Chisoxfn

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 05:52 PM) From everything I've read, it sounds like we shouldn't touch Purke with a 100 foot pole. I read a recent scouting report saying his fastball has dropped 4-5 mph since HS and he tires real fast. There are some serious injury concerns with him too. Couple that with his asking price, I have a feeling he will fall a lot and wind up returning to TCU. This is true, but he wouldn't be the first guy that you take a flier on that ends up working. His upside is much higher than almost any pick in that range. Now, I will say this, if the Sox were willing to spend that much, given teh depth of this draft, I'd rather they take a couple fliers on guys and give a few guys overslot money. Purke has a lot of talent.

I'd be down for Purke if he somehow slides to 47. Sox would obviously have to dish out some cash though (4 to 5M). Which they won't. There is a shot Goodwin could be there too (drafted by Sox before, repped by Boras, kicked out of UNC and now playing for Miami Dade CC).

Thoughts are with ya wite

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 09:17 AM) I remember Danks being talked about like a mid career Mark Kotsay. High average, 20 homers, good speed, great defense. I don't remember ever hearing about big power. He was always thought of a guy that would potentially develop power. However, those projections kind of went out the window the longer he stayed at Texas as the power just didnt' develop as many expected it to. He would hit the ball incredibly hard, his swing path just didn't lend itself to those hard hit balls turning into homers (rather line drive doubles, etc).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 09:46 AM) The problem is that Ben Gordon with the Pistons has been less effective than Kyle Korver has been the last 2 years. That part I don't disagree with. However, I see plenty of reasons why his struggles there could go away and in this instance, given the current state of the CBA there is no harm from us as a fans perspective in making this trade. Gordon has a high probability of being far better than Korver (imo) and we get the #8 pick for two lower 1sts and end up with Bogans back anyway. I just don't see how you could have a problem with this hypothetical deal. Doesn't really impact our cap status other than Jerry would have to pay some luxury tax (again, this is all under the current salary arrangement).

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 09:19 AM) I can understand people trying to get creative. But don't look at the names. Look at where they're at, at this point in their careers. Ben Gordon guarding Wade? lol. So basically a black Kyle Korver with a little more explosive scoring ability at over $35 million dollars through 2014? No thanks. Are you guys serious? Kyle Korver isn't even close to the player Ben Gordon has been the majority of his career.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 09:11 AM) First Rip and now Ben Gordon? Grasping at straws now. Ben Gordon is not a starting 2 on a good team, anyway. THe key is you aren't asking him to be a starting 2. You are asking him to be your sixth man. Essentially, to be your Jason Terry. And I think he could be that.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 09:03 AM) I can agree Gordon can out-create Korver, but better than Rose? Dude. Really? Rose is one of the best in the entire game at creating offense. If Gordon was that good, he wouldn't be on a bench somewhere. Rose can create, but when Rose is off, it is great to have another guy like Gordon that can create. And yes, Gordon in his Bulls days was one of the best creators of offense in the league. He's an elite shooter compared to Rose and while he isn't near the finisher around the basket or near the player Rose is (i'm not comparing the two), Gordon has in the past shown a real good ability to create. Rose can create too. I was more or less saying that on certain nights (e.g. nights where Rose has no shot and is more one dimensional), Gordon could be that guy. Obviously in its entirety Rose is on a whole nother planet than Gordon but I think Gordon would be a very good fit. I'm not sure there wouldn't be better fits, especially since Gordon has had injury problems and well, quite frankly, hasn't been the player he was in Chicago, but I can accept Ben on this squad, especially since this type of trade would keep most of the roster together. Note: I updated my post since I can clearly see that I stated it more in absolute terms regarding Gordon outcreating Rose. I did not intend such.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 2, 2011 -> 06:06 AM) Their percentages are all pretty close, except Gordon shoots A LOT more. I don't know if that makes him "better" or not. Gordon can create offense, Korver can not. That to me is the difference. Hell, Gordon might be better than Rose at creating offense when Rose is slumping and it would be huge for Rose to have another guy that could create his shot, especially when Rose is struggling to score. Gordon would have been a major upgrade in that Miami series when Chicago would go on those huge dry spells. And Balta, you are crazy. Chicago played ridiculously good defense against Miami, a team with 2 superstars, and 1 all star (not superstar).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 06:44 PM) Only fair way to evaluate those deals in aggregate is wins and losses. And this team has quietly been winning more than it has been losing since it fell to what 11 games out and about 11 below .500 at the low water mark?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 05:09 PM) Bibby was a stud on those good Sacramento teams w/ Weber. If not for the NBA-fix, he'd have one ring already. Dude was one of the two to three best PG's in the league for a while in Sacremento.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 02:16 PM) Wow. You haven't been paying much attention to the injuries of the Giants and to the awful performances of most of the Rockies, eh? No, I know the Giants are injured but the Rockies are very talented and while in the midst of a slump they are notorious slow starters and I would not call them a bad team.

