SoxAce

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:50 PM) I have a hard time believing that to be the case, and if he did, he substituted food for the alcohol. And I know this looks like a "Jenks is a fatass" post, but that man looks heavier and heavier with each passing season. There has to be something to that. Maybe he is a vegetarian..

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 11:12 AM) Partiers? Off of the top of my head, that is just one legitimate reason for its validity. Ya, but didn't Bobby quit drinking? Those stats remind me of BobDylan's legendary Gordon Beckham sucks in the day thread.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 02:40 PM) In 2006 when Sean Tracey failed to hit Hank Blalock after AJ had been hit twice. I was gonna say 2000 (we were close in 2006 from that incident) but I know it was not in Ozzie's tenure.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:26 PM) Jones makes me wanna vomit He is terrible, but for 500K, he is doing basically what he did last year at a bargain.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:10 PM) Cowley's tweets get him mentioned on Deadspin His response about 5 minutes ago.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 02:28 PM) There have been several reports that have been published by a number of different people that state that Rizzo didn't want Jackson and that the Sox were 3rd in the Dunn race, and that by the end of July, the Sox weren't even interested in Dunn anymore. Rizzo wouldn't come down from Beckham. I'm also not saying he doesn't have value, but you have to consider what type of hitter he can truly bring in. It would also almost certainly be a trade similar to the Garland trade of trading for a player with 1 year left on his deal. Another trade with the Angels, this time for Abreu, could be a possibility. I'm not sure Williams ever did attempt to trade Jackson again. I'm pretty sure Williams traded for Jackson with full intention to keep him. You are looking at this in a vacuum, where one #63 rated prospect is perfectly equal to another, and they have to be better than the #64 and have to be worse than #62. That's quite obviously not the case. Aaron Poreda had a "pedigree" simply because he was a 1st round pick. He was also left handed and could throw the ball pretty hard. I honestly don't remember being all that enamored with him in the first place (because I wanted the Sox to pick Porcello, and I didn't like the Poreda pick at all), and I realized that he looked like he might be a decent prospect. He didn't have off the charts peripherals by any stretch of the imagination, and I don't seem to recall him ever really developing a good breaking pitch (which was vital to him performing in the big leagues). It doesn't look like he ever did. Daniel Hudson was a 5th round pick, so he didn't have the "pedigree" that Poreda did. He was also right handed, and there were several big shot writers who questioned his stuff, though when I saw him pitch, I saw that he had good velocity and movement on his pitches. The biggest question for Hudson has always been his performance against good left handed hitters. Dan Hudson also pitched at 5 levels last year, and, though the levels of success varied, he was still very successful at each stop. So, no, just because Aaron Poreda was the #2 prospect and was higher rated than Hudson, I don't have to think he was as big of a prospect. I had no problem with the Sox dealing Poreda when they did, but I would have been upset had they dealt Hudson. Beyond that, you have to look at the return these guys acquired. When Poreda was dealt, it was for a potential Cy Young winning pitcher who was under team control for another 3 seasons (4 if you include the option year), and he wasn't even the centerpiece of the deal. When Hudson was dealt, he was traded for a starter who had an ERA of 5 in the NL who had 1 year in his entire career with an ERA below 4 and, though his peripherals improved in that year, there was still plenty of reason to believe that he was lucky to keep his ERA that low, and on top of that, the pitcher is only locked up for 1 more year. --- I can use foresight and sound reasoning to look at the numbers and realize that it's entirely possible that the Sox could deal one of these 5 starters in the offseason, but that only leaves another hole on the 25-man roster that needs to be filled. In the meantime, I can see that the Sox have about $88 million tied up between 14 players and I realize that is also a problem. I can also look and realize that there is not a whole lot on the farm that can be dealt for good value at the moment. Of the White Sox top 10 prospects going into the season according to BA, Brent Morel is probably the player who has improved his value the most. Even he is considered to be just a good defensive 3Bman who will be an average at best offensive 3Bman, and though that has value, it's not the centerpiece of a deal to acquire a big bat. The Sox have quite a few holes to fill next season, not much money to work with, and not a ton of trading chips to deal. Because of that, I felt that Dan Hudson was going to be a big part of the transition period for the White Sox in the next 2-3 years while the Sox filled their other holes with the money and any other remaining chips they had to deal. Instead, I feel that Williams made a very short-sighted deal in trading Dan Hudson for Edwin Jackson, and because of that move, it's going to be much more difficult for the White Sox to fill out their roster with a competitive team next year, and I imagine the Sox will have another small sell-off, similar to what they did before the 2009 season when they dealt Swisher and Vazquez. In the words of Stacey King... STOP IT! STOP IT! DON'T DO HIM LIKE DAT!!!

"I wipe my own ass" -Big Daddy

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 01:45 PM) Strange considering that Vanderbilt is such a conservative school. He's a smart kid... that makes (or used to, haven't followed him in quite some time) some of the dumbest decisions. He isn't Dukes as far as attitude/overall craziness though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 01:29 PM) I mean why? Injury? Out of options? Shot his girlfriend? From what I remember about him, more than likely breaking every clubhouse rule in the book.

