The 2003 tigers had a .265 win percentage. That equated to 43-119 over 162
The white Sox currently stand at a .125 win percentage coming into today which equates to a 20-142 record over 162 Right now they are considerably worse.
OP was just asking about pace though. And currently, yea the white sox are on pace to have the worst record of all time.
In ‘88, through 21 games the orioles were technically “on pace” to go winless
Im a life long white sox fan and watching this team as constructed, I just cant see them winning 53 games. its not like they're going to trade prospects for guys that can help the mlb team now. Plus those prospects are either mediocre, or not yet ready for the bigs so call ups wont help. Maybe if they get moncada , robert jr back healthy with tommy pham and eloy and they tear it up the rest of the way they can pass 53 W's. However it'll take more than moncada, robert, Pham, and eloy to put together a streak, they need bullpen help BAD. Its possible they avoid being the worst team ever but its not looking good for my squad.
God damn. I’ve always heard that you will win 50 games and lose 50 games no matter what, and the other 62 make the difference. I forgot how far that tigers team even missed that mark by a mile.
And they got hot at the end of the season to avoid breaking the 1962 Mets' record! After 156 games, they were 38-118. Go 2-4 or worse in their final six and they'd set a new record for worst winning percentage in the modern era (ain't no one breaking the 1899 Cleveland Spiders' all-time record); 3-3 and they'd still set a new record for losses (the 1962 Mets only played 160 of their scheduled 162 games and 41-121 is a better percentage than 40-120); 4-2 and they'd tie it. They went 5-1. While they'd previously had three occasions where they'd gone 4-1 in a five-game span, including a four-game winning streak in early May, that was the only time all year that they went 5-1 in a six-game span.
Gardenhire for the Twins was kind to the Tigers in the final series when, as I recall, they won 3-4. One game they came back late to win a game they were far behind. They really never should have finished with 43 wins. Gardenhire may have shown them mercy.
Ironically, the Tigers had a good offensive team in 2003. Their pitching, however, was barely MLB level and they couldn’t stop anyone. Bonderman, the number 2 starter, wasn’t MLB ready yet. Nate Cornejo, the number 3 was pretty much ineffective. Maroth, the “Ace” lost 21 games. I had partial season tickets.
An interesting year for sure. But out of the wreckage they drafted Justin Verlander with the 2nd overall pick. That’s right, the 2nd pick. San Diego took hometown shortstop Matt Bush ahead of them with the first pick. They didn’t want to pay Verlander, thankfully for Detroit. Three years after 2003, the Tigers were in the World Series… and completely fucked it up against the Cardinals.
Yoooo holy shit I was thinking "I don't think they're THAT bad..." and then I looked up their record...wow!
They're truly terrible. Definitely on track for the worst record in modern times. It'll be hard to beat the 2003 Tigers though. That team was terrible.
Loved watching Meat Hook Dmitri Young tho.
It's weird because a lot of those players aren't historically terrible. Not great, but serviceable. They are absolutely shitting the bed this year. There's gotta be total apathy in the clubhouse.
Are we at the point where the 2003 Tigers are now the worst team in "modern" times? ...I guess we are. I remember growing up studying baseball history, "modern era" just meant everything since the turn of the 20th century, though I would say that in a lot of ways, the "live-ball era" starting in 1920 might have been a better place to start, lumping in the years 1900-1919 with the 19th century (then again, maybe not).
Where do we start the "modern era" now? 1969 with the lowering of the pitcher's mound? For offensive stats specifically there's a definite need to separate "DH era" and "non-DH era" (I frequently bring this up when talking about the greatness of certain pitchers: Pedro Martinez, whose insane 2-year stretch in 1999-2000 not only in the American League when only they had the DH, but also in the heart of the Steroid Era, is arguably just as impressive as anything that happened in more pitcher-friendly eras; and Félix Hernandez, who started the sea change of W-L records not being the be all and end all of Cy Young consideration when in 2010 he won the AL Cy Young with a 13-12 record as voters conceded that it's a *pitching* award and they shouldn't hold the 2010 Mariners' historically bad offense--worst *ever* by a team that played the majority of its games with a DH, and honestly it would've only been middle-of-the-pack *in 1968, the Year of the Pitcher that necessitated the aforementioned rule change*), but seeing as how the NL only recently adopted the DH while the AL has had it for over half a century, calling this the basis of the Modern Era would suggest that the Leagues didn't enter the Modern Era at the same time.
