Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Ranger @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 02:19 PM) I'd like to think that without the Thome-PK-Dye trio in the middle of the order, the offensive mindset of the guys playing will have to change. To me, having those three guys when they were killing it (2006) was about as good as it could possibly get in the heart of any batting order. The problem is that if even one of those guys begins to disappear (2007, 2008, 2009), the players' mindset doesn't change because they've been used to it a certain way: the rest of the lineup is still waiting on those big boys to get it done, even though one or two of them is struggling. So, essentially, the team will go through stretches where they're waiting on a black hole to drive in their runs. That leads to a LOT of low-scoring games. I know a lot of fans hate the heavy reliance on the HR, but if you can ever have a 3-4-5 and good as those three guys were in '06, you'd be insane not to be happy with that. Now, since it's going to be nearly impossible to duplicate that again, I'm hoping next year's offense is more versatile and 6 guys aren't always waiting on the other 3 to do the heavy-lifting. Teahen was on the show with us this past Saturday (excuse the plug, but here's the link if you want to hear) and I asked him about the approach playing in the Cell and how players are affected subconsciously because of the tendency to be HR-friendly. And he said something telling, I think, that when he was with KC, they viewed the Sox players as waiting for the guys in the middle of the order to hit the HR. I'm wondering if maybe without that "safety net" for the other guys, if the offense as a whole will do a better job of working together to score runs instead of relying on 2 or 3 guys to do all the work. Obviously, I'd rather have 4 badasses in the middle of the order that I know are going to rake every night, but there is more than one way to have a decent offense. And when it comes down to it, presumably with this rotation, the Sox don't have to have a top 5 offense...they just can't afford to have a bottom 5 offense. Completely agree with you and I'm very curious to see how the clubhouse dynamic changes with Dye and Thome gone. They were clearly the leaders (along with Konerko and Buehrle, who remain) and I know Getz at times questioned the veteran leadership of the club and I really am curious to see a new waive of players step up and lead this club and I want to see the teams attitude change a bit on the field. With that I think we will see the offensive approach change to an extent and I think it might be for the better. Clearly it would be great to have three guys do what the Sox offense did in 2006. However, it is also important to remember that that offense died late in the season. With the rotation the Sox have, they'll need a solid bullpen (Jenks/Thornton is a damn good 8th/9th inning spot) but we'll need to see two more relievers (at a min emerge as being quality 7th inning and beyond guys) and just a solid lineup (having a league avg player at every position will work fine, especially if the team plays good baseball and does the little things) will be okay. Would it be great to have a dominant lineup and bullpen to go with our rotation, absolutely, but we don't need it to win it all and come July if we are missing that one piece, we'll be golden, cause Kenny will go out and get it.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 01:56 PM) Kenny's quote makes me wonder what he thinks our record will be if the season started tomorrow. Do we magically become a division champ and WS contender just because of Peavy, Teahen and Hudson being added and Dye, Thome off the team? If we have no glaring holes in the GM's mind, I would think he'd get rid of Ozzie if we play slightly below .500 ball again as next season plods along. The way Jerry and KW talk, we've got all the talent we need. So we better be way better than a .500 team or it's somebody's fault. I prefer to say they've overrated our talent, including bullpen and lineup's ability to produce runs. But they are paid to judge talent and they think it's great, so let's see it in the W-L column, Kenny and Oz. Lets not forget full seasons of Beckham, a healthy Quentin, an improved Rios (his career numbers indicate we should expect much more out of Alex Rios next season), Jake Peavy for a full-season, a better 5th starter (Garcia > most of what we ran out last season), a more seasoned Alexei Ramirez. Oh and Jenks should be better than last year (his career numbers indicate such), Pena has the potential to be better, Linebrink should be better (again, his stuff looked fine, control and mind-set were more of the issue...although by no means am I saying he'll be great, but he can't be as bad as he was last year, imo). So ya, I'd say there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic despite some of our obvious holes (no DH, no true top of the order hitter, could use another reliever). Bottom line, while we all focus on the negatives a lot cause we all know how many flaws last years club had, I think we also ignore the extreme positives and as a whole I really like our chances next season (for the above reasons), not to mention the fact that I think Kenny will be able to make some moves that give the club the necessary flexibility to make a few solid moves that fill holes.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) Oh I'll be around, but I should let you know that I am also in an open relationship with WSI. She doesn't mind. She better not. And just like over there, I'm sure I'll get into with some of you, sometimes some of you will hate me, somtimes I'll hate some of you, but there will be plenty of love to go around. I hope this team plays well so I don't have to be crabby. They will. It is easy to look at the holes the club has, but hard to ignore the fact that this club has a promising young nucleus, a tremendous starting rotation (which includes an ace), and almost zero players coming off of career years. Yes there are holes, but Kenny will do what he can to fix those holes and this club is going to be a whole heck of a lot better in 2010.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 12:43 PM) Honel had terrific upside but he got hurt. I pretty much agree with the rest though. I never liked Broadway or McCulloch and I generally don't like the idea of taking a closer prospect in the first round unless the FO thinks he'll work as a starter. If you had seen much of Honel in the minors, he really only had one plus pitch. The knuckle-curve he threw was extordinary, but his fastball wasn't a plus pitch and his change-up was solid. BA advertised him having a plus fastball, but the reality is he was a one pitch starter with a mediocre fastball that he didn't spot that well. He also got hurt. I believe people expected him to add velocity as he filled out, but it just wasn't the case. I remember one summer when he was being super hyped BA was talking a bout him sitting in the mid 90's, I go watch him pitch and he's throwing in the upper 80's, while ocassionally hitting 90/91.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 10:57 AM) A lot of people are going to take what JR said he wrong way. He's not saying we're not going to make any moves, he's just saying we already made our biggest commitment to Peavy. I think he's basically saying we don't have the budget to make another big splash and that ultimately if we make a splash it will be via the trade front. I still expect us to maybe sign one or two guys that ultimately get non-tendered or left out on the market. We could get more aggressive if the club is able to free up payroll via trade.

