CWSGuy406

JimH, do you really think Beato even makes it to #29? I think BA has ranked him 13th overall or something like that. His stuff sounds electric, and if he does happen to slide all the way down to #29, you have to take him, no question. BTW -- Cheat talked about this on his blog, but I'm pissed that MLB is now making 'recommendations' as to what kind of money to give to Draft-and-Follows. The D-&-F system sounded like one where, if you played your cards right, you could grab some high-round talent without necessarily having top picks.

QUOTE(dasox24 @ May 31, 2006 -> 10:50 PM) I think so. If he's the best player available, why not? Plus, with Fields likely moving to OF or 1B, then it's not exactly like we're loaded with 3B prospects. And, if he does develop well, but we don't have a spot for him in a few years, then we can use him as trade bait. It's all about taking the best player available. We can't worry about who is or isn't already in the farm system -- if everything goes well, that's up to KW to figure out two-three years down the road. ------------------------------------- I want to throw a name out there: Pedro Beato. He's a 17th rounder from the '05 draft (or around there) that the Mets didn't sign. He was a D-and-F, and he's said to have a fastball in the mid-90s (touching 96), a nasty sinker, along with featuring a good slider and changeup. He's from the Dominican -- any chance he falls to #29? His stuff seems real nasty.

Oh fun, b****ing about the media. Can't we keep this "tradition" at WSI?

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 02:24 AM) i dunno, a lot of announcers said he was the best ss. the numbers are good enough when ur playing great D Izturis career line: .261/.295/.338. End.of.discussion.

This is really, really bad timing for the Royals. It needed to be done, yes, but it needed to be done about two months ago. A week before the draft? That's sort of screwing Moore over a little bit, as he now has six days to prepare for a draft that is rather large in the scheme of things for the Royals franchise. Let's play "You're the GM" for a moment. With the first overall pick, who are you taking? Miller? Hochevar? Somebody else?

Question for anyone who feels "qualified" enough to answer: Now that the Sox have a little more money to play with, does that change their stance on drafting Boras clients? I ask this because it looks like Luke Hochevar will once again be in the draft. There's another guy with Top 15 talent, but who will fall for signability issues. Since the Sox don't have particularly good "positioning" in this draft, they could really make good by drafting some of the good players that fall for $$$ issues.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ May 23, 2006 -> 05:49 AM) Angels aren't falling flat, they are playing about as good as they are (ie s***ty). Yeah. They're pitching has been a little surprising to me -- I thought Weaver would be a decent bottom of the rotation pitcher (ie ERA between 4.50-5.00), and same for Santana. The offense, OTOH, has been bad now for the past year or so, and it's not going to get any better. Garrett Anderson just isn't a very good offensive player anymore. They don't have a whole lot of offensive threats -- Vlad (duh), but beyond that, nothing. Rivera has his moments, and Figgins and Kennedy are nice complimentary players, but that offense is not one to be feared. I know Stoneman has been ripped, but I think he made the right choice in not dealing away guys like Kendrick, Morales, and Wood for someone like Manny. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to see Anahiem try to get a good prospect or two for Kennedy (among others). I'm sure the Mets would definitely be interested...

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ May 23, 2006 -> 05:41 AM) His slider is flat and only effective when a righty chases one thrown at his knees. I agree. It's not really a 'biting' slider, and certainly not something I'd characterize as being nasty. The only place that pitch should be thrown is on the outside corner (to lefties or righties), and down and in to righties (and I'm talking in the dirt). He's got a helluva fastball though. Pretty straight, but you can be straight when your hitting 97-99 with ease.

QUOTE(JackTalkThai @ May 23, 2006 -> 02:02 AM) Justin Verlander is straight up filthy. Going on 15 scoreless innings (ERA is now 2.79) and kid was hitting 99 with ease on the gun in the 7th inning. He has absolutely unreal stuff....for anyone let alone a rookie. The only question is how many innings does his arm have in it this year. I don't think he's pitched many more than around 120 or so. He pitched right around 130 innings last year, so yes, in the second half, you're going to have to tell us how Verlander adjusts when he gets to 125 IP on the season. I'm not saying he won't adjust, but it'll be interesting to see how much (if at all) of a toll the longer season will take on his arm. He has the easiest heat in the majors. I mean, with absolutely no effort, the guy is a legit 97, 98. This division has some arms coming up that'll make teams all around the league cry -- McCarthy, Liriano, Verlander -- not to mention the already established guys like Contreras, Santana, etc etc.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ May 22, 2006 -> 09:17 PM) Its a risk Keith, but go down tonight, and try to buy tickets at like 6:20, 6:30. I think you should be able to grab some from the box office.... On the White Sox ticket exchange, there's a good pair I'm looking at -- pricey, but worth it. If not, I'll just do that.

Is tonight officially sold out? I can't seem to find a ticket... Anybody wanna help me out?

I was amazed that Mackowiak didn't get to that ball. After seeing a replay, it looked like he was shading Barrett to right-center and still didn't get there. I'm with Yas -- if Anderson is out there, he puts that one in his back pocket, no problem. Really can't put a whole lot on Ozzie, other than not having BA in in the 8th. We put our best reliever out there and he didn't get the job done.