And of course, the 1962 Mets had the excuse of being a new expansion team, which *usually* results in a bad record (hello, Vegas Golden Knights). The 2003 Tigers had no such excuse.
Yep. To your last point, the ‘62 Mets at least had the excuse of being a brand new team in their first season who had only had a farm system for like, a year and a half. The Tigers had no such excuse.
In some ways the 2019 Tigers are worse... those 2003 Tigers won 43 games but were "only" 47 games back. The 2019 Tigers won 47 games sure but they were 54 games back. 19 Tigers also scored less.
Either way Tigers and Orioles really had some terrible seasons in recent years
Not only are they bad, but they're the kind of "no lead is ever secure" bad. Take today for example. They had the Twins out hit 7-1 at mid game and ended up losing by three runs. They've had multiple games like that this season. It's horrendous.
As a Royals fan, I would like to personally thank the White Sox for importing several former members of the Royals' front office and coaching staff.
Because if they were awful in one place and oversaw a decade of losing, surely that's a great hire to turn around your fortunes. Great job, CWS ownership. 👏
They're right there. The Tigers were also 3-21, they got to 3-25. They then won 4 in a row and 5 of 7, 6 of 9.
If they can avoid that 6 of 9 they'll have a legit shot.
.125 is hard to keep up.
The Tigers at 3-21 scored 55 runs and gave up 127. That's run differential of 72, an average of losing by 3 each game. 5.2 to 2.2 is the average game.
The current White Sox are minus 82, 53 runs scored and 135 allowed. That's an average of losing by 3.4 every game. Average White Sox game is 5.6 to 2.2.
I'm pulling for them.
It's been funny to me, but now that I'm seeing those it truly affects I feel bad for losing. There's resources out there, please don't neglect the help if you need it
The worst part is that due to anti tanking rules I don’t believe we can even get a lottery spot next year so we’ll be the worst team in history and then draft 7th at best
1899 cleveland spiders went 20-134 for a .130 winning percentage. In a 162 game season the Sox would have to go 21-141. In the modern era the athletics went 36-117 in 1916 for .235 winning %. To top that the would need to go 38-124.
Currently they are on pace to win.......... 20 games (rounding UP)
This team was set up to fail. No changes will be made. Clevinger? Pham? Give me a break. Getz and Grifol are here for the duration. I'm wondering if this team is even capable of winning two games in a row.
No, Cleveland Spiders of 1899 are impossible to catch. 20-134 with a .130 winning percentage. The Spiders were so bad the National League got rid of them and changed the ownership rules cause the Spiders owners took any good players from the team and put them on the other team they owned. White Sox could break the ‘62 Mets record for worse 162 game season though.
Oakland is 8-9 in their last 17, with a chance to split a 4 game set in the Bronx(Yankees fan so I hope not.) Chicago started 0-4 but since then they got hot and are now 3-17 in their last 20 games.
Oakland has scored 71 and allowed 111, -40
Chicago has scored 56 and allowed 141, -85
As we stand right now Oakland looks like a World Series contender compared to Chicago
No way, I mean the Rockies are bad, but the white Sox are historically bad this season.
They are on pace for a record of 20-142, which would be the most losing season by both # of loses and win % in the history of the game.
I did some quick math:
The most losing season ever in MLB history was the Cleveland Spiders in 1899 at 20-134.
In a 162 game season the white Sox would need a record of 21-141 to be the most losing team ever.
Currently they are on pace for a record of 20-142
So to answer your question: yes, they are currently on track to be the most losing team in the history of the MLB, or at least since we started tracking that data, well over 130 years ago.
*As a Houston fan:*
*We are trying to help them*
*Not get that record*
\- Simp4Shadowheart
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Sad thing is, because they are a major market team and don't take money from revenue sharing, the highest draft pick they'll get in the 2025 draft is #10. Reinsdorf is a joke of an owner asking the tax payers of Illinois to foot the bill for a new ballpark when he can't field a competitive team. I feel bad for Sox fans
The big question here is what does on track mean. The more common and less useful method is to simply multiply the exiting percentages by the amount needed to make a full season. This method greatly exaggerates natural variance in small sample sizes.
A better method would involve some type of regression to the mean and use predictive stats. For example, you could take their run differential over 26 games and look at other teams that have had that over 26 games and see how they fared that season.
