Chisoxfn

Wait wait wait, I'd be shocked if the Sox weren't sending some cash over. But I like this for the fact that it frees up money. I hope the Sox use this money for bullpen help.

Does anyone know if the Mets are planning on dealing Frankie Rodriguez and if so I assume they'd be getting very little for him due to his contract and off the field issues. He could be a nice closer to pick up. I know he injured himself in the fight and ended up missing the rest of the season but he still has above average stuff and has been an effective closer and would be an upgrade over Jenks.

QUOTE (Rooftop Shots @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 07:25 AM) Nice post! Totally agree! I second it. RIP Mr. Santo. You were an great baseball player and an asset to the game of baseball!!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) If you sign Konerko and Dunn, everyone knows you're selling him because you have no spot to play him. I'd tell those teams that he can play 3B and outfield and get his at bats and develop that way. There are ways to make it work if teams try to give up crap for him.

The questions are how do we get our bullpen in tact. From a roster standpoint, we are pretty well set outside of having to worry about Quentin playing defense. I guess Viciedo could become expendable, but I wouldn't want to just give him up. And is Sale our 5th starter?

Do you trade Viciedo for a young pitcher? Does Jackson become available? Who knows. Morel is going to be at 3rd and I see many reasons to consider going younger at catcher if an option was out there. I'd still be a fan of Napoli behind the dish or Russ Martin.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 1, 2010 -> 01:30 PM) Eh, he didn't too much and in college, he didn't have a position. That's why people are shocked he was taken #4 overall over Jerryd Bayless. He had great workouts, but Westbrook, in no way, showed the capability of what he does now, in college. He didn't suck, but he nowhere met his hype from when he was in high school. Same goes for Jrue Holiday. Wasn't good. People out west knew all about Westbrook. He was overshadowed to an extent by Collison/Farmar/Afflalo (I think one of them wasn't actually on that team, but I might be wrong) but the guy was very very productive and incredibly explosive and showed that at UCLA. Westbrook was always the second best pure NBA prospect on that squad and he had tremendous work outs on top of it. I thought it was surprising he went 4th, but everyone knew he could jump out of a building and was an upper echelon defender in college.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 1, 2010 -> 11:24 AM) Didn't know how much of a terror Westbrook was on until I read this thread. Wowzers. I remember watching him at UCLA and thinking he was one of the most overrated players I had ever seen. As someone who watches a lot of UCLA basketball, I have no idea how you could have thought Westbrook was overrated. He was a strong defensive player in college, who was a nice passer, and explosive athlete. His shot got better during his brief career at UCLA and has continued to improve in the NBA. That UCLA team was very well coached and prepared for the NBA.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 30, 2010 -> 09:50 PM) It's certainly not an entirely financial-based decision (especially when the state of California will end up with a huge legal bill for the court costs they will incur once they are legally at odds with federal authorities on marijuana). It just makes sense for largely progressive California to be at the front of this debate. Largely progressive, more like largely retarded. Worse run state in the union by a mile.

I'd be ok with Lee and Dunn. That depends on what Lee will sign for and you woudl have to deal Quentin which kind of stinks because you are selling low on him (I say you must move him because Dunn would have to be the DH and Quentin shouldn't play the OF regularly).

I believe it is compared to what your tax basis is in the home at the point of sale. That is if you are talking about a tax loss. If you are talking about a financial loss, you'd have loss on the sale of your home and than you'd have losses associated with financing in theory and technically if you sell your home for less than you owe, than you actually have a gain related to debt forgiveness.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 05:34 PM) Well of course they could. A lot of teams "on any given Sunday" could beat a whole lot of teams. That doesn't change the fact that Iowa lost to every team they played worth a damn outside of MSU. And they have some horrible losses in Northwestern and now Minnesota. Just because they are very capable certainly doesn't mean anything if they don't play up to their capabilities time and time again. I don't disagree with that. They are still better than pretty much every team Boise State and/or TCU played.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 03:02 PM) However Iowa is probably as good as anything that Boise played this season. They are judged purely on record which is not always a good indicator of team strength and talent. Absolutely agree. I think Iowa on any given Saturday could beat a whole lot of teams. Unfortunately, Iowa didn't execute when needed at the end of games.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 10:12 AM) Playing a good (and ranked) Nevada team versus playing a terrible Michigan team will do that to you. I didn't post this in reaction to any other discussion here. I'm saying that OSU will probably be the second Big Ten team in a BCS bowl, whereas Boise State won't, despite having a similar SOS and more quality wins. End of the day it's about money, but if I'm a Boise State fan I'd be mad too. And the strength of the WAC has nothing to do with it. SoS clearly evened out over the season. Iowa s***ting their pants during the second half of the season probably hurt OSU's strength of schedule significantly.

