SkokieSox

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Sep 29, 2007 -> 02:34 AM) well, nice bet dude Thanks man - I'm happy.

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 01:47 PM) The grading thread got me to thinking, since I give KW an "F" for this season, how many of us would be clamoring for his firing if the Sox hadn't won the WS in 2005 ? I know that's why I give him a pass. I like KW and think he's a pretty good GM but certainly not in the top ten - maybe in the top half. I think that he's still learning on the job and I'm surprised at some of the lessons he hadn't learned before this season. So, would you want him fired if the Sox had missed the playoffs in 2005 ? What if they lost in the playoffs that year ? What if they lost in the WS ? Do you still want him replaced ? Do you think that he's one of the best GM's ? Wonder if he has won 5 WS in a row, would you still feel the same? Hypotheticals are worthless, reality is what counts. He did a WS, and for that, he deserves the good that comes with it, just like he deserves the bad for this season. Either way, he's aggressive, and I like that.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 09:09 PM) Thome produces big time at the beginning of the season in 06, and he's unclutch because he didn't produce as much down the stretch. Thome gets hot down the stretch in 07, and he's unclutch because he got hurt at the beginning of the season. Exactly - until the guy hits 74 homeruns in a season, he's a detriment to this team. lol

QUOTE(Colorado Sox Fan @ Sep 27, 2007 -> 07:11 PM) Woopdee dang doodle. We needed these in June. But they wouldn't have happened because the games actually meant something. We're all frustrated, but let it go, Thome has produced when it has counted time and time again in his career. This dismal season isn't squarely on his shoulders...

One more to go...

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 12:45 AM) I'm not even getting into the "should it be debated" or "CHRIS YOUNG!" portion. I just don't believe that we would be going, "HEY, KW SHUD HAVE TR8ED FOR JAVY!" if we hadn't traded for him. Why would we? People don't often do that, especially not coming off a Series with a "bright future" ahead of them and McCarthy waiting and all that. Especially since he wasn't THAT hot last year, in totality, and who knows what he would've done in another city if we hadn't gotten him. Seems like a huge stretch to say, "We'd be mad about not getting Javy!" Right. Who cares what people would have said if we hadn't traded for him, the point is we did, and the team is better for it.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 07:46 PM) Teams that buy on what a player is doing "right now" and fail to see the projectability of young players with track records of improvement are destined to fail. What are you talking about, Vazquez is not old, he's 31. In this case the Sox were able to get someone that could help them now and later, versus just later. Pitching is the more important piece for a team that is trying to win now and in the future.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 07:14 PM) Let's compare.... How many above average pitchers are available at a salary of $11M/yr? Probably none, but you can get close. Or at least catch lightning in a bottle. How many projectable CFers are available at a salary of $500K? None. And Young's salary over the next 5 seasons will be less than what it takes to sign Hunter or Jones for 1 season. That's value. Value is subjective, and again with the FA pitching market and abundance of CF's available, I'd have to say Vazquez still has more value. Teams don't want to catch lightning in a bottle with pitching when they have a guy at the same price virtually a lock for 200 innings and the same for K's. In fact, they probably still would need to for the spots further down in the rotation besides the addition of Vazquez. So many teams have question marks after the third spot and in some cases the second spot. If I'm a GM with a suspect rotation, I'm probably trying to catch my lightning in a bottle with the CF spot. Besides, let's not pencil Young as an All Star just yet. The average and OBP need major improving before that title is earned. Will he develop that part of his game, I'm sure, but Vazquez is getting it done now, and not many teams would pass on the opportunity to acquire him.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 06:59 PM) You're wrong. 5 more years of improvement under a suppressed salary makes Young a far more valuable commodity on the trade market. Not with this FA pitching market.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 06:42 PM) Vazquez pitched well down the stretch last season when the Sox were still in contention. He pitched well early this season before the Sox fell out of contention. He's been one of the 20 best starters in the AL for over a year. I don't think he pitches well only when there's no pressure, but that's just me. Do I wish the Sox could rescind the Young trade? Yes, without a doubt. Young is more valuable. It was a bad trade. But the Sox didn't get totally ripped off. It wasn't an epically bad trade -- they did get value in return. Just not equal value. I disagree, I think at this moment in time, factoring both players on the market, Vazquez would bring in considerably more than Young. In fact, I think Vazquez under contract could net a talent like Young and potentially more.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 04:42 PM) Chris Young's homer rate is almost as good as Josh Fields'. Throw in he's a gold glove calibur defender and most likely will be a 30+ steals guy, plus the money differential, Vazquez is going to have to show he can pitch like he has this year when the team is in contention. Vizcaino, and El Duque were both part of that deal as well. Vizcaino was pretty valuable. El Duque being around may have helped Contreras, we don't know. Contreras was pretty good without him to begin the season last year, but maybe El Duque would have helped when the struggles began. Whatever, they can't rescind the deal. I just have a hard time with people puffing their chests out talking about how everyone against that trade was wrong after Vazquez has a good year on a team that may finish in last place. A guy like Paul Byrd was available that offseason. I don't see how anyone can say that trade has worked out well since the Sox finished 3rd last year and either 4th or 5th this year. Despite the losing this team has done, it can hardly be put on the shoulders of Vazquez. As someone pointed out below, Young has great potential, but a low average and OBP. He will certainly get better I'd say, but the plan was to win now. Besides, Pods had come off a good year, we had Anderson ready to take CF, and with that being the plan, it was worth turning a valued prospect into a quality pitcher who could eat innings. Especially considering the amount of innings our starters had thrown. It's easy to forget, but the situation called for us to make a move like this. Looking at today, the deal still looks good to me. With the FA pitching market being what it is set up to be this offseason, it allows the team to move a starting pitcher and get a lot of value in return, which the team is able to do because of having Vazquez in the first place.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 03:02 PM) Seriously. Let me know when Javier Vazquez pitches well in a game that matters. Sure, you could point out his 3.86 ERA in his last 12 games of 2006 when the Sox were fighting for a playoff berth. But I prefer to ignore that. Of course, why count the times he's done well when there is negative times we can focus on.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2007 -> 07:13 PM) Anyone remember when the Bulls played some exibition games in Paris and Michael Jordan mentioned he enjoyed his visit to "the Luge"? See, even us super stars can make mistakes.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:46 AM) I think its safe to say you lost $500 2 more to go...