They remind me of the 2022 Reds. Terrible start but they’ll most likely level off at some point.
Don’t get me wrong, the White Sox are bad but if I was a betting man I don’t think they will be historically bad.
As of right now the White Sox are 3-22 and have a .120 win PCT. The worst team of all time, the Cleveland Spiders, had a win PCT of .130. The White Sox are currently on pace to be the worst team of all time
Its WAY too early.... lots of bad teams go on long streaks through season...
So far Chicago has barely scraped out wins but seems to be blown out on a regular basis
Worst NL team is Cleveland Spiders 20-134 and worst AL team is Philadelphia Athletics at 36-117
The 2003 tigers had a .265 win percentage. That equated to 43-119 over 162 The white Sox currently stand at a .125 win percentage coming into today which equates to a 20-142 record over 162 Right now they are considerably worse.
The Orioles started out 0-21 in 1988 (and still won 53 games). Its too early to tell.
OP was just asking about pace though. And currently, yea the white sox are on pace to have the worst record of all time. In ‘88, through 21 games the orioles were technically “on pace” to go winless
Yea. A's were ass at the beginning of last year and they cranked out some wins as the season went along.
Im a life long white sox fan and watching this team as constructed, I just cant see them winning 53 games. its not like they're going to trade prospects for guys that can help the mlb team now. Plus those prospects are either mediocre, or not yet ready for the bigs so call ups wont help. Maybe if they get moncada , robert jr back healthy with tommy pham and eloy and they tear it up the rest of the way they can pass 53 W's. However it'll take more than moncada, robert, Pham, and eloy to put together a streak, they need bullpen help BAD. Its possible they avoid being the worst team ever but its not looking good for my squad.
OP asked on track. Single answer is yes. That’s their pace.
2018 Orioles: challenge accepted.
God damn. I’ve always heard that you will win 50 games and lose 50 games no matter what, and the other 62 make the difference. I forgot how far that tigers team even missed that mark by a mile.
And they got hot at the end of the season to avoid breaking the 1962 Mets' record! After 156 games, they were 38-118. Go 2-4 or worse in their final six and they'd set a new record for worst winning percentage in the modern era (ain't no one breaking the 1899 Cleveland Spiders' all-time record); 3-3 and they'd still set a new record for losses (the 1962 Mets only played 160 of their scheduled 162 games and 41-121 is a better percentage than 40-120); 4-2 and they'd tie it. They went 5-1. While they'd previously had three occasions where they'd gone 4-1 in a five-game span, including a four-game winning streak in early May, that was the only time all year that they went 5-1 in a six-game span.
Gardenhire for the Twins was kind to the Tigers in the final series when, as I recall, they won 3-4. One game they came back late to win a game they were far behind. They really never should have finished with 43 wins. Gardenhire may have shown them mercy. Ironically, the Tigers had a good offensive team in 2003. Their pitching, however, was barely MLB level and they couldn’t stop anyone. Bonderman, the number 2 starter, wasn’t MLB ready yet. Nate Cornejo, the number 3 was pretty much ineffective. Maroth, the “Ace” lost 21 games. I had partial season tickets. An interesting year for sure. But out of the wreckage they drafted Justin Verlander with the 2nd overall pick. That’s right, the 2nd pick. San Diego took hometown shortstop Matt Bush ahead of them with the first pick. They didn’t want to pay Verlander, thankfully for Detroit. Three years after 2003, the Tigers were in the World Series… and completely fucked it up against the Cardinals.
Wow that’s so long ago and I’d entirely forgotten that! Thanks for being back that memory!
Don't blaspheme
That's certainly not blaspheming. "Taking the "lord's" name in vain" isn't this!
Yoooo holy shit I was thinking "I don't think they're THAT bad..." and then I looked up their record...wow! They're truly terrible. Definitely on track for the worst record in modern times. It'll be hard to beat the 2003 Tigers though. That team was terrible. Loved watching Meat Hook Dmitri Young tho.
Bobby Higginson and Jeremy Bonderman kept that team from going 10-152
Moneyball legend Jeremy Bonderman
Forget their record. Look at the BA of everyone on the team. They’re so much worse than bad haha.
It's weird because a lot of those players aren't historically terrible. Not great, but serviceable. They are absolutely shitting the bed this year. There's gotta be total apathy in the clubhouse.
