CWSGuy406

I'll be positive for a second here. So long as the Sox land Cameron, they figure to be a good deal better than last year, despite much of the doom and gloom. As pointed out at a post on SouthSideSox, the Sox were beyond terrible at four (!) positions on the diamond last year -- SS, 3B, LF and CF. I don't think people understand just how terrible we were at those positions. From the link above, Sox left-fielders hit for a .731 OPS last year. From there it only gets worse. Sox shortstops combined for a .659 OPS, Sox third-basemen combined for a .642 OPS and -- shield your eyes -- Sox centerfielders hit for a .628 (//puke -- thanks "Ersty") OPS. With that in mind, you're looking at huge upgrades at each of those four spots, especially if the Sox add Cameron. At shortstop Cabrera figures to be a 40-to-75 point improvement over what we had out there last year; Quentin figures to be a 20-to-50 point upgrade; Fields figures to be a 110-to-160 point upgrade; and if the Sox grab Cameron, that's another .150 point imrovement. Since I don't think the rest of the lineup figures to regress much (maybe Thome, but I'd guess that's made up for in slight improvement from Richar, Dye and Konerko), the Sox are looking at a much better lineup. Obviously I don't mention a whole lot about the pitching -- I'd guess there's regression-to-the-mean for the bullpen (ie better results), but that's probably going to be offset by the loss of Garland. Even with all this, though, I can't see how anyone could say the Sox are a 90-win team. And even 90 wins doesn't get you sniffing the playoffs, so...

QUOTE(Mr. Showtime @ Dec 17, 2007 -> 02:34 AM) 45 shots, 1 goes in. We're on some kind of a roll! I don't know what the Hawks have done, but the horseshoe is so far away from that team right now it isn't even funny. They had the 40+ shots plus another five or so that were deflected wide. They completely outplayed Florida for the first two periods. Florida had two scoring chances and, sure enough, scored on both. The third period was just frustration with Florida trapping like crazy and every Hawk player trying to do a bit too much -- at that point I don't really blame them, though, as they had 30+ shots heading into the third. This sucks hard right now. They haven't played terribly over this past stretch of games yet are still losing and are falling back in the West.

Tonight was a real sleeper of a game -- not a whole lot of energy on either side. The Hawks had their chances to, at the very least, get a point out of this one. Kane, Ruutu and Sopel all had point-black opportunities to give the Hawks a second goal but beyond that there wasn't a whole lot. Havlat was also completely invisible tonight -- did he take a shot all night ? //goes and checks box score-- Nope -- not one shot tonight for #24. Hopefully they'll come out a little stronger tomorrow, gotta get two against Florida. It'll be my (triumphant!) return to the UC so I'm looking forward to it. Losing points like last night sucks though. The Western conference is finally starting to spread out a little bit and unfortunately we're spinning our wheels.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 11:56 PM) I think the Dbacks are a better time now than they were heading into the day. The upgrade from Livan to Haren is substantial, while the downgrade from Valverde to Pena as closer with Qualls in the bullpen isn't that bad. Webb + Haren in a short series? Damn. And if, by chance, they keep RJ healthy enough so he can pitch game three? The Cubs best get Brian Roberts AND a new SS, because even that might not be enough against that D'Back staff.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 04:30 AM) Burish is a good energy guy and will drop them, but he is pretty worthless offensively and has bad hands. A guy like Blunden or Brouwer should be getting a look in his spot, IMO. At least compare and contrast the guys. 1 point in 30 games is kind of hard to do. The problem is that we have two Adam Burish-types on the roster in he and Lapointe, and you certainly don't need two of those types (I'll leave the debate about whether you even need one up to somebody else). Not that I'm looking past the rest of this season, but next season will be so nice with so many mediocre players coming off the books -- Samsonov, Zyuzin, MagJo, Lapointe and Perreault will all be gone. That's three spots to be filled by the likes of Skille, Bolland (permanently -- even though he only has a handful of points, I've enjoyed Bolland's play.), Brouwer, Blunden etc.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 06:07 AM) Also Dimitri Young and his .869 OPS. The list goes on. If you were to pair Ross Gload and Josh Phelps -- neither of which would cost a whole lot (in fact I think Phelps was DFA'd) -- you'd have a player who would be no worse than average and who'd cost less than $4 million. There's a bunch of bench/AAAA-type sluggers who aren't particularly great but wouldn't kill you and, more importantly, would allow you to spend elsewhere.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 05:05 AM) Is it? When you consider the "average" production of the first base position, can you think of one player who may be available that would be above that average? Why else would the Giants be interested in such a trade if that was the case? Secondly, I'm not sure Fields is ever going to be the 3b he needs to be. And if that is the case, why not use our in-house resources most efficiently? He'd probably be a little below average, but Morgan Ensberg could put up non-awful production at first (or third). Last year two first-base types were found off the scrap-heap in what turned out to be fantastic pickups in Carlos Pena and Jack Cust.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 04:12 AM) By not signing Eckstein and signing Uribe? You guys are serious in that you'd prefer Eckstein and Uribe over what we have now? Not so much Uribe and Eckstein, but Uribe, Eckstein and Garland rather than Cabrera -- yes. That being said, DA is right in that Eckstein wouldn't have taken a one year, $4.5 deal a month ago. At that point he was still looking for relatively big money. And I didn't want Eckstein, but in the hypothetical situation where they could've gotten him on a similar deal, yeah -- I'd take him for a year. My big fear was the years he was going to get.

