's importance to the Brewers is far more than Pods to the White Sox, as the VORP is stating. He's fortunate that Pods became a sparkplug. Would a good GM make a trade to acquire the SAME OF/DH (Everett) twice in back to back midseasons? Seems like a waste of prospects to me. Let me see what I'm gathering here, your argument is based off of what? Miracles and luck? No doubting the White Sox have been good this year, but come on. Statistically they shouldn't even been close (hence my comment that they will fall hard in the standings next year). You should know better...

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Plus, they're Bear fans don't forget that.

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

If you're a Bear fan, it has everything to do with.......everything. These are the same fans you will be hugging at Soldier field after the Bears score a winning touchdown (if they ever do.........that's another story). It's a very, very good reason to root for Chicago and therefore the White Sox.

 

We're all Chicago fans, and that's the bottom line. Certainly most Cub & Sox fans have Chicago in their hearts, and that's more than enough reason to root for the White Sox over the hated, despicable, Cardinals.

 

If you aren't a Bear fan, then perhaps it doesn't mean anything to you. Many Cub fans are though, including myself.

 

Please...those same Bears fans were talking trash after Games 6 and 7 in 2003 to me and other Cubs fans.

[Soul]

Plus, they're Bear fans don't forget that.

 

What the hell does this have to do with anything?

 

If you're a Bear fan, it has everything to do with.......everything. These are the same fans you will be hugging at Soldier field after the Bears score a winning touchdown (if they ever do.........that's another story). It's a very, very good reason to root for Chicago and therefore the White Sox.

 

We're all Chicago fans, and that's the bottom line. Certainly most Cub & Sox fans have Chicago in their hearts, and that's more than enough reason to root for the White Sox over the hated, despicable, Cardinals.

 

If you aren't a Bear fan, then perhaps it doesn't mean anything to you. Many Cub fans are though, including myself.

 

Please...those same Bears fans were talking trash after Games 6 and 7 in 2003 to me and other Cubs fans.

 

 

.....and high-fived Cub fans in 2001 when Mike Brown took 2 INTs back for game-winning TDs in overtime. Many Cub & Sox fans partied together the night the Bears clinched the division title that year, beating the Packers at *something* for the first time in forever.

 

Where were the Cards fans? Oh yeah, now I remember: rooting for us to lose for their Rams home-field advantage. Had we won another game we wouldn't have faced the upstart Beagles and surely would have advanced...

 

Cards fans may as well be Martians to me. Sox fans at least share the same city interests sports-wise after the baseball season ends.

 

I didn't like being trash-talked after games 6 & 7 either. But guess what? It was coming from Cards fans every bit as much as Sox fans. So in the final analysis, my alliegance in a Cards/Sox World Series would go squarely to the South Side, despite the North/South side rivalry.

 

I can't even understand someone who would root for the Cards.

[Soul]

If you're a Bear fan, it has everything to do with.......everything. These are the same fans you will be hugging at Soldier field after the Bears score a winning touchdown (if they ever do.........that's another story). It's a very, very good reason to root for Chicago and therefore the White Sox.

 

We're all Chicago fans, and that's the bottom line. Certainly most Cub & Sox fans have Chicago in their hearts, and that's more than enough reason to root for the White Sox over the hated, despicable, Cardinals.

 

If you aren't a Bear fan, then perhaps it doesn't mean anything to you. Many Cub fans are though, including myself.

 

I'm sure plenty of Sox fans also like money and weekends. The fact that I share some traits with them doesn't make me hate them any less.

 

The goings on at Wrigley are what matters, and the Sox and their fans have looked way more dispicable there over the last eight years than St. Louis has. The Cardinals at least can claim some class as an organization.

 

Everyone likes money and weekends. Not everyone else is a Bear fan. Big difference.

[stitchface]

for the record, the cubs were closer to winning the world series in 2003 than the sox are right now.

[J.R.]

Everyone likes money and weekends. Not everyone else is a Bear fan. Big difference.

 

I guess your football loyalties outweigh your baseball ties. That's strange to me, but if pulling for the Sox brings you closer to your Bears brethren, go for it.