Are we at the point where the 2003 Tigers are now the worst team in "modern" times? ...I guess we are. I remember growing up studying baseball history, "modern era" just meant everything since the turn of the 20th century, though I would say that in a lot of ways, the "live-ball era" starting in 1920 might have been a better place to start, lumping in the years 1900-1919 with the 19th century (then again, maybe not). Where do we start the "modern era" now? 1969 with the lowering of the pitcher's mound? For offensive stats specifically there's a definite need to separate "DH era" and "non-DH era" (I frequently bring this up when talking about the greatness of certain pitchers: Pedro Martinez, whose insane 2-year stretch in 1999-2000 not only in the American League when only they had the DH, but also in the heart of the Steroid Era, is arguably just as impressive as anything that happened in more pitcher-friendly eras; and Félix Hernandez, who started the sea change of W-L records not being the be all and end all of Cy Young consideration when in 2010 he won the AL Cy Young with a 13-12 record as voters conceded that it's a *pitching* award and they shouldn't hold the 2010 Mariners' historically bad offense--worst *ever* by a team that played the majority of its games with a DH, and honestly it would've only been middle-of-the-pack *in 1968, the Year of the Pitcher that necessitated the aforementioned rule change*), but seeing as how the NL only recently adopted the DH while the AL has had it for over half a century, calling this the basis of the Modern Era would suggest that the Leagues didn't enter the Modern Era at the same time. And of course, the 1962 Mets had the excuse of being a new expansion team, which *usually* results in a bad record (hello, Vegas Golden Knights). The 2003 Tigers had no such excuse.
Yep. To your last point, the ‘62 Mets at least had the excuse of being a brand new team in their first season who had only had a farm system for like, a year and a half. The Tigers had no such excuse.
In some ways the 2019 Tigers are worse... those 2003 Tigers won 43 games but were "only" 47 games back. The 2019 Tigers won 47 games sure but they were 54 games back. 19 Tigers also scored less. Either way Tigers and Orioles really had some terrible seasons in recent years
Not only are they bad, but they're the kind of "no lead is ever secure" bad. Take today for example. They had the Twins out hit 7-1 at mid game and ended up losing by three runs. They've had multiple games like that this season. It's horrendous.
As a Royals fan, I would like to personally thank the White Sox for importing several former members of the Royals' front office and coaching staff. Because if they were awful in one place and oversaw a decade of losing, surely that's a great hire to turn around your fortunes. Great job, CWS ownership. 👏
Correct. I hate this team so much.
Just wait till the draft, you'll hate them even more. Ability to play the game is secondary to "character intangibles."
While Steve cohen aspired to be the dodgers, Jerry looked at the royals and said yup I want that
They're right there. The Tigers were also 3-21, they got to 3-25. They then won 4 in a row and 5 of 7, 6 of 9. If they can avoid that 6 of 9 they'll have a legit shot. .125 is hard to keep up. The Tigers at 3-21 scored 55 runs and gave up 127. That's run differential of 72, an average of losing by 3 each game. 5.2 to 2.2 is the average game. The current White Sox are minus 82, 53 runs scored and 135 allowed. That's an average of losing by 3.4 every game. Average White Sox game is 5.6 to 2.2. I'm pulling for them.
I hate it here
It's been funny to me, but now that I'm seeing those it truly affects I feel bad for losing. There's resources out there, please don't neglect the help if you need it
I find it comical at this point tbh lol fuck this whole team
The worst part is that due to anti tanking rules I don’t believe we can even get a lottery spot next year so we’ll be the worst team in history and then draft 7th at best
It’s wild to think the A’s and White Sox played in a playoff series only a few years ago and both rosters were full of young talent
1899 cleveland spiders went 20-134 for a .130 winning percentage. In a 162 game season the Sox would have to go 21-141. In the modern era the athletics went 36-117 in 1916 for .235 winning %. To top that the would need to go 38-124. Currently they are on pace to win.......... 20 games (rounding UP)
This team was set up to fail. No changes will be made. Clevinger? Pham? Give me a break. Getz and Grifol are here for the duration. I'm wondering if this team is even capable of winning two games in a row.
It’s too early, but if they keep going at this pace they will be. Injuries really haven’t helped. Not saying they’d be good, but they’d be “better”
Hopefully. Don't want Detroit to be tagged with that anymore.
🤷 I’m ngl i’m just depressed at this point. Like baseball isn’t fun to me anymore
…but Caleb Williams!