Juan is a good player who does a lot of things well and some things really poor. In general, he's a pretty valuable player for a club. It is a bit pricey but I can think of worse ways to spend your money. But I always loved Juan so I'm a bit biased.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 09:27 AM) Which suggests trouble for the Jets, Patriots, and Packers in a couple weeks. I won't go that far. This is a good team with holes and it is an improving team. I said all year this team would get better and better and as of now I can't be anything less than exstatic with the job the coaching staff has done and with what the players have done. However, there is still a lot of tough games on our plate and in no way am I going to act as if the Minny/Detroit games are guaranteed wins (Minny is a talented team and Detroit, despite 2 losses, has played some damn good football). Add in New England, the Jets, and Packers and you are talking about one tough finish and we need at least 2 more wins to feel good, 3 to be a lock. Hopefully the Bears keep getting better and keep playing above average, winning, football!!!

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 27, 2010 -> 10:13 PM) BTW, Rose is now up to 27, 8 and 5 a game, what a joke! Lately he's been taking some really ill-advised shots though, imo. Still playing ridiculous though.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 27, 2010 -> 07:01 AM) Exactly the point of why career free throw percentage isn't some sort of be all for the last minute. I completely disagree. I don't care if you are cold or warm, you should be able to come in and make free throws. Guys pratice em all day. Even if he was running a ton, he might only get a couple shots a game. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be ready/capable of hitting his free throws. He had warmup shots at the half and before the game. Only person to blame those missed free throws on are Lucas himself and I'm pretty sure he'd tell anyone that.

That is incredibly messed up. What kind of dog is it Soxy? Bulldog?

Lucas is a career 81% free throw shooter and I always thought you want your best free throw shooters on the court at the end of the game.

These are assinine rumors that make no sense. Why not just use Dallas McPherson as our full time 3rd baseman? And yes, I'm being sarcastic!

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 24, 2010 -> 09:24 AM) Just cause CarGo didn't win the MVP is no reason to end your life! Ehhh....this sites better without ya Jordan LOL

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2010 -> 10:09 AM) While you've spent time tryinga to convince me of something I already believe...that the fangraphs dollar system is complicated but still remains a useful way of looking comparitively at player value if you pay attention to the reasons why it does what it does...you still haven't argued at all about why the Huff deal is a terrible deal. I am diong that because you are using fangraph $ values to show me why he is a bargain and that is plain ridiculous and isn't what those dollar values were created for. I won't argue that he wasn't effective last year, he was, very much so. I'd argue that I'd have little confidence expecting 11 to 12 M per year production out of him.

11 or 12 million a year per year is ridiculous when in recent years you have had guys like Vladdy, Abreu, Damon, etc signing for cheap deals that are also veterans. If you sit around and have 6 to 8 million to play with, you will be able to sign an effective offensive player. Now the Giants decided they wanted to move now and I can understand that, especially since they will be gaining a lot of revenue due to there world series win (i.e., 2011 season tickets sales increase), but I think if you are going to spend that sort of money per season, there are other opportunities out there, such as signing a Adam Dunn for a little more or even a Paul Konerko. Both are less streaky players in general, very effective, good clubhouse guys, etc. Now on the bright side Giants are only paying 2 years but Huff has had a very up and down career, imo. He's been effective at times, but in no way is he one of the best first baseman in baseball and giving him that sort of money over two years is paying him in a manner similar (on a per season basis) to some of the best in the game.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Nov 23, 2010 -> 10:06 AM) They aren't actually assessing a monetary value that, but instead using a monetary figure to help correlate performance on the field to how much it is worth given market conditions. They aren't suggesting that the Giants should have paid Bonds $37.8 million in 2004, but they are instead showing how good he was offensively using his WAR multiplied by the price teams pay for 1 win share. Bonds was a 12.2 WAR player in 2004 - meaning he was worth just over 12 wins all by himself - and teams paid $3.1 million per win share (price of win share, or pWS) in 2004; thus, Bonds' WAR*pWS = $37.8 mill. Mark Kotsay was a bad player, and I don't think it's really debatable that his presence on the team cost the Sox wins. Thus, he has a negative WAR. Taking his WAR*pWS = some negative number. He's not actually worth negative dollars, but instead it helps compare how bad he was. Exactly, which is why I said you can't compare that value to what a player is making. The only thing you can do is take those numbers and use them as just another way to evaluate a players effectiveness, but to just say, well fangraphs says he is wroth this and is getting this than the difference makes him a steal or bust, well that is ridiculous.