Chicago Fanatics Message Board
http://chicagofanatics.com/

Cleveland Indians
http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=108348		 Page 3 of 7
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
The White Sox were a very good team with a historically great post season runs (one of the best)


Just leave it at that.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
Because they werent as good? 99 wins vs 114? The Reds were undefeated in post season?
So total combined playoff and regular season wins is the true metric of greatness?
rogers park bryan wrote:
Man, I cant imagine how bad it must suck to be mad that your team is ONLY a great Championship team but clearly not the best.
So, are you saying the 2005 White Sox are the third greatest team of all time?
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
Certainly not more important, but if you're trying to decide who the better team was you look at the whole season (obviously)
Why should we? This indicates that an opening day loss is important even as rosters change drastically all throughout the season with trades, call ups, and in some cases the resting of players towards the end of the year to get ready for the playoffs. If the Cubs somehow traded for Mike Trout and went undefeated in the playoffs we wouldn't say "Yeah, but they weren't as good in May!".
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Because they werent as good? 99 wins vs 114? The Reds were undefeated in post season?
So total combined playoff and regular season wins is the true metric of greatness?

There is no absolute formula (obviously) but I think looking at 175 games is a better indicator than looking at 12-18.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Man, I cant imagine how bad it must suck to be mad that your team is ONLY a great Championship team but clearly not the best.
So, are you saying the 2005 White Sox are the third greatest team of all time?

No, I haven't said that.

They are one of the top 3 since Wild Card play began in 1995 though.
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:
Any team can beat any team in a 7 game series.
Very true. We saw that when the Cubs barely squeaked by the Indians last fall.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Certainly not more important, but if you're trying to decide who the better team was you look at the whole season (obviously)
Why should we? This indicates that an opening day loss is important even as rosters change drastically all throughout the season with trades, call ups, and in some cases the resting of players towards the end of the year to get ready for the playoffs. If the Cubs somehow traded for Mike Trout and went undefeated in the playoffs we wouldn't say "Yeah, but they weren't as good in May!".

:lol: :lol: Look at where you are and what you're arguing.

You are arguing that a 7-9 team could be the best NFL team of all time.


And yes, of course people would say that. They'd say they were a good team that became great when they got Trout. Good team...great post season run. Not so sure what is hard about that.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Frank Coztansa wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Any team can beat any team in a 7 game series.
Very true. We saw that when the Cubs barely squeaked by the Indians last fall.

Did you stay up for it? Did you cry at all?
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
No.

I had no more tears left by that point.
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Certainly not more important, but if you're trying to decide who the better team was you look at the whole season (obviously)
Why should we? This indicates that an opening day loss is important even as rosters change drastically all throughout the season with trades, call ups, and in some cases the resting of players towards the end of the year to get ready for the playoffs. If the Cubs somehow traded for Mike Trout and went undefeated in the playoffs we wouldn't say "Yeah, but they weren't as good in May!".

:lol: :lol: Look at where you are and what you're arguing.

You are arguing that a 7-9 team could be the best NFL team of all time.


And yes, of course people would say that. They'd say they were a good team that became great when they got Trout. Good team...great post season run. Not so sure what is hard about that.


It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:

It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

I dont know why Sox fans get labeled as having a victim complex.
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:

It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

I dont know why Sox fans get labeled as having a victim complex.


:lol:
Author:  veganfan21 [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Quote:
"I know you about to sweep the world series and imma let you finish, but the 1998 Yankees were one of the best teams of all time! Of all time!"

^ I don't think there's anything controversial about that.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Because they werent as good? 99 wins vs 114? The Reds were undefeated in post season?
So total combined playoff and regular season wins is the true metric of greatness?

There is no absolute formula (obviously) but I think looking at 175 games is a better indicator than looking at 12-18.

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Man, I cant imagine how bad it must suck to be mad that your team is ONLY a great Championship team but clearly not the best.
So, are you saying the 2005 White Sox are the third greatest team of all time?

No, I haven't said that.

They are one of the top 3 since Wild Card play began in 1995 though.
Why though?

The Sox argument is pretty obvious and solid. No team has had to win as many games and has done it with less losses.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Certainly not more important, but if you're trying to decide who the better team was you look at the whole season (obviously)
Why should we? This indicates that an opening day loss is important even as rosters change drastically all throughout the season with trades, call ups, and in some cases the resting of players towards the end of the year to get ready for the playoffs. If the Cubs somehow traded for Mike Trout and went undefeated in the playoffs we wouldn't say "Yeah, but they weren't as good in May!".

:lol: :lol: Look at where you are and what you're arguing.

You are arguing that a 7-9 team could be the best NFL team of all time.