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws Another great article talking about the Sox off-season plans.

JR: We've Already Signed Our Free Agent By Jason Gage SoxNet Bob Nigthengale, USA, today is one of a handful within the media to report that the White Sox will be one of many teams to stay away from free agency (which officially begins tonight @ Midnight, EST).

Ya, I don't necessarily agree with those people. The good thing is, both have crazy high upside and thats a good thing. The next question is can our coaches help them develop and will they put in the time it takes to develop. I certainly hope so!!!

QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 10:26 AM) I forgot McCulloch. He's eligible too. See you.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 08:17 PM) Trayce is actually higher (again IF he figures it all out).. which could potentially make you wet. I'm going to have to disagree with that. Mitchell is just more polished and I can't say Trayce has a better skill-set, although he does have more power potential. Both have sick upsides, but both also have a lot to work on that puts the odds of them reaching that ceiling at much lower levels and it is why they both were outside of the top 10. I would say both have the pure potential of a top 10 or so pick though.

QUOTE (wsgdf_2 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 08:09 PM) It's Kevin Goldstein. He's not a typical Baseball Prospectus guy. He wrote for Baseball America in another life. So... the rankings aren't based purely on performance. He definitely takes performance into account, but with him it seems to be more of a combination of upside(tools) + readiness(performance). He does take age and level into account also. He's always loved Jared Mitchell - thought it was a GREAT pick when the Sox took him, so I'm not surprised he ranks him so high. Goldstein also follows the Sox quite a bit so I'd say he's a very very well educated observer of the Sox system and a good guy to listen to when he talks about Sox prospects.

