Chisoxfn

QUOTE(BearSox @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 07:14 PM) Phillip Hughes > Clay Buchholz... Buchholtz curve is downright nastier than Hughes breaking ball. Hughes has a far better build though and should prove to be more durable (despite his injury earlier this season).

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 10:05 PM) Christensen is awful, the Iowa WR's are more awful, but their TE's, OL, and entire defense are all really good. Should be a pretty good team, but I thought we played pretty well on defense, we should be fine in the MAC. And damn, I thought Illinois was going to pull it out, but they should be pretty good in the long term. And it was about 2/3 Iowa fans today at Soldier Field, but they were so drunk and tired from the Cubs game the day before that they weren't very loud. At least I'm not a Michigan fan though, maybe they will finally fire that idiot Carr. Thats cause half of our WR's weren't active and are waiting word from the judge.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 03:33 PM) The entire city is filled with iowa fans. Ya...it shouldn't be a shocker, Iowa travels amazingly well. I still remember someone on here saying it would only be 60/40 (not you rock) but I'd say 80/20 though (based on crowd noise and what my cousin who was at the game mentioned to me).

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 02:21 PM) Time for the customary Iowa trying to coast after getting a lead. Good defensive play and an awesome rushing attack. Would have liked better play out of the QB Christensen but at least no turnovers by him...plus it was a nice win (really it was like a home game for iowa and they made over 1 million bucks for the school on the game).

28-14 now...WHOOO

21-14 App State now and they have the ball. Dexter Jackson is a speed demon.

Michigan State on the other hand is absolutely pumelling UAB.

Man this is awesome...I love waking up to football. Got the Iowa and ND games set to record as both are on about the same time. I'm kind of scared for both teams games but I'm excited to see each teams new QB's (Christensen for Iowa and apparently Jones for ND).

QUOTE(danman31 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 11:58 AM) What do you U of I fans think of this weekend's game in St. Louis? I'll be there, anyone else making the trek? I think go.....TIGERS!!!!

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 1, 2007 -> 09:37 AM) I haven't seen anything official on call ups, just speculation. I will be surprised if Bourgeois isn't added to the 40 man and called up, in my opinion they should give him a good long look. I would bet he is better than Andy Gonzalez at just about any aspect of the game. He is. He also has more potential than Gonzalez (although Gonzalez once had some upside when drafted, but Bourgeois is a guy that was thought of at a pretty high level some years ago and that was based on some minor league success). Bourgeious has also put up better numbers in the minors than Gonzalez could ever dream of doing. Its a joke that Andy is getting all this time while a guy like Jason Bourgeious isn't getting a chance (Bourg is faster, a better hitter, and can't be any worse in the field). Albeit I don't necessarily blame Gonzalez because he is a decent defensive 2nd baseman/SS (not great, but decent) but having to play all over has probably hurt his defense a bit.

