Jordan4life_2007

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 17, 2010 -> 09:32 AM) If the choice is that, or a couple of draft picks, I take the CFer on the verge. This is the first time we've agreed on something since 2006.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 17, 2010 -> 07:32 AM) And you just made my point. Trading Danks, as many posts in this thread suggest as PART of a package for Colby Rasmus, isn't going to make the Sox better. They will be worse. Their payroll may be a few dollars less. Well if Mr. #3 starter thinks he's too good to sign an extension then what would you suggest we do? He's still under control for two more years and this would be the best time to trade him if you choose to go that route. Give me a 24-year old athletic, multiple tool CF over a #3 (though a really good one) any day.

QUOTE (Springfield SoxFan @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 10:22 PM) I think KW is watching this K-ROD situation with the Mets closely, if K-ROD strikes a deal with Mets to buy out his contract and he is healthy, that is a classic situation for KW to pounce. Buy out his contact? He's due over 12 million next year. Not happening.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 06:34 PM) Well, here we go. Is it safe to say "first hit wins"? The more I think about it the more I can't see how the hell the Giants are going to be able to score enough runs to make this series competitive. Anyway, tonight is a night even casual fans can cherish. Lincecum vs Halladay! Let the fun commence.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 12:12 PM) Yep. Billy Beane is the same GM that traded Carlos Gonzalez, Houston Street, and Greg Smith for 4 months of Matt Holliday, and Kenny Williams is the same GM that gave up Ryan Sweeney, Gio Gonzalez, and Fautino De Los Santos for a year of Nick Swisher and then traded him for Wilson Betemit, Jhonny Nunez, and Jeff Marquez. GMs make assumptions and mistakes. Gillick is no different. That's a fireable offense.

QUOTE (joeynach @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 05:23 PM) KW also got Thornton for peanuts, got Quentin for peanuts, got Floyd for a broke down Freddy, got Danks for McCarthy, found Alexi from Cuba, found Jenks on a waiver wire, drafted Sale, etc. KW is a good GM but by no means perfect, sometimes he strikes out too. In fact from his track record It wouldn't be far fetched to say that he better at making the under the radar none dazzling moves than he is at making the blockbuster big name moves. The fact that you have to go back to 2005/2006 proves the point. And the jury is still out on Sale. And I will give him credit for Ramirez. CQ for peanuts? That still has yet to be decided. And CQ has been worth a bag of peanuts the last two years anyway. But since the 2007 off-season, KW has been bad, bad, bad.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 05:27 PM) i guess youre right in the sense that those where all good at the time but ended up sucking so if you wanna call that a slump i agree but at the time they were made i wouldnt call any of em minus the pena trade a bad deal....i guess i just misinterpreted a slump .....also in no ways is this ogr in a world of trouble, the offseason hasnt even begun Except basically none of those deals looked good at the time (outside of assuming we would eventually get a healthy Peavy) and they look worse now. Most of them were pretty much risk/reward. And there's been absolutely no reward to this point. And this organization is indeed in a world of trouble. Too many holes+little money to spend+horrible, horrible farm system+being in the same league as the Twins, Yankees, Red Sox, Rays and Angels=world of trouble. QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 05:36 PM) I hate this argument. Our entire front office thought this was a good trade. They weren't confident in Hudson, period. You have to understand that they didn't want to send an unproven kid out there every 5 days in a tight race. Jackson was awesome and more than any of US expected him to be, but the front office knew the whole time what they were getting. Our team is better next year...plus 8 mil. We have Edwin Freaking Jackson now; talk about yer all-time Peavy insurance. But they were more confident in sending a perennial underachiever out there? And I will concede, Jackson did well. Even if it was against mediocre lineups for the most part. But Hudson, at least for the moment, has made the entire front office look foolish. There was obviously something there that they failed to identify. A kid doesn't go on that kinda run by accident literally right after you trade him. And lol@Jackson being "all-time" Peavy insurance. That's worse than CQ/Danks being a good enough package to "land anybody."