I think shelby and long will be protected. Probably Gartrell and Cassel as well. I wouldn't protect those guys though as I don't think they'd stick on another major league team for a full-season. Long and Shelby have the best potential of that group. Omogrosso would be right there with Long/Shelby, but he's hurt and who knows if he'll recover.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:58 AM) Exactly. Obviously a trade for A-Gon isn't going to go down in the next day or two. But it is something that has been speculated on as an option, ever since the season had finished, because of the circumstances with San Diego's payroll, the Sox's need to improve their 1B/DH situation, and the two teams having dealt with each other only a couple of months ago with the Peavy deal, albeit there's a new GM in Hoyer there now. As for the Soxnet / Cowley situation, Cowley's entitled to his view but obviously many people around here and myself feel that he was overly harsh in doing so to say the least, but hey that's the nature of the business. Soxnet isn't mainstream, we hope one day that it becomes popular enough that it does so. And after making the post about the Gonzalez rumor, traffic on the site spiked significantly, so it has generated the site some publicity and extra viewing traffic which is great for the site. And obviously, every rumor that a message board or a blog posts is not always going to be correct. But the guys decided to post what they had heard from their sources, and for them to be dealt with by some members of the media (while some others have risen above that), has just been classless and really quite sad in the end. I want to just speak out and say we've held to ourselves many rumors over the years. This was one we felt worthy of talking about. It came from a good source, had details as to a few of the names that would be going (saying the Sox called about Adrian Gonzalez is one thing, its another to hear that three teams talked and bounced the idea of a 3 team trade off of each other). Again, we also re-iterated it would never happen. I'm willing to take whatever heat comes about from making a comment and I'll take heat in the future when I report what I heard on. It happens to anyone, blogger or media member, but I'd like to believe our sites and our long-term reputation is very well respected amongst Sox fans privy to whats going on in the web world. You'll never find a better source for Sox minor league news than on our network. And you'll never find a place that more often than not is ahead of the curve on Sox news (whether its getting the juice out of a rumor right when it happens, to us reporting something with our own sources, etc, etc). We might not talk to the org as often as others, but for anyone to say we don't have sources, I'd like people to go back and look at just one many real interesting days we've had. A day when the Sox were handling Brandon McCarthy. The radio was saying one thing, I was saying another. People outside of Soxtalk doubted us, little did they know I was 10000000% sure that my info was better than theirs because of who my info was coming from.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 10:31 PM) You know, I'm not sure if Joe or anyone else in the media lurks here. Personally, I appreciate message boards and a lot of times I find them sometimes entertaining, sometimes helpful. What, I think, some people don't like about message boards is how they can sometimes devolve into groupthink and "best insult" contests. I don't really care for that. I don't care for negativity, but I do love real, actual debate. Negativity is probably the one thing about message boards that can rub me the wrong way. Some of you know that I sometimes get the "company man" tag thrown at me on occasion (often on message boards), but it really isn't true. For those that truly listen to what I say during the shows, I'm not a pessimist, but I'm also really not an optimist. I'm just simply not a negative person. I don't think everything is always going to end up as bad as it could possibly end up, and I don't think that everything that can go wrong always will go wrong. I think sometimes negativity runs rampant on message boards. That's usually because of the passion posters have for their teams. This is true pretty much everywhere. This isn't always true, but sometimes it is. I love having level-headed discussion about the team and I've been participating over at WSI for a while (sorry, Mike!). I'll be back here as often as I can. I don't doubt that the contributors here have good intentions. Again, I think it's a matter of being careful in how rumors are presented because, as you can see, s***storms can follow. Hey Chris Welcome aboard. Glad you've stopped by and I appreciate your comments. I never thought the story I wrote would end up erupting like it did, but I will not take back what I said and it came from a very good source. I felt that the article I wrote was as honest as possible to the fact that they were prelim discussion. In fact, for those that followed this thread they will vouch for the fact that I kept re-iterating that I was reporting discussions had taken place recently between the three teams with those names being involved. I didn't go anywhere past there and I thought indicated throughout the article that that was the extent of the talks. I wanted Sox fans to know what we had heard and to discuss the possibilities. Basically put, prior to the article there was already a 20 page thread on the matter of Adrian Gonzalez but most of it (with the exception of the radio reports last week) was pure conjecture on Sox fans part. I felt the news we heard from our source put an end to the conjecture and at least linked the teams to discussions. I personally see Gonzalez as a great fit for a club with a budgeted payroll of 115-120M and since the Sox don't fit in that camp I think it would be hard to come up with a Gonzalez deal that makes sense (since you'd lose him in 2 years). I realize Gonzalez contract is cheap, but even if you acquire him you still have significant holes to fill and an extension to try and figure out, plus you know your going to have to eventually pay Quentin and Danks. If the club could move Jenks, Konerko, Linebrink it would be another story but that will be incredibly difficult to do (especially in the case of Linebrink). Well, maybe not difficult to trade them, but to get value back equal to there value with the Sox would be difficult (in the case of Jenks/Paulie). And in regards to Joe Cowley, I have stayed out of it aside from sending my email to him, because his comments were not attacking a rumor, they were attacking myself and other individuals and those comments were completely unprofessional and un-called for. If Joe wanted to find out about SoxNet, he could have shot me a quick email and I would have been happy to inform him of the sites history, the fact that the network of three (Soxtalk/FutureSox/SoxNet) sites gets ~12 million hits per month, has interviewed quite a few major and minor league players over the years, has an owner that turned down a job to go into scouting, has connections to Sox scouts, etc, etc, etc. I realize SoxNet might appear new, but the way he reacted and responded and criticized was completely un-professional and child-like. And I'll take all of the heat that comes with what I wrote and I'll stand by it, just as I've stood bye anything I've written (albeit poorly, as I'm not a columnist, but I am a baseball purist and a person that has a vast understanding of the game of baseball) and I'll continue moving forward in my goal of making this place the best of all fan run sites across the web!!!! And Rongey, once again, you are a class act and I look forward to seeing you around these parts more often!!!

