innersanctum

QUOTE(bigruss22 @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 02:17 PM) I dont care if the Sox draft, trade, sign as a prospect, sign as a free agent or whatever, as long as they have the talent. Right now they dont, and the best method to get more talent for them is to go to the draft and get the best available player. The Sox SHOULD NOT make a move to "establish" ourselves now because frankly, we DO NOT have the talent needed to win this division, we dont even have enough for the wild card. That is why we should trade for prospects and get rid of these aging veterans, because this core had a shot to go back to the playoffs and blew it, and now it looks to be to little to late. That makes sense to me....a little more clear.

QUOTE(BlackBetsy @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 08:19 AM) Mark Buehrle, Aaron Rowand, Joe Crede, Chris Young...whoops. So out of those, Rowand is the latest with Crede behind him and Buehrle....so we are going 7 years without a farm player paying off, is that right? Rowand is gone though and I was thinking more specifically about players on our current roster that have established themselves enough to prevent them from being traded. Shouldn't we make moves that establishes us right now? I just don't get why we should hold onto players when the last time a farm player paid off was almost 7 years ago (6 if you count Rowand but he no longer resides at the Cell). So Buehrle is the only All-Star who was born and raised on the in a White Sox uniform that is currently on the active roster, is that right??

So when was the last time that young talent paid off for the White Sox? Before we start holding back our young talent, when was the last time that talent paid off for the Sox? I am a White Sox fan but by no means at the level most of you are. I am asking because I just honestly don't know who on the roster right now was brought up through the farm. Crede is the only one that I can think of right now who has established himself. I know there are others that are homegrown but they haven't really established themselves yet. Is there any young player that could play up to the already achieved potential of someone like Bay? Or would they just turn into another Borchard?

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 17, 2007 -> 10:04 AM) Seems to me that most of the national pundits are calling for a Detroit and Cleveland battle for first, with the Sox coming in at 4th or possibly 3rd. Am I missing something? We have essentially the same team as last year. Detroit and Minny will regress (no way their pitching/hitting can duplicate last year) and yet the Sox were still in it the last week of the season, even though we had some of the worst career performances by some players, Buerhle in particular. Cleveland does scare me because they have an offense that can match us, but they did little to upgrade their pitching, specifically their bullpen. Am I crazy to think the Sox should be the favorites or cofavorites at worst in the most difficult division in baseball (now three years running...)?? Yeah, remember, Cleveland was picked to win the Central Division last year.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 12, 2006 -> 10:58 AM) And yet, all 3 of you are wrong, as both California and Maryland have higher upper class tax rates than Illinois, to the point that Paulie's take home pay after Taxes will wind up being higher from him having taken the $60 million from the Sox than it would have been had he taken either the $65 from the O's or the $60 from the Halos. And the misinformation grows and grows. The players have to pay taxes in each state that they play games in based on a per game rate. So if Paulie played 84 games in Illinois, 12 games in CA, 22 games in Ohio, and so on, he would have to pay taxes on $74,074 per game under each state's taxable income laws. Just because a player resides in a certain state doesn't mean that state gets to collect all his taxes. they can only collect taxes on the games he has played in that state. And there are reasons why they do that. If you were the Royals, would you want to collect taxes on just the Royals (forget the Cardinals for a minute)? How much better would you feel if you got to collect taxes from the Yankees salary 3-4 times a year and the White Sox another 9-10 times a year. Each state gets their cut on the bigger pies too that way.

