2005 Chicago White Sox = Team of the decade?

Quote:

---

You're going to hear a lot of talk in the next couple of weeks about the 2004 Red Sox or the 2009 Yankees being the "Team of the Decade." But in looking back through the notes our department compiled, and comparing some of the numbers from the championship teams of the 2000s, the 2005 White Sox are a very legitimate candidate.

Consider the following pieces of information, gleaned from our resources, with some help from the Elias Sports Bureau:

The White Sox tied with the 2002 Angels for second-best record by a World Series champ this decade (99-63).
The White Sox ended a longer drought without a World Series title than the Red Sox did (having last won the World Series in 1917, a year prior to Boston).
The White Sox went wire-to-wire in first place and won the World Series. They're one of only five teams to do that in major league history (1990 Reds, 1984 Tigers, 1955 Dodgers, 1927 Yankees), not to mention the only one to do so during the decade.

They went 11-1 in the postseason, good to be tied for the second-best win percentage in a single postseason since 1969.
They went unbeaten on the road in the postseason, and were the first team to clinch all three of their postseason series on their opponents' home field.
Their 52 road wins in the regular season were the most of any World Series champion in the decade.

Their 3.61 ERA was the best of any World Series champion in the decade.

They won 99 games. Bill James designed a method (Pythagorean projection) to assess how many wins a team should get in a season, based on their runs scored and runs allowed. The White Sox exceeded their Pythagorean projection of 91 wins by eight wins & the most any World Series winner exceeded their Pythagorean projection in the decade.

They hit 200 home runs, not ucommon for a champion during this decade, but they also stole 137 bases, the second-most of any World Series champion in the 2000s.

So you can hook onto the 2004 Red Sox for sentimentality, or the 2009 Yankees for statistical dominance, but if you're looking for a team with an appropriate combination of both, the 2005 White Sox are a good way to go.

---

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/news/story?id=4765669

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carbon.

The White Sox exceeded their Pythagorean projection of 91 wins by eight wins & the most any World Series winner exceeded their Pythagorean projection in the decade.

---

So the White Sox got lucky and won more games than they probably should have - and that makes them the team of the decade? I'm not saying that they aren't - I really don't put much stock in this kind of story - but this is not very supportive evidence.

The World Series drought is, also, entirely irrelevant. As is the whole "wire to wire" thing. Who cares if the Yankees weren't in first place on April 16th or whatever? I'm not quite sure what this means:

Quote:

---

So you can hook onto the 2004 Red Sox for sentimentality, or the 2009 Yankees for statistical dominance, but if you're looking for a team with an appropriate combination of both, the 2005 White Sox are a good way to go.

---

If you're looking for the "best" team of the decade, sentimentality shouldn't be a factor whatsoever.

2006 Cardinals, by far.

Ugh, mindless MSM drivel. I work for ESPN Chicago, therefore the 2005 White Sox were the team of the decade. Huh? :confused:

2007 Mets beechez

2004 Yankees were the team of the decade. Thanks Yanks ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metsguy234

2007 Mets beechez

---

Just the thought of them being the best team chokes me.


BOOM!

Not to mention that they were 17th in the majors in wOBA and wRC and 10th in FIP and xFIP. They weren't even very close to being the best team in the league. It'd actually be laughable to call them the best team of the decade. The 2004 Red Sox was first in wOBA and third in pitching. The 2007 Red Sox were third in hitting, fifth in pitching and seventh in fielding. Both were better teams than the 2005 White Sox.

yanks 2000-2009

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Francoeurstein

Just the thought of them being the best team chokes me.


BOOM!

---

'Mets' and 'choke' used in the same sentance, how many times have we heard that this decade?

Who is the best team of the decade, then? What would you guys use to judge? Wasn't their a Seattle team this decade that set a record for wins, then lost in the 1st round??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

Who is the best team of the decade, then? What would you guys use to judge? Wasn't their a Seattle team this decade that set a record for wins, then lost in the 1st round??

---

I think that when you get to comparing the very best teams of the decade, it's too close to really say which team was better than which.

Uh, 2007 Rockies.

kthxbye

1983 Baltimore Orioles, FTW!