I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 05:27:46 -0700 (PDT), DrCrawdad
<drcrawdad.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Aug 12, 6:16 am, "thomas hagen" <hagentho....TakeThisOut@sbcgloab.net> wrote:
>> Home or away. That was a great performance by Danks. A perfect game, an hbp;
>> a hit, the killer walk (that Ozzie keeps warning the staff about) and then a
>> clean drive to the gap (EOG). Nice series altogether!
>
>2 of 4, good. 3 of 4 would have been great and it would have kept the
>Sox in 1st place!
>
>> You have got to like the Red Sox's pitching staff (especially their $100M+
>> "cool han' Luke" from Japan), as both Sox staves did well. It was a fine
>> effort all around. America enjoyed it very much thank you 'TBS, and nice
>> graphics of LSD on the HiDef (I could almost smell the lakefront)!
>
>The Sox now have to face the Royals, never an easy win for the Sox.


The forumula for winning a championship has always been to play the
top teams even and beat up on the weak ones.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

On Aug 12, 6:16 am, "thomas hagen" <hagentho....DeleteThis@sbcgloab.net> wrote:
> Home or away. That was a great performance by Danks. A perfect game, an hbp;
> a hit, the killer walk (that Ozzie keeps warning the staff about) and then a
> clean drive to the gap (EOG). Nice series altogether!
> You have got to like the Red Sox's pitching staff (especially their $100M+
> "cool han' Luke" from Japan), as both Sox staves did well. It was a fine
> effort all around. America enjoyed it very much thank you 'TBS, and nice
> graphics of LSD on the HiDef (I could almost smell the lakefront)!

===========
I just hope the game 4 loss doesn't bite them in the arse if they are
chasing Boston for the wild card spot! Hopefully it won't come to
that.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

In article
<66476b65-11b8-463d-946d-85e69ce155f7.DeleteThis@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
DrCrawdad <drcrawdad.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:


> The Sox now have to face the Royals, never an easy win for the Sox.


Few wins are easy at the professional level, but the White Sox have
enjoyed recent success* against the Royals

2008 8- 5 (through August 12th)
2007 12- 6
2006 11- 8
2005 13- 5
2004 13- 6
2003 11- 8
2002 11- 8

Total 79-46 ..632

[Not that amything will ever make up for that last Wednesday of the
1967 season in Kansas City. Different franchise, but the pain was big
enough to damn two franchises.]

_________________________________________________________________________
* PAST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILT AN INDICATION OF FUTURE PERFORMANCE
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

"Gary S. Simon" <garscosi RemoveThis @thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:garscosi-B2FDC0.08281613082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> In article
> <66476b65-11b8-463d-946d-85e69ce155f7 RemoveThis @m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> DrCrawdad <drcrawdad RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> The Sox now have to face the Royals, never an easy win for the Sox.
>
>
> Few wins are easy at the professional level, but the White Sox have
> enjoyed recent success* against the Royals
>
> 2008 8- 5 (through August 12th)
> 2007 12- 6
> 2006 11- 8
> 2005 13- 5
> 2004 13- 6
> 2003 11- 8
> 2002 11- 8
>
> Total 79-46 ..632
>
> [Not that amything will ever make up for that last Wednesday of the
> 1967 season in Kansas City.

........and then to fall out in D.C. (A.L.) the following weekend and watch
Boston go bye us and Detroit. I recall it being a four or five team race for
the pennant - only the winner takes all. And I heard there was a rebellion
against the Sox management at the end of the year. Tommy McCraw could steal
bases but seldomly did he steal anyone's heart. There was a lot of talent
throughout the field - and baserunning was the key.

> Different franchise, but the pain was big
> enough to damn two franchises.]

You don't include Cub fans, do you (or all of Chicago?).
Even Howard Cosell, I suspect.
The A.L. pennant dropped so fast, nobody had a chance to take sides!

That was an agonizing year - for all that it was worth.
The WS' best player's batting average I believe was .265 and most HR's was
18.
The team's ERA was somewhere below 3 with Peters, Pizarro and Horlen leading
the core.
I prefer what there is now.

> _________________________________________________________________________
> * PAST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILT AN INDICATION OF FUTURE PERFORMANCE

and it doesn't matter who's pitching.
Just win!
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

In article <sMAok.21366$N87.14582@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"thomas hagen" <hagenthomas DeleteThis @sbcgloab.net> wrote:

> "Gary S. Simon" <garscosi DeleteThis @thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote in message
> news:garscosi-B2FDC0.08281613082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...


> > [Not that amything will ever make up for that last Wednesday of the
> > 1967 season in Kansas City.
>
> .......and then to fall out in D.C. (A.L.) the following weekend


After the DH loss in Kansas City, the White Sox needed a sweep
against the Senatorsa, and some breaks, to get into a playoff.

Te White Sox were swepat at by Washington, and didn't average
anything close to the 12,000/game they needed to hit a million in
attendance for the season.