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 02:15 PM) We have a winner, Gonzales is definitely a class act. So, theres short legs, but obviously Kenny likes Adrian Gonzalez, so theres still a chance. I think everyone knew this deal wasn't going to go-down ASAP and that the odds were ultimately remote. Does the media indicate that the Sox have interest in Figgins, etc. Absolutely. This really isn't much different than that, with the exception we are indicating that the three teams had a preliminary discussion on a potential trade. The discussion most likely occured at the GM Meetings and odds are it wasn't going to go anywhere (given all of the variables).

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 09:30 PM) Bulls win 101-87. This was basically the 1st time I got to see the Bulls this season for an extended portion of a game and the thing that stook out to me most was how much better the defense looked compared to years past. Yes, it was against a mediocre/bad/young Kings team, but we played extremely disciplined defense. They didn't leave their feet on pump fakes, they worked hard to get around screens, they hustled to every loose ball, they didn't allow any easy entry passes to the post, they communicated well on switches, and their man defense overall was very sound. It's definitely apparent that the coaches and players have put a great deal of focus on defensive effort, and it seems to be paying off a bit. There is a major difference in having a healthy Hinrich and Luol Deng getting significant minutes. Not to mention Salmons. All three are superior to the garbage defensive players we had on the court for significant stretches of last season, imo.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) Yet again, someone missing the point here - the main desired Sox pieces in that trade are NOT named Konerko. We should also point out that our initial source did not give any specifics regarding what the Angels would be trading, but did mention there would be salary relief coming. Now salary relief could imply cash coming from the Sox or the Angels sending a player with a contract. So if it is the Konerko piece that makes the rumor so bogus, than I find it very interesting that people ignore the fact that Konerko and cash or Konerko for a bad contract and prospects makes a lot of sense for the Angels. I'm I am the Angels, I'd consider dealing Brandon Wood, Gary Matthews Jr., and cash to the White Sox for Paul Konerko. Matthews has no value to the Angels, in fact he has negative value, and Konerko would give the Angels much positive value as a DH. The better question is if I'm the White Sox would I do that. And than from the Padres perspective, would you consider a deal (hypothetical) involving Brandon Wood, Jordan Danks, Hudson, and Flowers. Someone will tell me the Pads think they have there 3B of the future, but I'd counter and say that Wood is fully capable of playing 2B (if you can play SS, you can play 2B). So the Pads could fill 3 major holes in there everyday lineup with players ready who possess upside and get a potential #2/#3 starter who is ready for the majors. Ya, I'd say that could legitimately make sense for all parties. The team I'd question would be the White Sox who'd be giving up a whole hell of a lot for 2 years of Adrian Gonzalez.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 09:51 AM) Just admit it Jason. Your pseudonym is Mark Gonzalez. Haha.

Gonzalez really is a class act.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 09:30 AM) what does what mean? The short legs comment? Basically, there not much to the trade rumor. Basically it means exactly what we reported, prelim discussions happened and it sounds like nothing ultimately went past that. I think it is exactly what we've widely speculated. The key to me is that the three teams had prelim discussions and moved on for the time being. From the Angels perspective I am sure they have far bigger fish to fry at this point in time, but it doesn't mean Reagans wasn't willing to chat for a bit.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 09:27 AM) Gonzo gave props to SoxNet for the Peave trade. Said the AG trade has "very short legs" What exactly did he say, I'm curious?

Another important thing for everyone to realize is the viewership Soxtalk gets. It is not some small potatoe publication, the site has an incredibly high volume of traffic and a lot of media power. We aren't just some small blog that has no history of being accurate in the past. We are one of the largest independent fan run team specific message board, with sister blogs, and connections. Just think, Soxtalk's message board traffic is greater than the boards of Whitesox.com, Local Media, & ESPN.com combined.

Badass..congrats Evan!!

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 06:25 PM) Now that it's over, I can honestly say it was one of the top-3 HIMYM episodes for me. Loved all of Barney's "plays." And the blonde was smoking. Ya, definitely one of the best HIMYM episodes of all time.

QUOTE (flavum @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 03:04 PM) Morel 4-6, homer Danks has 3 hits as well.