It'd be an upgrade, that's for sure. I'd prefer some other scenerios, but I wouldn't criticize a move like this, with knowing other moves would still be made.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 10:23 PM) He will probably get $30 million + a year. I don't know how much more revenue he would bring in. White Sox fans show up for wins, not to see an icon. Tom Seaver's starts didn't boost attendance, Albert Belle's presence didn't either. The Sox would have to win, and sell close to a million more tickets a season. I don't know if capacity would even allow it. T-shirts man. t-shirts. The Sox would definitely make money, any team would definitely make money. That's the only reason he'd get $30 mill plus. PS, could you imagine the potential of 6 30(+) homerun players (Thome, Dye, Konerko, Arod, Crede, Fields) You could certainly go on base and speed for the rest of the lineup, two up top, and one in the 9 hole. Great lineup potential... You could market that well too.

QUOTE(gosox41 @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 03:14 AM) The way this team is set up right now, they can barely afford Rowand let alone A Rod and some Japanese guys. Bob That all depends. With as much money that a player like AROD would cost, he'd bring in at least as much in revenue, probably quite a bit more.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 02:18 AM) He's a good outfielder, but he was nowhere near one of the best defensive outfielders in the AL in 2005. Granted, that season was all Sox for me, so I can't say emphatically that he was the hands down GG. Devils advocate for a second, not the best outfielder, but up there with CF's. Again though, he may not have been the best, but he did a great job IMO. Better than Hunter, I feel playing time needs to be considered.

QUOTE(knightni @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 12:11 AM) I've never heard the phrase, "all set and done" before. Is it new? Yes, it is new. Feel free to use it...

QUOTE(The Critic @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 12:19 AM) I believe it's a take-off/bastardization/reworking/misinterpretation of "when all is said and done". I like mine better...

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 01:15 AM) If Gold Glove means misreading fly balls in the 9th inning or hitting the pitcher's mound with every throw home, then Rowand should have been a Gold Glove winner in 2005. Or if it means playing a good CF, that might be a better measure, which he certainly does.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:46 AM) I think its safe to say you lost $500 Not necessarily, but even so, no hard loss, I won 4 grand a month ago.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:43 AM) Naw not at all. We're on the same page here. Cool

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:39 AM) I was obviously kidding gep. I wasn't trying to make anything out of nothing like what your doing here. Lol - I'm not trying to make anything out of it. I'm just ensuring my point was clarified since you had a difference in opinion.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:30 AM) Since when did Left-Center Field become the same as Left Field? It's been a while for Thome though. He's been hitting his homers from Right Field, Right Center, Center Field, and Left-Center Field recently. Not sure if he's hit one to left this season, but he still does have those bodacious muscles of his to do so ei"g"her way. BTW: I know im nit-picking I know Left Center is at the Left side of the field. What's the difference, you want him to hit the foul pole or something? As long as he can hit homeruns to both sides of the field with authority, I don't see any downside to hitting to left center vs. left. If anything it's better, he's slashing the gaps. Besides 501 was in left.