The White sox were swept at home by the Senators


> and watch Boston go by us and Detroit.


Neither had far to go. Heading into that ill-fated DH, the White Sox
led the Red Sox by less than .001 and the Tigers by only half a game.
They White Sox also trailed the Rwins by a game. In the loss column,
however, the White Sox were tied with the Twins and one ahead of the Red
Sox and Tigers.

The hope (at least my hope) was that the White Sox' (seemingly)
favorable schedule would allow them to finish on top, while the other
teams played one another (or California, which was the only other
winning team in the AL that season).

Here's how the race looked after the games of Tuesday 9/26/67
(including the remaining schedule):

Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Twins 91 68 CAL @ Bos @ Bos
White Sox 89 68 @ KC DH WAS WAS WAS
Red Sox 90 69 CLE MIN MIN
Tigers 89-69 CAL CAL CAL DH


Given how the other teams' games played out, the White Sox would have
needed to win 3 of their last 5 games to have tied for first, and 4 of 5
to reach the World Series (for which I still have unused tickets)
without a playoff.

Obviously, I wasn't taking into account that the White sox had not
beaten up on the Senators or A's that season. Heading into that DH, the
White sox had split 16 games with the A's and had won only 8 of 15
against the Senators.




> I recall it being a four or five team race for the pennant

Yes, it was a four team race -- Red Sox, Twins, Tigers and White Sox



> > the pain was big enough to damn two franchises.]

> You don't include Cub fans, do you (or all of Chicago?)

Sorry for the confusion. I meant the A's and Royals (even though the
latter didn't exist until two years later).

..

> That was an agonizing year - for all that it was worth.
> The WS' best player's batting average I believe was .265 and most HR's was
> 18.


The White Sox would have loved a regular with a .265 batting average.
Ken Berry and Don Buford led the way at .241. Ken Boyer hit .261, but
had only 180 at-bats.



> The team's ERA was somewhere below 3 with Peters, Pizarro and Horlen leading
> the core.


Baseball-reference gives the team ERA at 2.45. Was Juan Pizzaro
still on the team? I think Tommy John had replaced him in the "Big
Three" by then.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

"Gary S. Simon" <garscosi.DeleteThis@thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:garscosi-8F72A5.10424413082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> In article <sMAok.21366$N87.14582@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> "thomas hagen" <hagenthomas.DeleteThis@sbcgloab.net> wrote:
>
>> "Gary S. Simon" <garscosi.DeleteThis@thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote in message
>> news:garscosi-B2FDC0.08281613082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
>
>
>> > [Not that amything will ever make up for that last Wednesday of the
>> > 1967 season in Kansas City.
>>
>> .......and then to fall out in D.C. (A.L.) the following weekend
>
>
> After the DH loss in Kansas City, the White Sox needed a sweep
> against the Senatorsa, and some breaks, to get into a playoff.
>
> Te White Sox were swepat at by Washington, and didn't average
> anything close to the 12,000/game they needed to hit a million in
> attendance for the season.
>
> The White sox were swept at home by the Senators
>
>
>> and watch Boston go by us and Detroit.
>
>
> Neither had far to go. Heading into that ill-fated DH, the White Sox
> led the Red Sox by less than .001 and the Tigers by only half a game.
> They White Sox also trailed the Rwins by a game. In the loss column,
> however, the White Sox were tied with the Twins and one ahead of the Red
> Sox and Tigers.
>
> The hope (at least my hope) was that the White Sox' (seemingly)
> favorable schedule would allow them to finish on top, while the other
> teams played one another (or California, which was the only other
> winning team in the AL that season).
>
> Here's how the race looked after the games of Tuesday 9/26/67
> (including the remaining schedule):
>
> Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
>
> Twins 91 68 CAL @ Bos @ Bos
> White Sox 89 68 @ KC DH WAS WAS WAS
> Red Sox 90 69 CLE MIN MIN
> Tigers 89-69 CAL CAL CAL DH
>
>
> Given how the other teams' games played out, the White Sox would have
> needed to win 3 of their last 5 games to have tied for first, and 4 of 5
> to reach the World Series (for which I still have unused tickets)
> without a playoff.
>
> Obviously, I wasn't taking into account that the White sox had not
> beaten up on the Senators or A's that season. Heading into that DH, the
> White sox had split 16 games with the A's and had won only 8 of 15
> against the Senators.
>
>
>
>
>> I recall it being a four or five team race for the pennant
>
> Yes, it was a four team race -- Red Sox, Twins, Tigers and White Sox
>
>
>
>> > the pain was big enough to damn two franchises.]
>
>> You don't include Cub fans, do you (or all of Chicago?)
>
> Sorry for the confusion. I meant the A's and Royals (even though the
> latter didn't exist until two years later).
>
> .
>
>> That was an agonizing year - for all that it was worth.
>> The WS' best player's batting average I believe was .265 and most HR's
>> was
>> 18.
>
>
> The White Sox would have loved a regular with a .265 batting average.
> Ken Berry and Don Buford led the way at .241. Ken Boyer hit .261, but
> had only 180 at-bats.
>
>
>
>> The team's ERA was somewhere below 3 with Peters, Pizarro and Horlen
>> leading
>> the core.
>
>
> Baseball-reference gives the team ERA at 2.45. Was Juan Pizzaro
> still on the team? I think Tommy John had replaced him in the "Big
> Three" by then.