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 03:02 PM) Literally the ONLY thing that Scott Podsednik arguably provides us with over any other major league replacement is steals and runs, and as it turns out, the value of those two numbers seems to be inflated. His defense is atrocious. He is 18th out of 21 in Qualified Fielding Percentage for Left Fielders. He is a mediocre 10th out of 21 in Range Factor despite his tremendous footspeed, and 11th out of 21 in Zone Rating. He is 8/9 in qualified AL leadoff hitters in OBP and OPS. He is 7/9 in RBIs. 8/9 in home runs. This means he doesn't walk enough and he doesn't have nearly enough pop. Pretty much all of his OPS is generated by his ability to stretch a double into a triple. Now he IS third in runs, and he IS second in steals. However, the runs are more of a product of the success behind him than the runs he is generating with his legs this season. I'm going to argue in this thread that probably less than half of his steals have been truly meaningful in terms of determining the outcome of the game. Additionally, a lot of his offensive numbers in terms of hits and RBIs are occuring in blowout games. In fact, six of the first seven games in which he had an RBI were lopsided victories for the White Sox: 10-4 Sox over Cle April 1st (1 RBI), 9-0 over KC April 17th (1 RBI), 7-1 over MIN April 21st (1 RBI), and 9-1 and 12-5 over LAA two consecutive days May 9th and 10th (1 RBI each). The lone game he contributed to that was close in that stretch was @ LAA, where he had two RBIS in a game where we still won by a larger margin than that (3). Additionally, 7 other RBIs out of his 32 total occurred in lopsided games in which the White Sox won, and a handful of other RBIs occurred in losses for the White Sox. Aside from the Grand Slam against Houston, less than 10 of Podsednik's RBIs this season have been at all meaningful in terms of determining the outcome in a White Sox victory over 6 total games. And all of those games he had 1 RBI. Now, Podsednik's stolen base log for 2006: 1) April 16th vs. Toronto. 1 Steal. Podsednik steals second with 1 out in the bottom of the 2nd in after the Sox score 3 in the first against Toronto and have a 3-0 lead. He takes thrid on an Iguchi groundout, allowing Thome to swing away for a sac fly, which he ends up hitting out for a 2-run job. The Sox go up 5-0 and hang on 6-4 in a game that was closer than expected. Net Result: stolen base generated arguably 2 runs, the difference in this game. 2) April 18th vs. Kansas City. 2 Steals. Pods steals second in the 5th inning with the sox up 3-1, takes third on an errant throw and is stranded on third after an Iguchi K, a Thome walk and a PK strikeout. Pods steals second in the 7th inning with the Sox up 3-1, and scores an insurance run on a 2-out single by Thome. Net Result: stolen base generates 1 insurance run, but Kansas City had virtually nothing going against Jon Garland all game and was never really a threat. 3) April 25th at Seattle. 1 Steal. Pods is part of a double steal with Anderson as the lead runner in the third inning, and both end up scoring the first runs of an eventual 13-3 blowout which featured dominant pitching from Javier Vazquez. Net Result: Hard to argue that his steal as a trail runner in a blowout really contributed much to the success of the evening. 4) May 1st at Cleveland. 4 Steals Scott is the centerpiece of an 8-6 win by stealing 4 bases in 5 chances on Victor Martinez and scoring three runs. Net Result: Podsednik probably won us this game with his legs, but Vic Martinez is pretty easily to steal off of 5) May 9th at LAA. 1 Steal. Steals a base in a 9-1 whitewashing of a struggling Kevin Gregg. Yawn. Net Result: Nada. 6) May 14th at Min. 1 Steal. Steals a base and scores a couple of runs, also has a couple of RBIs and hits against Minnesota in a close game. Net Result: Podsednik was crucial to the Sox winning this game 7) May 15th at Min. 1 Steal. Pods' home run probably had more to do with the victory here than his stolen base. He stole second in the 4th but was stranded. Net Result: Nada. 8) May 16th at Tampa. 3 Steals. Steals 3 bases in a 10-7 loss. Net Result: Hard to argue that three stolen bases in a losing effort really provided much for the team. 9) May 19th vs Cubs. 1 Steal. Steals second base with the Sox up 6-1 in the 6th inning of the first game at the Cell. Net Result: Totally meaningless steal. 