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 08:37 PM) Hmm. Well I guess it depends on your goal. If you think we're not going to be serious contenders next season anyways - and I probably fall into that camp - then maybe it makes the most sense to leave them in the minors to give them more seasoning so they don't lose any service time. Then Kenny will probably be forced to tear the team down (unless he's fired) and we can call up Egbert and Gio when we're sure they're entirely ready. I was thinking that purely in terms of the organization's stated goal of winning in the short term, it makes the most sense to give Gio and Egbert a shot next season whether it's as starters or relievers. That's certainly a valid concern. If the idea was to to shut down both pitchers to protect their arms then I'd probably be behind that. However, I'd rather see Egbert pitch 2 or 3 games in the majors than to have him pitch in the AFL. The point of the fall league is for Lucy to be able to go in (he is not expected to pitch many innings there at all) and work on a couple of his secondary pitches that the organization is working with him on. He could not do that at the major league level.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 07:30 PM) It's funny you bring up Howard. I remember campaigning to get him in '04 (I thought we should move Konerko instead of Lee for the salary dump we could all see needed to be made)... The responses were that he was too old and struck out too much... To me the complaints about Howard hold about as much weight as those against Egbert. When you're a little old for your league at AA and putting up ridiculous, highly projectable numbers, there's not much weight to the age issue unless your talking about a players HOF chances. It's dumb to complain about a guy with Howard's power ceiling because he's 24 (hitting 40+ HR) in AA and AAA, or about Egbert's while he's leading the Southern League in FIP... But it's not at all comparable to writing off a 23 year old with mediocre numbers in ROOKIE ball. (For the record, I never would have projected Howard to be as good as he is. I never would have thought he would have developed the batting eye he has... Nor would I have been so bold as to predict a near 60HR season.) If it matters, I'm not actually debating the whole rookie league low a thing (a guy in low A thats 25 definitely is someone I wouldn't call a prospect unless he had some crazy circumastances around him and he better be dominating the level and have crazy good tools) because I don't even give a crap about guys in rookie ball (the production there means absolutely nothing to me and the only guys I ever even watch much are highly picks that are there) because everyone else will have to succeed in A ball before they ever get on my prospect radar (unless of course they have ridiculous tool sets such as 100MPH arms). I was more so making a point that there are reasons out there where age could be looked past (although for the most part age is obviously key). And I remember those Ryan Howard debates (they were pretty good if I recall) and it turns out Howard turned into a heck of a ballplayer (and as you said in 05 Howard made some adjustments, got more patient, and that helped him turn into the player he is today but geeze who would have ever expected him to be this ridiculously good).

Carmona is nasty.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 03:44 PM) Bringing up Ross Gload versus the prospects that we're talking about is, in my opinion, comparing apples and oranges. There are plenty of AAAA types who are older (mid-to-late 20s) who, for whatever reason, don't get a shot. I could also name a bunch of them -- off the top of my head, guys like Jack Cust, Chad Bradford and to a lesser extent Roberto Petagine. Guys who dominate the hell out of AAA yet aren't able to latch on (for a certain amount of years -- Cust, Bradford and Gload have all found their roles) for a couple seasons. I don't think that's the similar to a 23 year old who is hitting the bejesus out of SALLY league pitching. May I remind you that Jack Cust was once a top notch prospect. Bradford wasn't and Gload wasn't simply because he was piegon holed (first baseman without a bunch of power are naturally going to get passed up by other guys...plus he had Mark Grace/Todd Helton/Konerko all in his way). But I also know (because I talked to scouts when Gload was still in our minor league system) that he was thought of as a guy that would be able to hit major league pitching, problem was teams just had a preference to have power over average/solid defense at first. But I agree there are lots of AAAA types and I bet if some of them got fair shots (a lot of them may not have quite the skill-set to succeed at the major league level while others may have just never gotten proper development and are just in need of a fair chance...see Ross Gload/Willie Harris) so I still think teams could do a good job picking up some of those type of guys and seeing what happens (especially bad teams with nothing left to loose as its typically good teams that have numerous AAAA guys stashed in there system as there isn't room for those guys on the major league roster).

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) That's pretty funny. Age is pretty much the first thing I look at after the general "statistics". Age is incredibly important. I actually disagree. Age is very relevant, however it has to be factored in with a few things (is a guy raw...ie he didn't play high school ball or he is being converted to the pitching position, etc). For 98% of prospects you can pretty much rely on age, however, you always have those guys that played college ball, get drafted as hitters fart around and than someone turns them into a pitcher (ocassionally vice versa but it usually happens this way more so than the other) to take advantage of there arm (more often the conversion actually occurrs at the college level but it still leaves the player a couple years behind). Than of course there is catchers, who naturally have a longer developmental period (so its more typical for a catcher to be a bit older than most of the guys on his minor league team). This means that the player is naturally going to be at lower levels at an older age, however, it also means he's more like a high school player than a typical college player (despite age) and nothing says the player won't have a successful career (however, it obviously would be on average a shorter career as he'd reach the majors at an older level). s*** just look at Ryan Howard...he was an older prospect (should people have wrote him off because he was a bit older for a first time rookie or should they have considered the fact he has amazing stats and part of the reason he was old for a rookie was partially because of who he was being blocked by...Jim Thome).