I recall Bruce Howard, Horlen, Peters, Fred Talbot, Don Locke (?) and a
sharktank full of solid arms. I think Juan was another Big K starter.
Yeah, now I do recall that the team's BA was .241. Didn't Pete Ward lead in
HRs with 18 and 83 RBIs respectfully?
Lopez held that team together and kept them competitive (with a sorry
attendance record - the good old days all to fall on a lost cause.
I wonder how Ozzie would have managed that team?
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

>>> El Senor had been replaced by Eddie Stankey before the 1967 season
> began. >>

Eddie Stanky replaced Lopez after the 1965 season.

>>I recall Bruce Howard, Horlen, Peters, Fred Talbot, Don Locke (?) and a
sharktank full of solid arms. I think Juan was another Big K starter.
>>

Besides Peters & Horlen, Tommy John was among their effective starters
in 67. Don Locke was an outfielder for the Washington Senators. You
may be thinking of Bobby Locker who was a good reliever. The starting
pitching also got a boost in 67 from young Francisco Carlos who
pitched well for awhile.

>>I only recall Stanky having only one good year - and I believe that was
1968. After that, they started 1969 with ten straight losses to kill
all
faithful sentiments>>

1968 was the year the Sox started 0-10 and Stanky was gone soon after
replaced for a short time by Lopez who didn't return for long and then
Don Gutteridge took over.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

In article <Sndpk.18352$mh5.3758@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>,
"thomas hagen" <hagenthomas.RemoveThis@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Lopez held that team together and kept them competitive


El Senor had been replaced by Eddie Stankey before the 1967 season
began.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

"Gary S. Simon" <garscosi DeleteThis @thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:garscosi-72A9AA.07241915082008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net...
> In article <Sndpk.18352$mh5.3758@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> "thomas hagen" <hagenthomas DeleteThis @sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Lopez held that team together and kept them competitive
>
>
> El Senor had been replaced by Eddie Stankey before the 1967 season
> began.

I only recall Stanky having only one good year - and I believe that was
1968. After that, they started 1969 with ten straight losses to kill all
faithful sentiments.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

In article
<059d97e5-e288-450c-8121-143919901b21.TakeThisOut@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
sdrahcir <whitesox148.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 1968 was the year the Sox started 0-10


And, if I recall correctly, relocated to UHF . White Sox fans of a
certain age recall those terrble seasons, especially the "home" games in
Milwaukee and the ever present threat of relocation to Florida.

The White Sox refused to cancel their 1968 home openier in the wake
of the assossination of Martin Luther King. If I recall correctly, the
public line was that the club would be charged with a forfeit.
Ironically, a forfeit is recorded as a 9-0 loss, and that's precisely
the score by which the White Sox lost their home opener to Cleveland.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

On Aug 15, 10:33 am, "Gary S. Simon"
<garsc....DeleteThis@thisisatypo.pipeline.com> wrote:
> In article
> <059d97e5-e288-450c-8121-143919901....DeleteThis@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>  sdrahcir <whitesox....DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 1968 was the year the Sox started 0-10
>
>    And, if I recall correctly, relocated to UHF .  White Sox fans of a
> certain age recall those terrble seasons, especially the "home" games in
> Milwaukee and the ever present threat of relocation to Florida.  
>
>    The White Sox refused to cancel their 1968 home openier in the wake
> of the assossination of Martin Luther King.  If I recall correctly, the
> public line was that the club would be charged with a forfeit.  
> Ironically, a forfeit is recorded as a 9-0 loss, and that's precisely
> the score by which the White Sox lost their home opener to Cleveland.

Very true about the UHF. In 1968 the White Sox went to channel 32 from
channel 9 where they had always been.
Most people didn't even have UHF and the few that did had to get
special antennas. I remember the one TV we had that had UHF had a
terrible picture & we had to watch the Sox through the snowy picture.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime 

In article
<0f8d38b3-cfb8-4c65-9aa2-1f2b9ac959be RemoveThis @m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
sdrahcir <whitesox148 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:


> In 1968 the White Sox went to channel 32 from
> channel 9 where they had always been.
> Most people didn't even have UHF and the few that did had to get
> special antennas. I remember the one TV we had that had UHF had a
> terrible picture & we had to watch the Sox through the snowy picture.


Unlike the 1977 opener against the Blue Jays, when it really did snow.
 >> Stay informed about: I'll Take a Split vs. Bos. Anytime