QUOTE(Frankensteiner @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 01:45 AM) I would gladly take Eckstein at $4.5M for one season AND Jon Garland as our #3 starter/trading chip over Cabrera. Plus, we wouldn't be worried about adding a leadoff hitter. I agree. Keeping Uribe around then would've also been acceptable, as he would be a great match with Eckstein as a late-inning defensive replacement.

http://www.hockeyfights.com/fights/39019 Ruutu hit and subsequent fights. Byfuglien hit. That's 500+ pounds of man coming together right there, and Byfuglien didn't even move an inch backwards.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 01:06 AM) Keith, please drop the attitude. When he drops his demeaning attitude I'll do the same.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 14, 2007 -> 12:52 AM) Dude, you're hilarious... makes no sense at all - that average meant average... I truly must be from another planet. I agree, you aren't making a whole lot of sense. I use the term "league average hitter" all the time and have never ever had someone think that I was talking about batting average -- you just can't take "batting average" from it. It's not that difficult. So if I were to say a guy is an "average hitter", that means I'm talking about batting average? Of course not -- the definition of "average" is "a quantity, rating, or the like that represents or approximates an arithmetic mean." If I wanted to talk about batting average, I would've clarified it with the word "batting" in front of it. Are you really so proud to admit that you just completely screwed up in reading what I wrote? That difficult, ehh? Because like I said -- nobody has EVER taken "league average hitter" to mean I'm talking about batting average. Congrats for being the first, I guess. You're just being ignorant at this point as well, because obviously batting average is the first statistic I think about when talking about hitters (read: that's sarcasm, in case I'm not clear enough. S-A-R-C-A-S-M). I guess I forgot that there's actually still people who think a lot about that stat.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) I read, and took from it the most apparent meaning. league average, I figured, meant league AVERAGE. How silly of me. You thought I meant average from "league average hitter"? That wouldn't make any sense at all in the context of how I wrote it -- none at all. If I wanted to write league average batting average, I would've wrote league average batting average. So yes, that was extremely silly of you.

QUOTE(SnB @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 08:27 PM) School just got a big he gawn and stone cold stunner from snb I just pounded a coors light in honor of the texas rattlesnake. Haha, that's absolutely fantastic.

