Jump to content

hawksfan61

Members
  • Content count

    171
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About hawksfan61

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Abingdon, MD

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Sox Minor League Affiliate
    Charlotte Knights (AAA)
  1. hawksfan61

    I think it's time to take Jose off the banner

    QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 11, 2016 -> 10:13 AM) This guy is a troll. I primarily lurk and don't post, but I read this board quite a bit. Ron is a true blue cubbie troll, the good posters on his site shouldn't waste precious keystrokes responding to such poor trolling.
  2. hawksfan61

    John Danks should never start for the White Sox again

    QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Apr 29, 2016 -> 04:16 AM) a team would take a flyer on him if released, because the sox would be on the hook for the salary. but who needs the 2016 dank aside as a roster filler or replacing an injured starter/reliever? There are four or five NL teams with zero interest in winning games this season who would probably take on another tomato can like Danks for the minimum. He's no worse and likely better than some of the trash being run out there by the Braves and Reds.
  3. hawksfan61

    2012-2013 Official NHL thread

    QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Jun 18, 2013 -> 11:29 AM) Eh, those numbers are basically equal and only because, by his standards, he had a pretty down regular season. I claim only my opinion, not that its gospel, and I certainly don't believe Hossa is close to our biggest worry, unless he is really hurt bad and misses more games. I do think both Sharp and even Kane have played better, despite all three of them having equal points. But like I said, we need Hossa to play. Hossa is the least of this team's problems. The Captain is completely invisible and Kane's contributions have primarily consisted of dancing into three defenders and losing the puck. These are your supposed to be your best players and they are zeros right now. At least Hossa, even if his scoring is down compared to the regular season (don't ignore the fact that he is also 34 years old).
  4. hawksfan61

    Rebuild: So Far Better Than Could Have Hoped For

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 08:07 PM) Most everyone would be quite happy if Danks morphed into a Buehrle-esque, #3 starter, middle innings eater...as long as he doesn't become a huge contractual liability/albatross. The primary concern (with Peavy) is whether he can maintain it in the 2nd half. Along with that is the "Big Game" issue, especially against the Tigers. If you'll look at his pitch counts over the course of the 2012 season, you'd almost think he was being abused or overutilized to the nth degree with the thought he wasn't coming back to the Sox in 2013 and we wanted to maximize whatever we could get out of him. So there's always going to be that Verducci Effect concern with Sale/Peavy/Quintana....until they get through the entire 2013 season without any ill effects. So we need to trade Peavy because he MAY wear down later in the season? His replacements will be guys who are coming off of major shoulder surgery or young guys who have never pitched 180-200 innings (Axelrod/Santiago). What point are you trying to make here? How does trading him make the problem any better? BTW, the big game argument is stupid. With Peavy we have a better chance of playing "big games" whether they be against the Tigers in September or against the Rangers/Tigers/Yankees etc. in October. I will take my chances playing big games and hope the horses that got me there perform.
  5. hawksfan61

    How can Ventura bat Dunn cleanup every day?

    If Dunn and Konerko don't hit like middle of the order hitters we are never going anywhere no matter where they bat in the lineup.
  6. hawksfan61

    Rebuild: So Far Better Than Could Have Hoped For

    QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 27, 2013 -> 04:15 PM) You know, right now...I'm not sure I agree with this. I think we have a good chance that next year, or even late this year, Johnny Danks can be the theoretical Peavy replacement. As others have noted, that still leaves the team with a 4 lefty starting rotation, which is definitely an oddity, but it does kinda make some sense. And we'd still be sitting there 6-deep in the rotation thanks to EJ. That said, if we're 2-3 games out at the deadline, screw it, I want Peavy in my rotation for the stretch. Why is Peavy criminally underrated on this site? I think people are underestimating how good Peavy was last year and how good he has been so far this year. Yes I know the Tigers lit him up last year but Danks stands as a very very poor man's Jake Peavy. The only year Danks has even come close to matching Peavy's numbers from last year is in 2008, which was 5 years and a shoulder surgery ago. Keep the rotation, buy/trade for bats.
  7. hawksfan61