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 03:37 PM) Neither Swisher trades were on KW IMO the ball club desperately needed a guy who can get on base and swish was ranked 6th in the AL in OBP maybe he gave up a bit too much but they were all unproven players we gave up, and the best prospect we gave up at the time (dLS) isnt even expected to be more than a bullpen guy so you that right there shows you just dont know what you got in prospects and swish was coming off 2 straight really good years where he hit 57 HR drove in 173 RBI plus he had an obp over .370 both years. who knew hed come to a smaller ballpark and suck and because he sucked we couldnt get a good return. They still got jeff marquez who a top 10 prospect in the yankees farm system could he have got more?? maybe but we dont know that im sure kenny tried to get more. Neither Swisher trade was on KW? Did he not make both trades? They gave up too much to get him and got back crap when they traded him to the Yankees. And why are you focusing on only DLS, who by the way had a staggering K/9 of 13.9, while ignoring the other premium arm we gave up in Gio Ganzalez? Add in Sweeney, and that was simply an overpay for a 3-tier type OF. Jeff Marquez is absolute horses*** and has no future whatsoever with this organization. Nunez is minor league fodder. Wilson Betemit? No comment. Let's face it, Ozzie didn't like Nick so they traded him at a time where his value was at it's absolute lowest. He had a career low .787 OPS at the time of the trade and he was almost 40. Who knew Masset was going to be a good reliever? Apparently KW did. Remember the famous "tick" below Bobby Jenks' stuff comment? And all he's done is go on to flourish with the Reds. Don Cooper? Hello? Who cares about Richar. He was a throw-in. Well both trades turned out to be bad. But I was referring to the second one. With Flowers completely falling off the prospect map, and it was obvious to those in the know that he was never going to cut it as a catcher, all we have to show for it is Brent f***ing Lillibridge? Fail. And you talk about how you never know with prospects yet you think Gilmore and Rodriguez will be in the majors? Paging Don Cooper? What's happened here? He's got a 95 MPH fastball and Buehrle K rates. Not to mention excessive walks. To be fair, I gave KW the benefit of the doubt here. I thought this could be another Thornton type of move. A year and a half later, the verdict is in: Pena f***ing sucks. And it sure would be nice to have a 24-year old, athletic 1B/LF with plus power who would obviously be dirt cheap for the next 6 years. Especially with PK's future in question. But hey, what do I know? And he's still hurt. And it looks like he's going to be a major injury risk going forward. Wonderful. When did Teahen ever look like he can be a good hitter? 2006? And better than Josh Fields? Well that's setting the bar real high. lol. Teahen is horrible and KW should be ashamed of himself. Please, KW deserves just as much blame. Though I definitely think Ozzie is a moron. Unless Jackson thoroughly outperforms Hudson for the next 6 years this trade is a fail. Slump? Bad deals? What's the difference. For years the rebuttal to KW trading away young talent like it's got an expiration date was how many of these guys have come back to haunt us? Well guess what, we're being f***ing haunted now. This organization is in a world of trouble at the moment.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 01:21 PM) Unless we sign Carl Crawford and get a RF that moves CQ to DH then JP deserves a spot in the starting lineup, I know he really needs to take more walks butttttt he was 16th in hits and 1st in steals in the MLB that right there deserves him a spot and there shouldnt even be an argument. in relation Denard Span got on base 226 times if you count hits and walks and JP got on 223 buttt JP has more than twice the amount of SB span has soooo should the twins bench span or bat him 9th??? Span was horrible in '10 for whatever reason. But his skill-set easily trumps Pierre's.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 02:32 PM) uh what slump??? What slump? Both Swisher trades, Masset for super washed up Griffey Jr., the Javy trade, the Pena trade, the Peavy deal (if only because he was damaged goods when we traded for him), the Teahen trade and despicable extension, failure to upgrade the DH before or during the season, and the, you know it's coming, Hudson/Jackson trade. KW and company have been awful the last three years. But hey, at least we're still in win-now mode.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Oct 16, 2010 -> 08:10 AM) You must be pretty confident that Danks will sign an extension? Because if he doesn't, there's a good chance won't be here past 2011. I'm not confident. But with the slump KW is in, I'm not sure he wouldn't botch a potential Danks trade in which we got back below market value. And he's under control through 2012. So it's not like he can just bolt after '11.

QUOTE (T R U @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 10:06 PM) thank god, I want the Yankees to win You are the epitome of a bandwagoner.

Rangers are toast if they blow this. Shaping up to be an epic choke.