That's the only mention of Cameron I'd seen -- he's really the only good CFer left, as he'll provide a league average bat and average-ish (maybe a little better) defense. He's also a fantastic baserunner. Lofton can't handle the position defensively anymore. So basically, if they don't land Cameron I'd just rather see them go with an Anderson/Owens platoon. And hey, if they landed Cameron I'd be probably as excited as you could possibly be for a season that will most likely end up in failure (failure in the sense that they're not *truly* rebuilding and they're not good enough to make the playoffs). I believe the Sox had four spots last season where they got replacement level production -- CF, LF, 3B and SS. Even getting average players in those spots -- which Cabrera, Fields and Quentin all figure to be, to some degree or another -- will be a huge boost.

Weeeeeee! Fantastic -- no mention of the more talented options of Brian Anderson and Ryan Sweeney. Nope, Jerry Owens, the catalyst who'll hit .270/.315/.330. But he'll steal bases and run fast -- boy will he run fast.

My question would be quite simple: When the draft rolls around this June, can we get a promise from you and the organization that you will take the best player available at eight, regardless of price and who said player's client is? Or, for the second year in a row, will we pass up on a superior talent just so we can continue to play by Bud's rules that none of the other top teams play by?

Havlat's goal was neat. He just walked in from the side by the goal-line and basically got to pick his spot. Also, it's time for MagJo to go. BRUTAL turnover in the nuetral zone, no-look pass and it almost cost the Hawks a goal. Crap -- Bolland breakaway is saved.

Ah okay -- Burish got a game misconduct. That makes sense as his fight was the second one. Kings score a goal and Seabrook and Thorton start throwing punches over the net. The Hawks better pound this team. They're terrible. More fisticuffs as the period ends. Damn. I have a relatively big final tomorrow an have to make a decision here. f***ing economics.

I missed the penalty announcements -- I think Ruutu got a game misconduct.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 02:02 AM) Hawks are up 3-0 about 16 minutes into the game. Tuomo and Marty both scored on strong wristers right out in front of the goal and Keith just added another on a break away assisted by Kane. Aubin just got pulled. Pretty exciting start to this game, a lot of scoring opportunities early. And two fights, starting because Ruutu completely LIT UP Vizhnovski (sp?)-- Ruutu just beat some major ass, and Burish probably got a W in his fight.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 13, 2007 -> 12:14 AM) Now that's funny. You GUARANTEE that a rookie, who hit .278 in his 2nd half callup and .267 on the year, will NEVER hit for a .268 average? Saying you don't think he'll do better than that I can understand. Guaranteeing he will never add .001 to his average during his entire career is just hilarious. Hey Northside -- can you be a pal and try actually reading what I wrote? Pretty please? I said this: "I guarantee Jerry Owens will NEVER have a season where he's a league average hitter or better in a significant amount of at-bats. " I'm sorry that you still believe when I say "league average hitter", you think that means batting average.

At this point all I can do is laugh. I have a somewhat wierd mind, but I'm cracking up histerically right now. Why? I'm thinking of the whole offseason and the moves that Kenny Williams has made, and in the background of my mind I have Benny Hill music playing. Like, take this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0Hp4Ed4qDA and then in your mind think about the things that have been said, things that have been done. "This only puts Detroit in a better position to compete with us." Scott Linebrink! Four years! No trade clause! We're competing in 2008, come hell or high water! All to Benny Hill music. And hilarity ensues. It's really true -- Benny Hill music does make everything better.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 07:35 PM) Owens put up a .340 OBP in his 2nd callup last season, and his walk rate improved markedly after his first month. If he could hit .280 or so, a .350+ OBP is within reach. He isn't Jim Thome when it comes to taking walks, but the numbers don't like; he is roughly as patient out of the leadoff spot as quite a few major league speed type leadoff hitters, including guys like Lofton, Podsednik, etc. Kenny Lofton now or Kenny Lofton in his prime? Either way you're wrong. Lofton -- at the age of 40 -- was still a league average hitter, with his ~.370 OBP and .415 slugging. I guarantee Jerry Owens will NEVER have a season where he's a league average hitter or better in a significant amount of at-bats.

On the bright side, there's no way anyone can now argue that the Sox have the WORST farm system in baseball... At this point it's no question. Also, Jason, the Dodgers didn't sign Andruw Jones to play a corner OF spot -- CF is his.