Pedro Alvarez. I don't even want to think of Smoat as of this moment. I'm also curious to see what sort of prep players emerge. Although I was incredibly dissapointed when the O's came to terms with there #1 draft pick (absolutely stud catcher) as I would have gladly taken him with our first overall pick.

Dodgers probably figure based on the starting pitching market a healthy Elo could be dealt in the off-season or they could always afford him in the rotation (when he's healthy he's more than serviceable, especially in the NL). He also is coming off of two very good starts and bottom line the Dodgers are desperate. This also tells me that the Sox could probably get someone do to a similar deal for Contreras (ie someone to pick him up) but Ken Williams is going to try and get something for him (as opposed to just completely letting him go for nothing..even though I still say addition by subtraction because having that payroll off the books is very valuable).

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 11:55 AM) Both Iguchi and Mackowiak will be available via free agency this offseason if the Sox just can't go on without them. I think there is a chance Mack will be brought back. Or at least a decent one. The thing is Mack was making too much for a bench player on a poor team and the Sox hopefully will use some of that money on the draft and international free agents in the up-coming year (same with Iguchi's money).

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 01:22 PM) Uribe is much better than Eckstein defensively, and SS is a defensive position. Eckstein f***ing sucks and this club would be completely stupid to sign him as he will get a multiyear deal when one year is too long. I'd much rather sign Vizquel for one year around $2 million, but I still think that isn't that good of a move. ...and the idea of getting Tracy, who is more injury prone than Thome, hits LHP much worse than Thome (.413 OPS this year against them,) and doesn't mash RHP anywhere near as well as Thome, to help platoon DH with Crede (sucks offensively,) Fields (still a long way to go) to replace Thome is quite f***ing stupid. Glad you continue to completely ignore the fact that Thome will be worthless for the Sox in one year. Plus I do not believe that Tracy is more injury prone than Thome as Tracy has had an injury (tendinitis in his knee) but it is the sort of injury that with a full off-season he should be good. In addition, sans this year he has been healthy his entire career while Thome has been completely unhealthy for the most part the past couple seasons (albeit productive when healthy but thats pretty meaningless when you are good for 2 stints on the DL per season, plus you already miss all the interleague games when we are in the NL park (while Tracy could actually freaking play in the field and help out in numerous areas). Oh and Tracy is actually getting better while Thome is getting worse and the Sox need more guys that are on the upward spiral rather than the downward spiral. And just in case it matters...Tracy had played in 154 games last year, 145 and 143 the two years before that (his only 3 seasons at the major league level and even if you factor in this years 75 games he averages 125 per season). You also have to factor in that his first two seasons he wasn't necessarily a full time starter as he was a young player still sitting out on ocassions due to developmental purposes (so he could have potentially played in more games). Thome on the other hand is averaging 112 games per season over the past 4 years (one of those being an extreme injury season, much like the one Tracy is having this year...however sans each players one major injury one has proven to be very heatlhy the past couple years while the other is old and continues to break down more and more). So give me a f***ing break about Thome being less injury prone.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 12:48 PM) I, personally love the idea of Brent Lillibridge. Or a player like him (the Sox can use some of there prospects and do a swap of prospects as Lillibridge really doesn't have a spot in Atlanta). And I'm sure there are other guys out there that are in similar situations and I am quietly hoping Kenny uses some of his young arms (even guys that some of you may not think have much value such as Sisco or Thornton or MacDougall or Floyd or Broadway or McCulloch or Russell or Masset or even Eggy) to acquire some prospects at positions we need them. I'm not necessarily saying you'll be able to trade Broadway for Lillibridge but maybe the right package and you can. Or maybe you deal a guy like Masset for a little older prospect that has had success but never had a position because he's blocked by major league talent (yet this prospect still has talent, its just his value has dropped a bit based on him not being able to get promoted to the majors). Those options are out there, but its going to come down to Kenny being a little ballsy and taking a chance (something I'd like to see) as well as our scouts doing an excellent job identifying these guys that could be had without giving up any major long term chips (Gio Gonzalez, maybe Egbert is considered this as well but I included him on the list because i would deal Egbert for Lillibridge or any other upper echelon prosepct, although I don't know if the other organization would consider those sort of deals).

