SkokieSox

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:31 AM) I've said it before and I'll say it again...it would be a very smart move to pick a day when there is a lefty starter on the mound once per week and decide that JD is going to DH and Terrero (if he's still here) is going to play RF. Why push your luck and wind up getting JT hurt? Because I want 34 homeruns - that's why.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:20 AM) You sir, are a liar. 501 was as well.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:20 AM) You sir, are a liar. Not 500, my mistake, but it was within a few of it.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:19 AM) There actually has been numerous rip jobs on Thome even last season. The latest when he was slumping a couple of weeks ago was that he had lost his power. And what reasoning has caused this theory? The guy has hit a minimum of 30 every year except for one in the last 12 seasons.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:03 AM) All he does is pull the ball, he's lost that good oppo power stroke when was the last time he hit a HR to left field? Jim will get to 34 just as long as the final 10 games are all blowouts, if the game is close and Thome comes to the plate . . . forget about it, he'll K every time. Left center #500

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 03:05 AM) You need to read SoxTalk more. Thome's lost his power. He's a nice guy though. Your ability to copy and paste astounds me.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 02:59 AM) You need to read Soxtalk more often. Thome has lost his power. He's a nice guy though. He has 30 homeruns, and hit 42 last year. What do you mean?

The spread was 33.5 homeruns at the beginning of the season, and I threw five hundo on it. What's the consensus of this taking place with the limited games we have left? As of this moment, he has 30 homers and 10 games left. He's been on fire, I'm hoping he finishes strong...

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 03:43 PM) You can look up the stats, Garland is a league average pitcher. A league average pitcher that will throw 200 innings is valuable -- if he's a one year rental and making $12M he's probably worth a B prospect and C or two. Pretty much what Garcia brought in return. The Sox aren't going to get what the Rox got for Jennings. Considering we got two pitchers who very well could both be in the rotation in 09, I'd be happy about that. I have to say though, we would have received the package that Jennings got, but we asked for Hunter Pence as well. Can't say I blame the effort by KW... But it goes to show, Garland won't be handed over for scraps.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 14, 2007 -> 11:02 PM) We could afford him....If we traded Countreras and Konerko. What if we unload Konerko for either a CF'er or a SS? Maybe even some prospects, he has alot of value. Would the team improve with AROD+a young SS or CF'er? I think it might. I think they can afford it without trading PK.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 14, 2007 -> 08:43 PM) Thats fine, but you have to look at from the view of Alex, not the White Sox. Why would Rodriguez want to come to the White Sox? Alex has been slammed repeatedly in the media for not being a winner, and not being able to take the pressures of high intensity situations. How would the image of A-Rod look if he left NY, and signed with a last place team? The fans, and more importantly, the media, would never let him live it down. On top of it, if NY were to win the series this year, why would Rodriguez leave? He would be loved in NY, and I have to believe at that point George would pay just about anything to keep him around. With the ego A-Rod seems to have(not a bad thing) I just can't see him ducking out of NY to sign with a last place team. The Chicago media would let him live it down, and that's not a small market. Who cares what the NY media paints him as? He'd be an instant star player in Chicago, and even though you claimed he'd be knocked for it, it be great to play with less pressure and have more fun. That doesn't translate to losing, you can just play more relaxed. The Cell is a perfect place for him to hit his 4,326 homerun in. A last place team, but still a team that can contend with some moves, one he could be a real huge part of. Can't discount from a players view that the Sox still won a WS in recent memory. Despite Ozzie's comments about AROD a year or two ago, he's still a manager players like playing for. I think he too would like his environment. Also, I don't think the Chicago media will tail his every move and take pictures of him taking other women out. And last but not least, the Yanks have been quite clear that if he opts out that he is done with them. Keep in mind, if he were to opt out, Texas would no longer owe the portion they agreed to pay to the Yanks.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 14, 2007 -> 08:15 PM) I wouldn't even say Santana. For most teams, $30M is at least a third of their payroll if not more. For this team, probably just under a third. Having one player be 30%+ of your payroll is inviting disaster - like putting your retirement funds in a single, volatile stock. So unless you have a $200M payroll, I don't think ANY player is worth $30M. It's all relative - a player costing $30 million in salary can bring in let's say $50 million in revenue from shirts and what not... Michael Jordan was well worth the $30 million he got one year, and that was way back when. I'm sure he blew out $50 million in returned revenue.

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Sep 12, 2007 -> 09:49 PM) If you want to show a little something, then why not just pick up Ozzie's team option for 2009 right now? Being committed for 2 more seasons isn't enough? I really don't see the problem with extending Ozzie. It's been obvious for a while that he would be with the team for the foreseeable future.

We need a large agency to market AROD effectively next year!

