Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 09:09 PM) This team looks like it's had a disaster of a training camp. With Rose and the guys they do have, they'll be good enough to win 30+ games, but if Rose misses the first week and takes a while to get back to game shape, then we can pretty much write off the first month+ of the season since there's the circus trip. On top of that, right now Luol Deng looks terrible, and Salmons and Hinrich have been missing practices/games. Noah's had some really solid games in the preseason but has also been inconsistent. Maybe i overstated things a bit, but this training camp has really troubled me. Wasn't Salmons missing practice due to family stuff (wifes pregnancy)? Deng is coming back and improving with each game and is looking better than he did last year.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 01:47 PM) People view defense simply as a person got to a ball and booted it or threw it away as an error. Watching Nix he has better reaction time then Getz and thus gets to balls that Getz does not. These are not errors in as much as simply plays that were not made. I give Nix the benefit of the doubt as he was also a rookie and moved around to 5 different positions Getz can only play one. Both need to improve and I think the one that shows the most in spring gets the nod or it is a straight platoon both have weaknesses that make them equally average at this point at best. Getz has played 3B before. Not saying he'd make a good one but if CJ Retheford eventually develops Getz does have the ability to play multiple positions defensively and thus move into a utility role (not saying he'd be a plus defender at multiple positions, more that he's capable of doing it).

The Sox will look at moving the following guys (not saying they will) because ultimately to do some more re-tooling of the lineup salary needs to be moved and these are the guys that I think they look at or even consider (although Buehrle is a clear long-shot). In no way am I saying they have to move these guys: Bobby Jenks Paul Konerko Scott Linebrink Mark Buehrle

Very impressive.

SoxNet's Review on Getz 2009 Campaign

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 01:37 PM) The only way it's possible is if we have some backup plan for dumping a contract. Even than, the Sox already have a ton of money invested in the rotation so is moving Buehlre and than taking his cash and spending it on an unproven guy like Chapman all that worth it? Maybe, but I think it would depend heavily on what else the Sox got for Buehrle and even than there is no denying the fact that you'd be taking on a massive financial "risk".

The only bright side with Linebrink is the fact that he was throwing hard down the stretch. His issues had more to do with poor command and a lack of confidence in his secondary stuff than it did health. And because of that, I wouldn't be at all shocked to see Linebrink rebound next year and turn into one of the club's MVP's in what I think will be a promising 2010.

What is everyone else's take on the 2009 season Linebrink had and more importantly what the future holds for Liney and the Sox?

White Sox 2009: Scott Linebrink By SoxNet.net Rule #1 in off-season free-agency signings: when it comes to relievers, tread lightly. Hopefully White Sox GM Kenny Williams will follow this rule in the future, thanks to Scott Linebrink. Linebrink was signed by the White Sox pre-2008 to a four-year, $19 million deal. Though not a lot in baseball money, it's a long-term deal for a reliever. And while Linebrink had his moments, those moments have been scarce since mid-2008. What's odd about Linebrink's struggles is that while with most struggling pitchers you can point to...Rest of the Article

I remember when Soxfest was fun.

We love you Gordon!!!

I'm worried about this weekend's game, Iowa hasn't won at Michigan State in 14 years (dating back to 1995).

Thats awesome. It says something when you hit a bomb off a guy like Stras.

The Sox might have made a call but there is absolutely no way they are about to drop that kind of coin on Chapman. Now if Chapman doesn't ultimately get it, than the Sox might listen but I highly doubt a team like the Red Sox, Cards or Yankees won't get involved (I look at the Angels as a potential sleeper candidate).

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 01:15 PM) My god, you are an arrogant jackass. You picked two examples of where it was inaccurate. Want me to find the many examples of where it is accurate? And is it impossible that he had an off year defensively? Maybe he had a nagging injury he was playing through. Buh...Bye. And don't think it was just you, others were suspended....but you never play nice, never debate, its just attack after attack and that is intolerable and unacceptable.