10) May 23rd vs Oakland. 2 Steals. Steals third and scores the first run of the game on a wild throw by Kendall. The Sox go on to touch up Saarloos in a game that is never close and ultimately resulted in a 9-3 win for the palehose. On the other steal Pods was stranded. Net Result: Podsednik was a catalyst in the game, but the game wasn't close. Still, his steal contributes to the victory. 11) June 1st at Cleveland. 2 Steals. The first steal did score a run, but only after Iguchi walked (which would've sent Pods to second anyway) and Thome doubled (which would've scored him from first anyway. The second steal was a meaningless down-4 steal in the top of the ninth inning that could've probably been ruled Defensive Indifference. Net Result: None, he did not contribute to a win nor did his speed put us in a position to win the game 12) June 3rd vs Texas. 1 Steal. Podsednik steals third after doubling in a couple of runs and later scores. His steal partially provides the difference in this 8-6 win. Net Result: Scott was a big part of this game, and it's hard to argue that his stolen base wasn't part of it. 13) June 18 at Cincinnati. 1 Steal. Podsednik steals but is stranded in an 8-1 drubbing of the Reds. Net Result: Nada. 14) June 24th vs. Houston. 1 Steal. Pods stole second, went to third on a groundout and scored on a manufactured run via a Thome sac fly to allow the Sox to go up 1-0 in the first inning. Although the Crede slam was primarily responsible for paving the way to an eventual Sox win, Pods run in the first is just as important and was the difference. Net Result: Podsednik's run generated by the stolen base was the difference in this game 15) June 27th at Pittsburgh 1 Steal. Pods stole second and scored in the first, and although the White Sox never trailed in a close game, the run was crucial. Net Result: Pods' SB was key to the Sox maintaining a slim margin over the Bucks. 16) July 1st at Cubs 1 Steal Pods stole a base and was stranded in an 8-6 win. Net Result: Nada 17) July 4th vs Baltimore 1 Steal Pods stole a base in the second inning with the Sox already up 4-0 and on their way to a 13-0 drubbing. He was later stranded. Net Result: Nada 18) July 5th vs Baltimore 1 Steal Pods stole second and scored the first run in a tight 4-2 Sox winner. Net Result: Scotty contributed to this win with his legs. 19) July 8th vs Boston 1 Steal Pods stole a base and got us within a run at 5-4, but ultimately the Sox lose 9-6 to the Red Sox. Net Result: Pods stolen base didn't contribute to a win. 20) July 9th vs Boston 1 Steal Scotty steals second in the 12th but is stranded. Net Result: Nada. What's the bottom line? Out of 20 games in which Podsednik steals a base, 11 times (55%) the stolen base(s) didn't effect the outcome whatsoever. 2 times (10%) the stolen base(s) generated a run and contributed to a win, but the game was not really close 7 times (35%) the stolen base(s) directly led to runs that help to insure a win. So out of all the games Podsednik is stealing bases for us, almost 2/3rds of the time the stolen bases don't really affect the outcome. This is a very telling statistic, and I think one in which maybe emphasizes that the Stolen Base is overvalued when there isn't a whole lot else accompanying it. Sure, it's a vital part of a good leadoff hitter's repertoire, but relying on this alone is not enough to keep a guy around in my opinion. I'm not really advocating to get RID of Podsednik this season, but I would like to see a full-time platoon with Ozuna. If we're really resigned to giving up that much defensively in left, we might as well get OBA, OBP, OPS and other things out of it rather than just steals. Ozuna has got something like 200 points of OPS on Scotty. I realize that Ozuna is not going to hit .413 for a season, but even if he just hit .290 he'd STILL have 70 points on Scotty in OPS. Ozuna strikes out far less too, only 8 times in 92 ABs. So why not platoon them? Sorry for the long-winded rant, I just felt this stuff was interesting. In his defense, we lose those 7 games his steals directly contributed to winning the game, and we would be 50-38 and no where near Detroit and probably closer to Minnesota with Minnesota winning one more because of Pods missing this "crucial" steal.