And yes, of course people would say that. They'd say they were a good team that became great when they got Trout. Good team...great post season run. Not so sure what is hard about that.
What a terrible comparison. Every Super Bowl champ in history is undefeated in the playoffs. :lol:
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Rick, do you think the 05 Sox are the greatest team in history?
Author:  FavreFan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:
It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

Wrong of you? No. This isn't about you guys, despite your attempts to make it that. It's simply an acknowledgment by a few Sox fans that the 2005 team could have competed with any all time great team. Pitching matters.
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
FavreFan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

Wrong of you? No. This isn't about you guys, despite your attempts to make it that. It's simply an acknowledgment by a few Sox fans that the 2005 team could have competed with any all time great. Pitching matters.


Again, meaningless. Any WS champ could compete with anyone. You're just being purposely vague now. Do you think the 05 Sox were better than the 98 Yankees?
Author:  FavreFan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

Wrong of you? No. This isn't about you guys, despite your attempts to make it that. It's simply an acknowledgment by a few Sox fans that the 2005 team could have competed with any all time great. Pitching matters.


Again, meaningless. Any WS champ could compete with anyone. You're just being purposely vague now. Do you think the 05 Sox were better than the 98 Yankees?

I don't think it matters. I'd have them on the same level. If you want me to say yes I will. I don't think it's a dumb opinion to have.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:
Rick, do you think the 05 Sox are the greatest team in history?
There are a few others I'm sure that are equal to them.
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
:lol: :lol:
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
FavreFan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
It is wrong of us to suggest that the 05 Sox weren't as good as a team that some consider to be the best of all-time.

Wrong of you? No. This isn't about you guys, despite your attempts to make it that. It's simply an acknowledgment by a few Sox fans that the 2005 team could have competed with any all time great. Pitching matters.


Again, meaningless. Any WS champ could compete with anyone. You're just being purposely vague now. Do you think the 05 Sox were better than the 98 Yankees?

I don't think it matters. I'd have them on the same level. If you want me to say yes I will. I don't think it's a dumb opinion to have.

Exactly. There is a strong case as to why the 2005 White Sox would be right there in that conversation. The only counterargument seems to be "REGULAR SEASON WINS!".
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Image

Go Indians! Ive HAD IT with the 35 Cubs
Author:  Terry's Peeps [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
AJ > Posada
Konerko > Tino Martinez
Tadahito > Knoblauch
Uribe < Jeter
Crede > Brosius
Pods > Chad Curtis
Rowand < Bernie Williams
Dye = Paul O'Neill
Carl Everett > Darryl Strawberry

Buehrle > Pettite
Garcia < Wells
Garland = Cone
Contreras > Irabu
El Duque < El Duque

Pretty even matchup.
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Certainly not more important, but if you're trying to decide who the better team was you look at the whole season (obviously)
Why should we? This indicates that an opening day loss is important even as rosters change drastically all throughout the season with trades, call ups, and in some cases the resting of players towards the end of the year to get ready for the playoffs. If the Cubs somehow traded for Mike Trout and went undefeated in the playoffs we wouldn't say "Yeah, but they weren't as good in May!".

:lol: :lol: Look at where you are and what you're arguing.

You are arguing that a 7-9 team could be the best NFL team of all time.


And yes, of course people would say that. They'd say they were a good team that became great when they got Trout. Good team...great post season run. Not so sure what is hard about that.
What a terrible comparison. Every Super Bowl champ in history is undefeated in the playoffs. :lol:

No, its apt because a 7-9 team could trade for Aaron Rodgers and win every playoff game 55-0 and you'd say they were the greatest NFL team of all time.
Author:  FavreFan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
This thread is pretty funny. RPB and leash love to say how little they care about the Sox, yet it's killing them that Sox fans think the 2005 team was great.
Author:  Brick [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
rogers park bryan wrote:
No, its apt because a 7-9 team could trade for Aaron Rodgers and win every playoff game 55-0 and you'd say they were the greatest NFL team of all time.
If they went 55-0 in 4 straight games they probably would be the greatest team of all time.
Author:  leashyourkids [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
FavreFan wrote:
This thread is pretty funny. RPB and leash love to say how little they care about the Sox, yet it's killing them that Sox fans think the 2005 team was great.


It's funny that Sox fans are so insecure that you can't just be happy that the Sox were a great team. You have to try to argue that they're the best team of all-time.
Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
Quote:
You have to try to argue that they're the best team of all-time.
We don't have to try and argue. They were absolutely one of the best in the Divisional Era, and no worse than top two in the Wild Card era.
Author:  FavreFan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
leashyourkids wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
This thread is pretty funny. RPB and leash love to say how little they care about the Sox, yet it's killing them that Sox fans think the 2005 team was great.


It's funny that Sox fans are so insecure that you can't just be happy that the Sox were a great team. You have to try to argue that they're the best team of all-time.

Why does it bother you that someone would think they were?
Author:  rogers park bryan [ Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cleveland Indians
FavreFan wrote:
This thread is pretty funny. RPB and leash love to say how little they care about the Sox, yet it's killing them that Sox fans think the 2005 team was great.

The 2005 White Sox were absolutely a great team.
Page 3 of 7 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/