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 11:37 AM) Cmon, Jason. We're dead last in producing much of anything resembling an offense. Since 2005, when his OBP reached a respectable .363, he's steadily taken less and less walks per season. His stolen base totals are nothing to admire, either. When coupled with a complete absence of power, what good is he? These aren't facts which support anything resembling a solid leadoff hitter. I agree he's an improvement over Uribe. But ultimately, how much do the White Sox improve over this season due to this signing? Does this make us a playoff contender now? Honestly, i'd rather trade any of Thome, Konerko, Garland -- acquire (among other pieces) several promising MIF prospects -- and go through their problems for 300K than deal with another walking grinder. It's just another no-nothing move. Since we're probably not going to be winning anything for quite awhile, while not set our sights towards acquiring young talent for SS rather than waste resources on Eckstein? Completely pointless, imo. Only purpose it serves is to give the illusion of improvements. A feeling of "anything is better than Uribe." Sure, for one or two seasons. Then who replaces Eckstein? I'm saying if you are taking the approach that your going to go the veteran way, than the above is what I would do. I think we all know I'd prefer to get rid of a lot of the guys making over 10M, load up on young players, combine those guys with a few veterans and try to see what we have next year (if we are close, than move a player or two to fill a couple of holes that you weren't able to fill with young players and that could hopefully get you closer to a playoff appearance next year, but at the same time your still on track for 2009 and past. I think its the safer way to prevent a massive 5-6 year collapse (at its best, because if things go bad next year, this club may be completely screwed for a lot more than 5 or 6 seasons, however, they still are at the point that if they made some trades of there more talented older players and loaded up on young talent and got a bit lucky they could be in it next year and if not as long as they scouted and did well and didn't get really unlucky they should be in very good shape for 09/10/11, especially if they were able to find ways to add vets into the mix or trade for younger players (maybe guys close to getting contracts that you could deal for at a value because you'll have to shell out some money to sign even) to team up with these young prospects. However, it doesn't appear the Sox are going to go that route and that they are going to try one last season with a lot of this core and based on that the above is a scenario that I still think helps the Sox and makes them a potential contender, but still slightly makes the club younger and gets them some young prospects as well so that they won't be in quite as bad shape in 2009 (if 2008 does go wrong as you would have at least 4 young position players already starting plus a couple young starters that you can use in 09 as opposed to if we stick with everything we may not even have that nor would we have any young talent coming up as well).

F it...go for Andruw Jones...move Jim Thome.