Play the scenario out for a minute, if we were to acquire Schmidt: Why wouldn't or couldn't we sign Schmidt to a contract before he becomes a free agent? Wasn't Garcia a rental when we got him and then we signed him long term? I know there is a family connection between him and Ozzie but is there an opportunity that we could keep him for the long run once the season is over?

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 02:29 PM) I twas just joking around my friend...I simply enjoyed that little jpg i found. My day was also not ruined by the Sox loss, in fact if you look at who started this thread because of leaving early, it was me!!! I'm not even a real diehard fan, just some imposter! Sorry about that. all is good here.

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 02:05 PM) Relax. Even had he not made the attempt at the catch, it appeared that it would have hit fair and if it had, the whole thing would have happened the way that it did anyway. I love the White Sox and try to find humor in events that would normally drive me nuts. My week is not ruined because we did not beat the Astros last night. We have 6 games in a row at NL parks for the next 6 days who, if you combine the total number of wins between them, have 54 to our 49. It should be a good week for all White Sox fans.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 08:30 AM) Someone did it against the Dodgers, IIRC. I faintly remember Tony LaRussa going ape s*** after the game when being interviewed. "He got 8 effing rbi's, what the eff do you think I think about his game today.." (sic) This is very similar to a comment that Tommy Lasorda made when he was the manager of the Dodgers about Dave Kingman after he 3 homeruns in one game against the dodgers. I think that it's almost word for word what you said above about Larussa so there may be a chance that you have your manager's and incidents mixed up? Of course there is a chance that LaRussa also said this while managing the Cardinals in the above named incident, I just don't know about that one personally. Here is Lasorda's tirade on Kingman. This happened in 1978. Here are LaRussa's comments after the game with Tatis: Fast Facts Following the game, Cardinals' manager Tony LaRussa said, "It's a thrill to witness big league history. I don't care if you're a fan or sitting in the dugout or whatever. What have they got one-hundred years of baseball and this is the first time it's ever been done? Wow." Did you know that Fernando Tatis was only the second National League player to hit two grand slams in one game? Tony Cloninger, a pitcher for the Atlanta Braves, was the other player to go deep twice in the same game with the bases loaded. Chan Ho Park was the second pitcher to give up two grand slams during the same inning, the first was Bill Phillips of Pittsburgh on August 16, 1890, and the first to give them both up to the same batter.

No it really wasn't me. I just thought that whole incident was funny. It was a sad attempt at humor I guess.

I left the game early, but not too early. Security made me leave in the 13th for a stupid reason I would rather not talk about (I didn't even get to keep the souvenier). The game was over before I got to my car though so I didn't see what happened. I heard about it though. Dumb luck them Everett and Tavares kids have!

These were numbers I collected from some of the leading teams in MLB for the month of June through yesterday. The White Sox have scored 130 runs and given up 98. The Yankees have scored 97 runs and given up 99. The Tigers have scored 110 runs and given up 73 runs. The A's have scored 80 runs and given up 66 runs. The Red Sox have scored 98 runs and given up 94. The Cubs have scored 88 runs and given up 97.

Is there somewhere or someone (an email address specifically) I can write to in order to express my support of Ozzie and lack of support for the current campaign by ESPN to get him fired?

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 11:01 AM) Is there really a formal rule about this? It all seem discretionary to me, on the part of the umps and on the part of the league office that doles out punishment. I totally agree that these things are not handled well. There's not an easy solution, but a one-free-plunk norm might at least reduce the unequal treatment the Sox have suffered lately. In that case, Padilla would have been summarily ejected after hitting AJ a second time. And the Sox would have had a free shot to retaliate as well. Similarly, Ponson would have been gone once he hit Ozuna, and Riske could have plunked Duncan without penalty. Now, I suppose there may be incidents where a good pitcher facing teams with guys who hang all over the plate might unintentionally ding two guys. So even under this norm, the ump should use discretion. How wild is the pitcher to other hitters? Was the batter leaning in? Did he just barely get nicked, or was he plunked in the back? And there may also be incidents where even one beaning warrants ejection, as when the Rocket quite plainly went headhunting against Mike Piazza. So umps, just do a better job. Toss the instigators, and allow teams to get their share of justice. Otherwise, the tension will just build into something worse. After Anderson was hit, I was thinking that Ozuna was standing unusually far away from the plate. He was still HBP.

I believe there is a flaw in the hit batters rule as was evident last night in the Cardinals. While Ponson didn't intentionally hit Anderson and Ozuna, he still did it and gave cause for retaliation. So the Cardinals, like so many other teams the Sox have played this year, get two licks in on our batters and we are required to sit back and take it because they get two hit batters in before we can do anything about it. The rule needs to change to where the team that hits a batter twice in a game must be issued the warning, not both benches. It's a rule that I understand is there to keep the game under control but how many times do our guys need to be hit in games? Has there ever been a time this year that our pitching staff has caused a warning to be issued to both benches on their own (in other words, has any pitcher plunked two batters from the opposing team before they could retaliate?) MLB needs to revisit this rule and instead of penalizing both teams for the actions of one team, they need to penalize the teams that cause the warnings to be issued. The big picture, Ponson hits two batters and could have stayed in the game (at least LaRussa had enough common sense to pull him after he hit Ozuna). Riske hits one batter, gets ejected along with Ozzie! How is that rule fair to both teams?