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Sep 9, 2007 -> 07:32 PM) John Sickels rated Garland's trade value as a B prospect and maybe a C grade guy or two. Garland's value was a lot higher when his ERA was under 4 and he wasn't complaining about his shoulder -- that was the time to trade him. At this point, the Sox would be lucky to pick up a solid major league reliever for him. I'd rather take a B grade position prospect over a reliever any day, but the point is that he has little value. Garland will be a $12M rental next year and he's pitching poorly and is likely injured. You can't get much for that. No way, he's a much better option than practically the entire FA pool.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 9, 2007 -> 02:30 PM) Getting Fuentes as the main part of a trade for Garland would be just about the dumbest thing imaginable. His velocity has already started to decline, we don't need another lefty reliever, and he'd be a FA after 2008. Like I've been saying, I'm nervous KW will severely overpay for relievers. I would be very disappointed, especially with what KW has tried to receive for Garland already. I have to think that this is the hope of several teams and media out there, and is the reason for the speculation. In no shape or form has KW lead me to believe he would take such a low ball offer for Garland. Not to mention the FA market place for starting pitching. KW is in a good spot with Garland, and should be able to receive a favorable package.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Sep 9, 2007 -> 04:00 AM) When will anyone ever come in here with logic? You keep questioning my demeanor and my "opinions" instead of looking at the real picture, the reason I'm doing all this debating: OZZIE. Not a SINGLE person has come in here with a solid argument or a statement that argues that the moves I mentioned Ozzie making are bad moves, simply attack me in ways that are irrelevant. Until someone can come in here and prove this wrong, just please stop. PLEASE try some logic and stop posting inept, redundant posts. I'm talking about Ozzie, and you all agree talking about me and have not provided a single solid argument. Wow, this feels like a board full of Cubs fans. Agree to disagree? You can disagree all you want, but it doesn't make you any less inept. Normally I do not encourage attacking a man's sense of reason on this board, but you either have trouble reading or understanding what you've read. All anyone has done is given you reasons, yet you choose to call these reasons "inept" and further challenge it by saying it doesn't count because your thoughts are facts. That won't get you far in life... So call anyone you want as inept, stupid, whatever, but the reality is you are just being ignorant. But hey ignorance is bliss, so I'm cool with it if you are.

I got to say - Hunter would be great to have, but I'm intimdated to offering a 6 yr $90 mill contract as predicted that would run him through the age of 39...

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Sep 8, 2007 -> 04:35 AM) I keep explaining WHY it's fact, and all anyone does is simply say it's not. No reasoning whatsoever. Must I reference all the bad moves I've mentioned throughout this topic again and again? Yes, it is FACT that most of the examples I gave were BAD MOVES. At this point, I could care less about other people's denial and ignorance. Like I've said, some opinions are NOT always valid, and some opinions ARE fact. # a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred; "first you must collect all the facts of the case" # a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened; "he supported his argument with an impressive array of facts" # an event known to have happened or something known to have existed; "your fears have no basis in fact"; "how much of the story is fact and how much fiction is hard to tell" # a concept whose truth can be proved; "scientific hypotheses are not facts" Here, maybe this will help...

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ Sep 8, 2007 -> 03:13 AM) Yes. And like fathom mentioned Hall, how could anyone say that wasn't Ozzie's fault? Hall is not a first-baseman and shouldn't have to dive for balls constantly. Not saying one game necessarily makes this happen, but look what DID happen. it just made no sense. Steff mentioned, "sure, people can deny if they want to." Sure they can deny something that's true, but it's flat out stupid. Opinions aren't always valid. Sometimes they are simply inept and frankly, wrong. Ozzie has done so much to hurt this team this year alone it's sad. That's fact, not opinion. You wanna used the term "generalize?" People seem to use the word "opinion" too loosely. Is it an opinion that putting Toby at 1st wasn't a smart move? Is it an opinion that shifting for a .198 batter and then keeping it on when he tries to bunt isn't a smart move? No, that's fact. All you need is a little baseball knowledge to realize it. And surely many people here MUST have far more baseball knowledge than myself, but lately people in this topic make me actually question that. I think you need to freshen up on your baseball knowledge... In any case, its been explained, but you're obviously either not picking it up or not willing to. Just for good measure I'll say it a final time: Hall was not a first baseman, but was being penciled in to spell PK during this season. Therefore playing him there in ST is appropriate. It gives flexibility and insurance, but also would have allowed Hall more at bats which was what was promised to him when he signed. Remember, he could have started for lesser teams. But I can see how ignoring that would be convenient if you hated Ozzie and wanted to grasp onto anything to ensure that stays true for yourself.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:53 PM) Talking about Erstad. Erstad was being penciled in to the outfield, but depending on the situation out there, that could have been fine. However, I don't believe they wanted to shift him back and forth as an outfield starter, only to replace his spot with someone else.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:48 PM) Considering Ozzie's reluctance to ever have no back-up catcher left on the bench during a game, I highly doubt Hall would have gotten a lot of playing time at first base with AJP catching. That's what the plan was, and regardless of how many times it would actually happen, with Gload traded you needed an insuarnce policy there.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 10:48 PM) And that plan seemed pretty dumb when there is a gold glove firstbaseman on the roster. Does it? Gold glover translates to super human with no need of rest? Wow PK is better than I thought...

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 02:05 PM) Absolutely, he ruined our back-up catcher in the spring training (I can't wait to debate this for the 500th time this year). Go ahead and debate... The plan was to give at bats for Hall at first base on occassion to rest PK. Was he supposed to learn during the regular season?

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 7, 2007 -> 04:52 AM) Here's the question I have then....when is it the manager's fault? At what point is it the manager's fault for not getting the most out of his players? We had a year and a half of great baseball, and that's been followed by a year and a half of terrible baseball. 2008 better be a make-or-break year for KW, Ozzie, etc. (which is why I think an Ozzie extension is beyond stupid). Did Ozzie continuously run this team out of innings? Did he put his players in position to get hurt? Did he continuously mishandle the pitching staff? No - when the teams performance is hindered by strategy, and not injuries and poor execution, then I think its fair to blame Ozzie.