Tru, that t-shirt actually made me laugh a little bit. It's one of the more clever tees out there. I didn't mean to lecture you, I just don't like when people buy those shirts. A couple of years ago, yeah, I probably got a kick out of them, but it wore off. Your choice.

If your such a big Sox fan, buy a pro-Sox t-shirt, not an anti-Cubs t-shirt. By buying one of those, all your doing is contributing to the stereotype that Sox fans care more about the Cubs losing than the Sox winning.

I agree that Uribe has been bad, but Cintron is definitely not the answer. He's like Mackowiak -- solid bench player, but when placed into a starting role, your in trouble. I can almost guarantee his range doesn't touch Uribe's (nor does his arm, today's play withstanding), and his bat is marginally better (career OPS+ of 85 to Uribe's 82). Oh, and Anderson probably does three somerrsaults and a flip while catching Barrett's fly ball in his back pocket. Really, really important to have a good defender at CF and SS.

QUOTE(He_Gawn @ May 21, 2006 -> 04:10 AM) Played against Kyle last year when we were traveling in Texas. Kid can flat out bring it. Hes under 6 foot and can hit up to 99 on the gun. Supposed to be one of the best Wide Recievers in Texas too. I've heard that there are major, major attitude problems with Drabek. I also read on minorleagueball.com (Sickels site -- pure speculation) that steroids is a word that was brought up with him (Drabek) and his teammates. But, back to the main point -- anybody know anything about Tillman or Colvin?

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ May 20, 2006 -> 03:34 AM) It's been like that for years now, hasn't it? It's definitely worse than year's past. There's a clear limp in his stride. Nevertheless, I hope to be there on Monday to give a big cheer for #35.

Since it is a subscriber only article, I'd rather not post who Callis has all thirty teams drafting (go to minorleagueball.com if you really want to see all 30), but he has the Sox taking Chris Tillman, a high school pitcher (righty) out of California. He also says the Sox have some interest in Clemson OFer Tyler Colvin, along with other guys (no first name provided, so the first names might be wrong) Jordan Walden (who can hit 99 MPH) and Kasey Kiker. Thoughts?

As bad as Brian Anderson has been at the plate, I'm sure as hell glad the Sox didn't fork over Ray Liotta and Sean Tracey (or something similar) for Juan Pierre...

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 18, 2006 -> 05:00 AM) The big difference is that Bonds is about to rewrite the history books. What important milestone is Mike Morse on the verge of passing? Morse still cheated, though. Did the same thing that Bonds (supposedly) did. QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 18, 2006 -> 05:00 AM) Also. What is this "agenda" you claim the Bonds haters have? I was talking about Springer. IIRC, this wasn't the first time he hit Bonds. I personally think that Springer just doesn't like the guy.

BTW -- I'm not doing any crying or any midnight vigils for Bonds. I just shake my head when I see something like, "Gosh, I wish it would've hit him in the eye and blinded him!", stuff of that sort. It is what it is. It was a beaning from a guy with an agenda. It wasn't "establishing the inner half" -- you don't do that in a 10 run game (or whatever the score was -- it wasn't close, as I recall).

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 18, 2006 -> 04:43 AM) Intentional beaning has been around for years. It is part of the game as much as hard slides, take out slides, suicide squeezes and running over the catcher on a close play at home. Intentional beaning is a means that has been quite successful in dealing with issues in-house -- between the players themselves. It was a plunking -- Bonds got the message and it was heard loud and clear, cheat and face the consequences on the field. This is where my problem lies. Bonds takes the fall for a rather large (supposedly) group of guys that also 'cheated'. I'm not saying that what Bonds might have done is right -- I want you to understand that. But he's not the only one. Would Russ Springer throw at Mike Morse if he had the chance? Afterall, he's a cheater too, and one that actually got caught... I think there's more of an agenda here than just Bonds being a (supposed) cheater.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 18, 2006 -> 04:35 AM) Bonds actually confronting the guy would be the first gutsy thing he's done in a long while. I'd actually commend him for that but the news media that makes issues out of non-issues (such as this douchebag on douchebag plunking) would try to lambast him. I merely said that if Bonds didn't like it and he was so outraged and feeling that it was so unfair, he's just 60 feet away. I think Bonds handled the situation as well as he could have, especially considering he wasn't just thrown at once, but five times in a row (blatantly). Really, he would've made more of a problem by pointing the bat, charging, etc etc -- he didn't do so.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 18, 2006 -> 04:32 AM) I don't recall LCR saying anything like that. All I recall him saying was "he was 60 feet away". Dont put words in the guys mouth. LCR goes on to talk about this being about "pitching inside". I'm sorry, there's a difference between pitching inside -- establishing the inner half of the plate as yours -- and intentionally trying to hit the guy. But, you are correct, he didn't say what I typed. It was more a general comment towards people here in general, and LCR was the one who received the 'quote'.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 18, 2006 -> 03:57 AM) Couldn't have have happened to a bigger asshole. If Bonds really didn't like it, Springer was just 60 feet 6 inches away. And if he would've charged the mound, he would have been called out by fans and media alike as a punk for going after a guy five inches & thirty pounds lighter than him. Funny how this double standard works with Bonds -- if he charges, he's a big meany, but since he doesn't charge, he's a puss who deserved it.