    Rebuild: So Far Better Than Could Have Hoped For

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 11:00 AM) The Angels haven't drafted well. Just Trout, Jared Weaver and Howie Kendrick....at least in comparison to all the pitching the Cardinals have developed. Even once-a-decade talents like Trout or Harper or Machado can't offset lousy starting pitching. My point is they have drafted franchise cornerstones like Trout and Weaver despite not picking in the top ten. If teams are picking up franchise players outside the top ten of the draft what is the point of tanking? I thought the entire point of tanking was to get high draft picks so you could get good players, if we don't need to do that to get good players, what am I missing? I agree great offensive talents can't offset lousy starting pitching......BUT WE ALREADY HAVE GOOD STARTING PITCHING!!! We have filled the hardest hole, offense can be fixed a hell of a lot easier and more quickly than pitching can. So you stick with this team and try to make shrewd moved to get some guys that can hit on this team.
  8. hawksfan61

    Rebuild: So Far Better Than Could Have Hoped For

    QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 27, 2013 -> 10:43 AM) So you are content missing the playoffs the last five years but only losing 80 games? The net effect is the same: Another year, another year sitting at home in October (in fact 11 of the last 14 years, we have been sitting out the playoffs despite arguably the weakest division in that time frame). Why not miss the playoffs while having a plan to be good five years down the road instead of this let's be good enough to be in the race, but not good enough to win the race. I'm probably just a cynic and a perpetual pessimist with the Sox, but there is good reason. I see the same thing year in and year out where they simply don't have enough over the long haul of the season to do anything but "be in the race" only to fall out of it in September. I think in five years both plans have about the same chance to succeed. However under the "re-tool" plan you haven't alienated the fanbase and presumably have some talent on the major league level to work with (if you are winning 80-82 games then you have some guys that can play). Under the set the world on fire plan in THEORY you could end up with the Rays (we will ignore the fact that they were godawful for 10 years before they became a 90 win team) but you also have a great chance to become the Pirates, Royals, Mariners, etc. I would rather delude myself with the re-tool method, because nothing about being out of the race on opening day for 5-7 years sounds appealing to me. All-stars can be found anywhere in the draft, ask the Angels and Cardinals. I would rather do it that way.
  9. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 10:05 AM) Well, to be more accurate...the false positive is likely to be tearing through the next 27 games and using that as the rationale for gutting more of our prospects for the iffy chances of competing with a flawed team. Let me ask you this Balta. You're one of the minor league aficionados. If you could have a veteran catcher and another reliever (let's say the equivalent of a Joaquin Benoit) for Erik Johnson, Trayce Thompson and Daniel Webb, would you make that deal? If it increased our odds for appearing in the playoffs from 25% to 75%, would you consider it worth making? I thought our system was hot garbage, so why are people worried about trading anything that is currently in it outside a guy like Hawkins of Johnson? I wouldn't do that trade, and if we do make a trade I doubt its going to be one of that ilk. Think of last year's deals for a better gauge of what Hahn is probably looking for, savvy moves giving up little talent for flawed but useful veterans.
  10. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 27, 2013 -> 09:59 AM) Anyone who would describe the Sox going on a run against weaker competition as a "False Positive". Bingo!
  11. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 09:53 AM) Whose plan is that? Dick Allen said what good would Hudson do on this year's team. I answered. There are 15-20 teams out there that would trade us a reliever or veteran catcher (or both) for controlling Daniel Hudson's rights for 3+ years. He has 2 years, 117 days so service time accrued, so I'm not 100% sure if it would be 4 or 3 years (and how it works with time on the DL, etc.), but who exactly are we going to be able to trade to improve either the bullpen or catching position at mid-season? Wait. Time out. I need to find some good drugs to sustain me through this argument. Doesn't matter that there's the death penalty here in China for that sort of thing, lol. Plus, it's hard to find anyone to preach to on the street corner since 1) nobody believes in God, 2) there are no homeless to minister to and 3) everyone else is either enjoying the nice weather or watching Iron Man 3 in the theatres. If I was preaching, I would also be jailed (thankfully, not executed, just a hard labor/re-education camp in Xinjiang Province). What type of reliever or veteran catcher are you going to get for a guy coming off of a major arm injury? Please name one, because I think you are overstating the market for guys coming off of arm injuries that have not proven they are 100% back, which is the type of asset Hudson would be this year.
  12. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 09:47 AM) I think you might be the ONLY person on this site who assumes we're going to roll over the Royals for the rest of the season...and completely discounts the past. There are usually certain teams we always struggle with, say the Blue Jays on turf, or the Orioles....a decade ago, we constantly went out to Anaheim and Oakland and struggled just to win a single game on a road trip. Those weren't single season anomalies. They were consistently things you could count on, like the White Sox not beating Johan Santana or CC Sabathia. Same thing with beating the Twins down the stretch in the last decade. We didn't even do that in 2008....we got swept big-time and only beat them because of Rick Hahn's son's fortuitous coin flip call. There are certainties like death and taxes. The White Sox struggling against rookie pitchers, against soft-tossing lefties (see Bruce Chen) or almost any journeyman pitcher who relied predominantly on off-speed stuff. Where did I saw we would roll over the Royals? Please show me. You are completely missing my point on the Royals. My point is they are a bad baseball team who will be 10+ games back by the trade deadline comes around, so why are we even talking about them as far as competition for a playoff spot go? If the Sox roll over for the Royals again this year then we won't be making the playoffs again this year, its pretty simple. Time will tell, and every year is a fresh start. All I know is right now the Sox bats have somewhat come alive, the starting pitching has continued to dominate, and we have a leaky bullpen we are going to have to fix at some point. All of that said, I still like our chances better than anyone else in the division not named Detroit.
  13. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 27, 2013 -> 09:34 AM) You mention 2 names often, I haven't kept up with them, but how have Hudson and Santos been the last couple of seasons? How would keeping them around hve improved the chances for last year and this? I am sure the 45 innings Hudson pitched last year with the Omogrosso-like ERA would have blown us right past the Tigers. The Hudson injury doesn't make that trade good, it was still a dumb trade, but I am not sure why anyone is lamenting the loss of Hudson like it is going to help us now. Even if he does come back this year the rest of the year is a throwaway, so he MIGHT be decent again in 2014. If all goes to plan by then we will have a low payroll with a roster full of fringy prospects and bad veterans, so we wouldn't have needed Hudson anyways.
  14. hawksfan61