QUOTE(heirdog @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 09:33 AM) Are you sure about that? If the Sox played in the NL, Thome would not be a factor (and if he played, then Konerko wouldn't). The fact is the Mets look damn good and are on par with the Sox and Tigers right now and the rankings reflect that. But if the Sox were a National League team they wouldn't have acquired Thome. They would have gotten a stronger arm in the bullpen, me thinks.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 10:42 AM) It was also nice of the good people at the Great American Ballpark to play AC/DC's Thunderstruck at some point in each game to help get the Sox fans going. I don't think I have ever seen a vendor inside and outside the park (of course I had only been to Wrigley and the Cell before going to Cincy) selling both teams merchandise! I found that very interesting. I would be interested to see which merchandise sold more of. I was in section 134 sitting next to a lot of Sox fans on Saturday night. Had one Reds fan in 135 trying to get a Sox fan thrown out after AJ got his double. Reds ushers I think are as old as the ones at Wrigley! I think he had to change his Depends after the Sox fan's wife got in the Reds fan's face.

I am so sick of hearing about Kerry Wood. He is an average pitcher and on the White Sox he would be a 6th, maybe a 5th starter. Take that game against Houston and his 20 strikeouts off his resume, well you get a pitcher that can't win more than 14 games and is injured a lot of the time. I just don't get the hype about Wood. The media has embraced him since that game and he just hasn't produced since.

Are you keeping Invision Power Board as your message board or are you going to vBulletin? I ask because vBulletin 3.5.3 addresses some of the problems you having with the current board that will prevent them from occurring in the future. It is also a little easier to customize to your likes and dislikes. I do know that after some people get used to a specific board (Invision, vBulletin and even SMF), they tend to get tunnel vision so I am not trying to influence your decision. You have a great site and whatever decision you guys make is fine with me and probably most of the rest of the members. Option 2 looks good.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 10:01 AM) http://www.suntimes.com/output/deluca/cst-spt-deluca05.html Is the person or people that run mlbtraderumors.com from Chicago or are they a national site? I ask because most of the stuff I read on there pertains to Chicago baseball and the latest thing on there has Baltimore offering Tejada for Contreras, Uribe, Sweeny and Woodson.

SNL was funny in the early 90's for me. But I remember my parents saying that SNL hadn't been funny since Belushi. I am sure in 20 years, the kids today will say how funny SNL was when they used to watch: Rachel Dratch Jimmy Fallon Tina Fey Darrell Hammond Seth Meyers Chris Parnell Amy Poehler Jeff Richards Maya Rudolph Horatio Sanz Fred Armisen Will Forte Finesse Mitchell Kenan Thompson Dare I say someone will fondly remember "Steve, the Computer Guy", "Goatboy", anything by Will Ferrell, etc. I don't find SNL as funny as when the cast included: Dana Carvey Nora Dunn Phil Hartman Jan Hooks Victoria Jackson Jon Lovitz Dennis Miller Kevin Nealon A. Whitney Brown Al Franken Mike Myers Ben Stiller Chris Farley Adam Sandler But that is why it has lasted as long as it has. It appeals to a young audience and continues to run because they find what in pop culture is interesting to viewers and use it in their shows.

Since the playoffs have gone to a wild card format, only the 1999 Yankees have gone through the playoffs with only 1 loss. Not sure about prior to the Wild Card though.

Has a team every swept their way through the playoffs starting with the divisional series and ending in the World Series or go back even further, has any team ever won their LCS (before there was a wildcard) with a sweep and then sweep the World Series. With the White Sox going 10-1 thus far in the post season has anyone posted a better post season record than that?

QUOTE(Felix @ Oct 25, 2005 -> 10:08 PM) Garner just doesnt like black people. Thats why there arent any on his team. You know it's funny you say that because I had just made a note of that to my wife last night as we watched the series last night.