Quentin.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 11:01 AM) Eh, I only saw one brief video of it, maybe I needed to see it from 10 angles. But it looked like he knew he was dead, and tried to do something about it. That's exactly what it was. It wasn't a force out play. Sure he shouldn't have done it (dirty or not, most people would just slow down to get tagged or slide to get under the tag) but it was legal.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 10:22 AM) We will destroy them tonight. I guarantee this. Awwww sheeeeet! We need more of these from people. (more-so the guaranteed Vs from Jason)

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 11:49 AM) Pitcher Jeff Sues signed and sent to Winston-Salem. Former Pirates farmhand and Vanderbilt pitcher. Was #7 prospect in their system as recently as 2009 according to Baseball America. I remember him. Isn't he like the pitching version of Elijah Dukes (cept not as worse off the field)?

Final line. 7 IP 9 H 3 R 3 ER 0 BB 10 SO ERA now 3.57 overall. (1.19 WHIP)

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:16 PM) How could you lose interest in one of the top 5 players in baseball the last 10 years? The same way people have lost interest (pitching in a different league or not) in one of the best pitchers in the last 8 years (Santana) it happens for whatever reason. Maybe because he's getting older (like following younger players, though not as frantically as you) or that team having an underachieving year in every way.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:11 PM) And that he was traded to Seattle before that? Seattle is so terrible they are irrelevant. I was literally only checking on Felix's numbers and Frankin's UZR on that team. I've even lost alittle interest in Ichiro sadly and he's one of my favorite players to watch.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:06 PM) Too much bourbon? My bad.... totally forgot he was traded to Texas. (still in Phillies Jersey thinking when that is Doc) Ya he's been the sickest one. It's his to lose.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:54 PM) It is unreal how Danks seems to have the same game every time he pitches in Minnesota. Shame too... In a weak AL Cy Young race, he might be costing himself (for better or worse with our sox and negotiations) the chance of a Cy Young this year (especially with wins which sadly most voters look at and position of team). Might be good to be Trevor Cahill, David Price or Jon Lester right now (poor King Felix) and Cliff Lee is in the NL now.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:53 PM) This is one of the most ridiculous post threads I've seen yet tonight. in soxtalk history. Fixed... and I've seen my share of them the 6 years (7 lurking) that I've been here.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 10:24 PM) Vlad, pure and simple. Hitting .297 with a .839 OPS. That was my pick, and the one I wanted the most. Johnny Damon and his .288/.356/.438/.793 career line (currently .277/.363/.421/.784) would of been fine with me. Hell I would had taken that guy (though I like him anyways cause his game reminds me of a tier below Swishers) who was cut and has a career .244/.376/.454/.830 line (Cust - currently .275/.395/.441/.835) I would have been more than happy if we platooned him. Some posters here are right though. Tonight, Kotsay was not the problem for once. Danks did not pitch well this game and the bullpen wasn't very good. The offense did it's job scoring runs. Our pitching let us down tonight.

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 10:08 PM) Holy s*** people, why are some people so freaking stubborn? Those that wanted Thome gone were also under the impression that KW would acquire another hitter that could get those at bats as the DH. Everyone and their mother would have wanted Thome back if we knew that Kotsay/Jones would be the alternative. There are some posters here that will either never get that through their head, are stubborn, have a very poor memory, or are just mentally challenged. An admin/mod might literally have to pull up like 5+ threads in January/early February or a poster to bump a few old ones to have it sink in.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 11:01 PM) The Sox know Thome's weaknesses as well as or better than every team. Just because you want to throw a high fastball doesn't mean you will, especially if you may be a bit gassed. Exactly.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 10:51 PM) Yeah, I saw that. I also saw most people very excited that we were running Matt out there again for the 10th. I can only imagine the reaction had we gone with someone else there and that guy would have blown it. We didn't get it done. No one can save a damn game for us right now. It's really inexplicable and I don't know what else to say about it. I agree with you except this part which is false. Other than Badger, few of the posters were surprised that Thornton was back out there for that inning in the game thread. Not saying I didn't agree with it or did (other than Matt's low velocity I thought they still would have pitched Thome better and BTW we have poorly scouted Jim whom we should know his weaknesses that game) but just throwing that out there. QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Aug 17, 2010 -> 10:59 PM) I’d agree with that. You add 5 more MPH’s to that fastball and Thome gives you a big swing with no dice. I still don’t like the location though. High fastball, Thome doesn't touch. Low fastball, Thome touches. Same as slow stuff up and away he hits, slow stuff down and away he doesn't. Simple.

"Don't hate me, hate the White Sox" I don't think that will go according to plan as he thought.

Don't worry guys. Not finding at-bats for Thome and gaining the flexibility of Jones/Kotsay, taking on extra salary to get Jackson and not spending much on the draft is part of the plan and process here... What that is I don't think anyone knows, but it's a process.