QUOTE (Fantl916 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 07:13 PM) Im not so sure this would create a "gaping" hole. For one, it would save us from having to spend on a RF/DH type. And there are some decent SP's out there. Peavy is a health risk. Buehrle is a FA after next year. I think Jackson is gone either way. Floyd is solid. Sale? Who knows. And I don't want Freddy back. So yeah, I see a big hole in trading Danks. Maybe it's just me, but I'm looking beyond 2011. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 07:15 PM) Would you take that deal if Sale took over the rotation? Look at it this way. Trading D1 saves maybe about $7-$8 mil in arbitration this year. Putting Rasmus in RF Fills: the Left hand power bat opening, moves Quentin permanently to DH so the DH spot is filled with a guy who at least gives you 25 HR and an .800 OPS if he's healthy (which really isn't that bad for DH's in the AL based on last year), and we've got those spots filled with $15-20 million to spend, or more. That's plenty of money to keep Konerko, sign a catcher, and find a closer. I'm not confident that Sale will cut it as a starter. If he does, that changes things quite a bit.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 06:53 PM) Okay but if you're 80% sure he's a dominant starter with a 20% shot that he's a dominant reliever, how can you possibly say it's a bad pick? I mean, retrospectively, if he ends up in the 'pen permanently, yeah, it ended up being somewhat of a waste but it doesn't make the decision poor. He's gonna get every opportunity to start unless we end up with a Papelbon situation. Again, I used the wrong word. If we're the Red Sox, I don't care if he turns out to be a reliever. But we're not the Red Sox. Look at our pitching in the system after Sale. Pathetic is being too kind. I don't know how many more times we have to come up short for people to realize how critical drafting/developing is. If you look around the league, you'll see that they're are virtually no current closers who were first round picks. The best closer in the game (and when I say that I mean this year only) was Brian Wilson. You know what round he went in? 12th! You've got teams finding closers through international signings, waiver wire, rule 5 and late round picks. You don't burn first round picks on guys who eventually become closers.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 06:58 PM) I would definitely do Danks for Rasmus. If we still had Hudson, I'd no doubt do it. But I don't believe in creating a major hole in one spot to fill another. I hope KW proves me wrong. But he's really f***ed this organization up with his chronic obsession with "going for it" every year while continuously coming up short.

QUOTE (since56 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 06:30 PM) Don't trade Danks for anything less than a sick haul. Fixed. I like Danks, but he's not untouchable.

Thing with Jordan is that scoring 100, or even 80, would be so out of character for him. He'd have to chuck it at a ridiculous rate to come close. That wasn't his game. There's a reason he had such ridiculous FG percentages and premium efficiency for a 2-guard. His shot selection and overall fundamentals were second to none. You'll see guys like Kobe launching 25 footers with regularity when he's hot. And while they look great when they're going in, you look like a ball-hogging fool when they miss. And you're obviously going to miss a lot more of those than you make. Jordan's game was free-throw line and below. He was never a volume 3-point shooter. Which he would have to make atleast 7-10 3's to have a shot. Again, that wasn't his game. And this might be me, but would 100 points even be viewed as a great accomplishment? Even if someone did it you'd have just as many people criticizing it as you would people marveling at it.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 05:47 PM) There are usually concerns with every player not take top 3 overall. The only reason he was passed on was delivery concerns, yes, but the reason why everyone loved the pick was his potential and his stuff. They think his projection will reflect that higher of a guy who is normally picked in his slot. I don't disagree with anything you said here. And I admitted I used the wrong word when I said waste. But I will be extremely disappointed if Sale turns out to be nothing more than a reliever. But like I said, that's not an issue at the moment.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 06:14 PM) Sale's bonus wasnt even 2 million dollars. I'm not sure if you thought it was more than that? I'm using the wrong words. When I said expensive I didn't mean money. I just meant the pick (first round) itself.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 04:51 PM) Here's Hollinger's take. Read full thing, small excerpt. lol. What is this idiot talking about? Did Jordan say he could average 100 ppg for a season?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 04:19 PM) MJ says in today's NBA he'd either foul out or score 100. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5686980 I'd been saying a for a while that with the way the rules are right now, MJ with his style of play would average 40 ppg, easily. Defense would be different but he would adapt. MJ is about 5 years late with this revelation. Would he score 100? Nope. That's just inconceivable to me. And Wilt's 100 point game was a bunch of crap. But yeah, on a team in which he was the only legitimate offensive option (like the '87 Bulls), 40 PPG would be a cinch. I read somewhere that he averaged like 23 PPG, 7 RPG, 4 APG, 46.5 FG% in 30 games after turning 40 back in '03. And that was before the league went sissy with all the rules.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 02:33 PM) What were the questions about his long-term projections? For the most part scouts loved the pick. Not to mention he was one of the first players up in the majors after being draft and showed dominance earlier than 99 percent of draft picks. He will start for this team, his floor is a VERY good reliever. Thats a pretty damn good investment. I'll have to search for the links to some of the draft articles I read. But there were multiple ones stating that while Sale's talent is not in question, his size/delivery could relegate him to the 'pen. And I disagree. A good reliever is not a good investment with your first round pick. You won't convince me otherwise. There are much less expensive ways to find relievers/closers than to burn first round picks.

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) Could A Quentin/Rasmus swap possibly work? Have we entered the baseball twilight zone? In the last week the Marlins are shopping Mike Stanton, Danks and CQ are enough to land Votto and CQ alone would land Rasmus?

QUOTE (Chi Town Sox @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) That's a close one, Lopez is only going to get better on offense, and hopefully Noah too. Both are intense, Noah being on another level though intensity wise Noah, IMO, has almost no upside offensively. And he'll be overpaid starting next year. I don't know what's with this franchise and overpaying for role players.