QUOTE(Felix @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 10:55 AM) Eckstein: .679 OPS Uribe: .629 OPS Thats not significant, especially when you're considering the fact that Uribe is having (basically) the worst year of his career, is 5 years younger than Eckstein, offers excellent defense, and is likely cheaper. I don't give a s*** about OPS when I'm talking about a SS, especially when I'm talking about a guy that has proven to be a solid leadoff hitter (despite my absolute hate of Eckstein). IF we were talking about a middle of the order shortstop, fine, ops matters, but not when the Sox have a drastic need for a leadoff hitter. I also want the Sox to go hard after Chad Tracy as I still don't see how the heck the Dbacks will have room for him (he's missed a good chunk of this year with injury but he would provide a very good lefty bat and could play in LF/3B with Fields at the other spot (if the Sox non-tender Crede) and if the Sox listen to me and move Thome than Tracy could play some at either of those two spots (with Crede starting at 3b) and someone always getting ab's at the DH spot as well. You can tell me how Tracy isn't as good as Thome, but I also say you get young talent for Thome (some of which will help you recover from what you've had to give up to get a young player like Tracy) that can hopefully help the Sox get a lot more athletic. In fact, I'm all about moving Thome for young prospects (hopefully one of them is a middle-infielder) and than signing Andruw Jones, trading for Chad Tracy, signing David Eckstein (who plays some at SS, some at 2B, but solidifies the top of the order while the young SS acquired in the Thome deal and Richar both develop at the major league level) and you keep Joe Crede (or you can opt away from Crede). The Sox while dealing Thome, lose a bit of offense, however, in adding Tracy/Jones (or Hunter/Rowand, but I'd prefer Jones because he could be a middle of the order masher that has a better long term future than Thome and I'm buying on Jones being much more like the player he's been most of his career) you really have significantly upgraded this roster. Hell, just look at this (if you keep Crede): Eckstein - SS Tracy - LF/DH Konerko - 1B Jones - CF Dye - RF AJP - C Crede - 3B/DH Fields - LF/DH/3B Richar - 2B Salary wise: Andruw Jones +$14M (I'm basing this on what he made last year and I don't expect him to make a significant raise from that, and he could actually get maybe a M less); Jim Thome - 7 M (ballpark based upon what the Sox are actually paying him); Uribe - $5M; Eckstein $4M (this could be high, but I think he could get something around this); Cintron, Mack, Pods, Erstad - 7M (probably a little more) So the payroll is essentially identical to the payroll of last years lineup (however you now have a cheaper bench with guys like Pablo, Andy Gonzalez, Jerry Owens...so you may still have a move to make here based on some vets on the scrap heap...but Sweeney may fit here as well). Now say you get rid of Crede (Thus saving additional money): Eckstein TRADE (you get an outfielder/SS/pitching prospect for Thome ideally otherwise you trade for a younger outfielder that has some speed) Konerko (you can mess with these 3 guys) Jones Dye Chad Tracy (3b or LF depending on who Ozzie thinks is the better long term defensive option at 3b) Josh Fields AJP Richar You can also move Fields up to the 2 spot in the lineup if you want to (and use the other guy somewhere else). Bottom line looking at either order I can say that odds are you get better production out of Konerko/Dye (as opposed to what they did this year as both performed under career numbers and still have stuff left). Jones is a significant upgrade to anything we've had in CF (both offensively and defensively). Josh Fields is an upgrade to the production the club got out of 3b or LF this year (same with Chad Tracy, same with a healthy Joe Crede); Eckstein is an upgrade to what Uribe did; AJP holds steady. Iguchi is a safer bet at 2B, however, Richar has upside but I could see this being one that isn't as good as in 2006. However, you have upgraded production everywhere (or practically everywhere in the lineup) and have not made any significant increases in salary. You have also gotten younger at 2B, LF/3B/DH, and have gotten a young SS prospect whose getting broken in as well as a young outfielder type guy and arm). This doesn't factor into moves that could be made to the rotation (as in this case you now would be able to move Contreras/Garland to free up additional payroll and land numerous arms to go with Vazquez/Buehrle/etc (or you can keep Garland and just use Contreras and hope to free up some payroll that could go to the bench or bullpen or whatever else).

I am not a big Eckstein fan, but he is the best FA option out there and would be a significant upgrade over Uribe (pratically anything would be considering how much worse Juan has been at SS this year and just how terrible he's been at the plate). However, a long term deal would not be wise. I wouldn't mind the Sox acquiring a SS prospect and than signing on Eck for a year (paying him a little more money over that year due to an option for yr 2 with a decent size buyout) while the Sox work a long term plan in (as the reality is they really don't have any SS options in house). Plan A would obviously be someone like Rafael Furcal or a top young prospect that we would get with Ken Williams making some significant changes to a team that apparently doesn't care (thats what the manager says at least).

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 30, 2007 -> 01:07 PM) The reason they have all the teams close to one another is to make it easier for the instructional people to get from team to team and also to move players from team to team in emergency situations. Adam Ricks played two games in one day for two different farm teams. The Great Falls team out in Montana is there because the White Sox for whatever reason like the competitiveness of the Pioneer League. I would not be surprised though to see the Sox move the rookie league team (Bristol) into the Gulf Coast League but we'll see. Yep, not only does it make it easier on guys like Champion (roving pitching coach) but it also makes it easier for guys like Wilder/Williams/Lauman and everyone else involved in the minor league development (Ken Williams really isn't involved too much, aside from 1-2 trips he'll make during the season and I don't know how much Dave travelled this year but i know in the past he was always traveling amongst the affiliates). Plus all the affiliates are still within a close flight of Chicago (especially given that you gain an hour moving from Birmingham or Charlotte).