    Rebuild: So Far Better Than Could Have Hoped For

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 02:48 AM) With your repeated references to drug use, are you sure you're not sampling some of it yourself? I feel like I am with a lot of these posts around here itching for five years of 90+ losses all so we can get some more names on the BA Top 100 list.
  15. hawksfan61

    The next month, and possible "false positives"

    QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 27, 2013 -> 01:31 AM) What was the Royals' record against the White Sox from August 7th on last year? 9-3 (6-12 overall) How many games did we lose the division to DET by? 3 games. What was our record in 2011 against the Royals? 7-11 Seeing a trend? What is our record inside of the division now, without having played the Tigers? 7-9 What are the odds that the Royals will play .318 ball for the remainder of the season and not have a burst of momentum from hiring a new manager? 0.00% As for the Twins, Morneau will be gone after this year, they have 2 of the top 25 position prospects in the game and three potential front-line aces in Gibson, May and Meyer. They're 50% of the way there in terms of getting ready for another run again. Unfortunately for their fans, it's hard to be patient in Year 3 of a rebuilding project in a brand-new stadium. The White Sox also haven't cut their payroll all the way down to $70 million. Ironic, because Pohlad is individually perhaps the richest of all baseball owners, but one of the most penurious. Who cares what the Sox record was against the Royals last year? Records against teams from previous years have no impact on our performance against them this year, you know this right? The Royals probably won't play .318 ball the rest of the year, but they sure are playing it now and its not because of Ned Yost, its because their beloved prospects for the most part can't hit major league pitching. I know this is going to come as a surprise to some, but Top 100 prospects do not all turn out to be all stars, and the Royals have a handful of them on their roster right now. As far as the Twins go......who cares? Their team is horrible this year, was horrible the last two years, and will probably suck for two years after this. If the Sox has Mauer on the books at 23 per until he was 35 years old a lot of people on this board would crying and throwing their toys out of the playpen that we didn't trade him five years ago for a boatload of lottery tickets. I won't deny that the Twins have some nice pieces in the minor leagues, but prospects are NEVER a guarantee, and you don't change the long term strategy of your team based on the lottery tickets that a team with 96 and 99 loses the past two years hold.
×