Thanks Carolina!
there have been some ludicrously bad teams. but possibly yes.
Pathetic
What is the all time worst scoring differential? They are in pace for like -500 😂
No, Cleveland Spiders of 1899 are impossible to catch. 20-134 with a .130 winning percentage. The Spiders were so bad the National League got rid of them and changed the ownership rules cause the Spiders owners took any good players from the team and put them on the other team they owned. White Sox could break the ‘62 Mets record for worse 162 game season though.
No, the fucking Astros are.
The Astros might have something to say about that
Hopefully
Fuck you Jerry Reinsdorf.
Just remember that the "A's" exist.
The OakSacVegas A's are 6 games ahead of the White Sox
OSVA for short
You mean the PhiKCOakSacVegas A's?
It's kind of a mouthful lol
Hey, I calls 'em like I sees 'em.
Oakland is 8-9 in their last 17, with a chance to split a 4 game set in the Bronx(Yankees fan so I hope not.) Chicago started 0-4 but since then they got hot and are now 3-17 in their last 20 games. Oakland has scored 71 and allowed 111, -40 Chicago has scored 56 and allowed 141, -85 As we stand right now Oakland looks like a World Series contender compared to Chicago
There's so many injuries now, so many teams getting worse as the season goes on, it will be hard for them to keep up that pace.
Nah, Rockies keep y’all safe
No way, I mean the Rockies are bad, but the white Sox are historically bad this season. They are on pace for a record of 20-142, which would be the most losing season by both # of loses and win % in the history of the game.
Ya, but he didn’t say “this season.” He said worse team ever.
In the conversation to reach the worst record in history.
Totally
I know this isn't an answer to the question, but weren't the White Sox supposed to be getting better at this point?
Wheels fell off in 2022
I did some quick math: The most losing season ever in MLB history was the Cleveland Spiders in 1899 at 20-134. In a 162 game season the white Sox would need a record of 21-141 to be the most losing team ever. Currently they are on pace for a record of 20-142 So to answer your question: yes, they are currently on track to be the most losing team in the history of the MLB, or at least since we started tracking that data, well over 130 years ago.
As a Houston fan: we are trying to help them not get that record
*As a Houston fan:* *We are trying to help them* *Not get that record* \- Simp4Shadowheart --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
You're doing a bad job at it. You already have 4 more wins than them
Yes they are
As a Met fan, I hope so. We've held the title long enough
They certainly are on track to be if this level of play continues. They should consider forfeiting the season. lol
I hope so.
Sad thing is, because they are a major market team and don't take money from revenue sharing, the highest draft pick they'll get in the 2025 draft is #10. Reinsdorf is a joke of an owner asking the tax payers of Illinois to foot the bill for a new ballpark when he can't field a competitive team. I feel bad for Sox fans
hopefully
Hopefully
At any rate, I’m entirely embarrassed to be a south side fan.
Big yes, on pace for 20-142
The night is darkest before the dawn. But yes
I doubt it . I bet they take a series from Yankees just like the Sacramento A’s
The big question here is what does on track mean. The more common and less useful method is to simply multiply the exiting percentages by the amount needed to make a full season. This method greatly exaggerates natural variance in small sample sizes. A better method would involve some type of regression to the mean and use predictive stats. For example, you could take their run differential over 26 games and look at other teams that have had that over 26 games and see how they fared that season.
They remind me of the 2022 Reds. Terrible start but they’ll most likely level off at some point. Don’t get me wrong, the White Sox are bad but if I was a betting man I don’t think they will be historically bad.
Yes. Next question
As of right now the White Sox are 3-22 and have a .120 win PCT. The worst team of all time, the Cleveland Spiders, had a win PCT of .130. The White Sox are currently on pace to be the worst team of all time
Wasn't this White Sox core supposed to be pretty darn good just two years ago?
As a Cubs fan I love that they still won’t get a top 10 pick even with the worst record ever.
My buddy is a white Sox fan and I was giving him shit at first but it’s not even fun anymore.
Its WAY too early.... lots of bad teams go on long streaks through season... So far Chicago has barely scraped out wins but seems to be blown out on a regular basis Worst NL team is Cleveland Spiders 20-134 and worst AL team is Philadelphia Athletics at 36-117
Yes. Also, if you’re not betting against them every games you’re missing your chance at free money.
don’t count out the A’s