Lillibridge has always had very quick hands and bat speed which allowed him to generate good power. The problem was his swing was very long and he had a pretty poor eye.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 11:55 AM) Pitchers perform better with runners on? I'm indicating that good pitchers in high leverage situations are going to be out there more focused with a better plan of attack than the other way around. Often times pitchers don't hunker down until you are in a jam. That isn't to say they don't focus early on, but they don't go through as thorough of a plan of attack.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 11:45 AM) Except his career splits flat out disagree with this assessment. High leverage: .916 OPS Med Leverage: .891 Low Leverage: .885 They really don't. His career average is not good with runners on and I've always said with runners on I care about average more than everything else.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 11:42 AM) I remember for years you hated him. I thought he'd put up big numbers here but infuriate us with his inability to get clutch hits. I remember when we faced him on the Nationals, I liked him up with Thornton on the mound in a clutch situation cause he was such an easy out. Thats the thing. I've always said I prefer average to OBP. I don't ignore OBP, but at the end of the day, to win a game, you need to generate the key hit (or sacy fly, etc) to win the game potentially. And a guy that can't hit is going to have a hell of a time doing that in those high leverage situations (where you are facing a tough pitcher, etc). Its tough enough for a good hitter, but you put a bad hitter in that sitaution and the problem is magnified and statistically that is just something a lot of the current statistic approaches ignore. Hell, it is what made a guy like Jeter so freaking solid. For most of his career, in those high leverage situations, he knew how to make the appropriate adjustments in his swing to deliver clutch hits against good players. And while AVG with RISP can be a flawed stat due to sample size, those high leverage stats over large sample plans are valid, imo.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 11:32 AM) Dunn is 7-46, no homers with RISP Historically he's a worse hitter with runners on. Why? Because quite frankly in high leverage situations he's just not very good (cause he has a majorly flawed swing and he's going to struggle even more when pitcher X is more focused due to the situation, e.g., runners on). Dunn is the definition of a mistake hitter. Dude has made his career hitting jacks in low leverage situations against mediocre pitching. Put him up against good pitching and he'll get PWNED (as do many players, but he'll get PWNED more due to the huge flaw in his game).

QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 1, 2011 -> 11:17 AM) No reason to move Gavin Floyd anywhere. He has done his job this year, just having a tough outing so far today. I can live with that. Thank you. Dude has been consistently one of our best pitchers since coming to Chicago and has done nothing but produce this year. Talk about overreact (a lot of you). Not you Cap

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 23, 2011 -> 01:08 PM) Though I generally agree with Y2HH on the valuation of LinkedIn, he's definitely wrong about recruiting. People use LinkedIn to find candidates all the time. Heck I have recruiters contacting me at least once a month who found me that way, and all I have up there is a very basic profile with little detail beyond position title, company and timeframe, and what degrees I hold. That said, I think that tends to happen more with professionals who have an established career track, that can be easily gleaned from the information on the site. For a recent college grad, its probably not real helpful. Completely agree and I also agree that the valuation of Linked in (and the IPO pricing) and eventual blow up was absolutely assinine.

Bad division? NL West has the Giants and Rockies, two of the more talented (on paper) teams in baseball. And one of them, albiet they road a hot streak there, won the world series last year.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 31, 2011 -> 06:32 PM) I think he's under team control, is he not? He only has 1 year of service time, believe it or not. Now this is where things get a little cloudy for me...but is he still required to serve out his time under the service time rules, or does that get thrown out the window if you get released 3473593754 times? I would think he is our property for several more years now as long as we want him... I believe that is the case.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 30, 2011 -> 06:58 PM) Person A, this isn't close. Agreed.

Haha. Of all games I'll be at, it will be Friday's vs. Illinois.

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ May 30, 2011 -> 09:45 AM) f*** CS Fullerton!! LOL. You might be in luck. Fullerton has struggled through injuries all year. Team is freaking loaded but has had a lot of trouble ever playing with there actual squad.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 26, 2011 -> 12:36 AM) Noticed that he only has 4 SB and 4 CS. Is he not 100% confident yet with his ankle or he simply hasn't learned basestealing techniques (ala Willie Harris)? Pretty unusual for someone that athletic in A ball not to have at least 8-10 steals at this point in the season. I'm pretty sure the Sox are basically not having him run. Usually talented speed prospects aren't asked to steal a ton at the lower levels as a team doesn't want to risk various injuries with them stealing bases. They rather they would focus on there swings, hits, etc. Usually once they get to the higher levels they'll put more of a focus on in-game stealing. There are exceptions to this rule though.