Ya, I'm gonna be watching.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 12:46 PM) To defend him...it's gonna take a long time to get back to the explosiveness a DT needs when you have a knee injury like that. If by long time, you mean never, you are correct. I'm not saying it is his fault that he's not playing good, he just physically doesn't have the ability to be an upper echelon DT and unfortunately for him we are paying him to be one so when he doesn't perform like one he's gonna get called out. He'll be gone at the end of the year. I used to say Urlacher would be gone too, but given the few draft picks we have, the only way he's gone is if Roach/Williams step-up this year. If they do, Urlacher will be traded (mabye the Bears try to get something for Harris too) and than use there picks to replenish the oline as well as pick up another safety. The dline will be addressed with the Gaines Adams move and the current options for at least one more year. The Bears are also going to have to get creative in there attempt to improve the oline and that creativity might just be shelling out major bucks for a FA.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) Rob Mackoviak really wasn't that bad. He shouldn't of been playing CF, but he worked his ass of their anyway. I'd say there's little chance of De Aza being better then Rob. That's actually not that bad a thing anyway. Mack was an asset and the Sox just didn't have the personnel to use him properly. Ozzie was forced to play him in CF because he didn't believe in Brian Anderson. I disagreed with the move at the time because I just didn't see Mack being anything other than a horrendous every-day defensive CFer so I questioned what real value we gained by starting him over BA. De Aza could be a great pinch-runner and defensive sub who maybe figures it out and becomes more but in no way are the Sox counting him on being anything other than a bench player and he has the tools to be a pretty valuable one, imo. I would be quite content with our 4th and 5th Of'ers being Kotsay and De Aza. Maybe the Sox go crazy and carry Kotsay, De Aza, and Pods. Either way I don't think Pods or Kotsay should be looked at as anything more than back-ups that should get 300 or so ab's.

QUOTE (scenario @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:51 AM) 2009 UZR for MLB 2Bs... Second Base: 1. Dustin Pedroia 10.7 2. Placido Polanco 9.1 3. Chase Utley 8.7 4. Felipe Lopez 5.9 4. Freddy Sanchez 5.9 4. Ian Kinsler 5.9 7. Brandon Phillips 5.1 8. Clint Barmes 4.3 9. Aaron Hill -0.8 10. Jose Lopez -1.5 11. Kaz Matsui -1.8 12. Chris Getz -2.8 13. Orlando Hudson -3.8 14. Brian Roberts -4.1 15. David Eckstein -5.1 The fact that O-Dug and Brian Roberts are that low on the list saws a lot right there. Hell, Aaron Hill is a negative .8. There is nothing on that list that makes me think UZR is at all reliable. In fact, if anything else, it tells me that UZR is a joke.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:45 AM) He has bad range.... He has a UZR of -5.8. I'm sure you don't believe in UZR though. Please explain how Getz is a good defensive player. Let me guess, you use your eyes? I don't believe in UZR being an end all be all. Just look at the funky UZR's of tons of guys that are very good defensive players.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 11:30 AM) 2009 ALDS: 6 runs in 3 games 2006 ALDS: 7 runs in 3 games 2003 ALDS: 6 runs in 4 games Yep, it's the pitching. 2009 they were missing a key cog of there offense, Justin Morneau and went up against one of the best pitchers in baseball CC, and a pretty good pitcher Burnett. They also gave up 15 runs in 3 games. 2006: Barry Zito (the pre-Giants version, ie, the Cy Young version) and Dan Haren were tough. The twins also stranded an absolute ton of guys in the series sans the Zito start. So they hit just fine. Also, they gave up 16 runs in 2006 in just 3 games. 2003: They went up against the younger, excellent Andy Pettite a dominant Roger Clemens and a pretty good David Wells. They also gave up 15 runs in the 3 losses and won the only game where they had solid pitching (1 run performance which they won 3-1).

Very interesting. Hopefully this works out an they generate a lot more revenue. The one thing I wonder is what is the impact if you invest a lot of money and the company bellies up. Do we see franchise revenues take a hit? Either way sounds pretty cool and promising, but I was just curious about the other side.

QUOTE (son of a rude @ Oct 22, 2009 -> 10:55 AM) Ugh, why would you want players like that? Nick Punto! Oh yeah! There's a reason the twins never make it past first round... Ya, they don't have the quality pitching to make it farther.

So if Derrick Rose misses substantial time, are there any top picks we can hope fall our way?

The Phils should hope the Angels at least make it interesting, if not win. Basically put, if I'm the Phils and I'm going to have a shot, I need the Yanks to go 7 games which would mean you only see CC twice and it wouldn't be until Game 3 or so.