Jordan4life_2007

QUOTE (fathom @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 01:55 PM) My brother saw him a few times, and was extremely unimpressed. Not at all trying to be a smartass here. But your brother seems to be awfully hard to impress. Does he have any legitimate credentials when it comes to scouting? You might've shared this info already. I just don't recall.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 10:25 AM) How many young starting pitchers has KW acquired who have had an immediate successful impact on the White Sox major league team? None that I can think of. Contreras went on his 1 1/2 tear after about 15 up-and-down starts in 2004. But that's about it. I don't think anyone is predicting Marquez to win the ROY. I didn't say anywhere in that post that I deserved slack. I admitted a week ago that I was being ignorant as far as Richard goes. But when Mark Buehrle is the only homegrown starting pitcher you've produced in, I don't know, 8 years, it's easy to question or even slam any White Sox draftee (again, I admit I was wrong). Kenny has apparently been after Marquez for a couple years now. We know when Kenny is chasing a guy for that long it must be for a reason. We've seen these exact types of acquisitions before. And many of them have worked out. That's where my "selective" memory comment came in.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 09:57 AM) To be fair to Richard, we really dont have enough of a sample size on him to dismiss. I would say the same to those who solely focus on his postseason success No argument here. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 10:12 AM) This was actually jordan4life's post on Oct. 2. I posted it to show just how hypocritical he is slamming people who don't think Marquez will be much help in 2009 for "not giving him a chance." No response to my last post? QUOTE (KevinM @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 10:15 AM) It's ridiculous to dismiss Richard after his 2008 performance. Agreed.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 21, 2008 -> 06:48 AM) As a matter of fact, I've been one Jose Contreras' biggest backers on this site. I was one of the few that didn't want him gone even in 2005. I also am a Marte fan, and mentioned Matt Thornton as a potential pick up 3 months before he became a White Sox. I admittedly wasn't a fan of Gavin Floyd and still am not sold. The numbers suggest some things. Marquez has always given up a good amount of hits. He doesn't strike very many out. To suggest he will do things he's never done before during his minor league career on the major league level is crazy. I'm sorry I bring reality into the equation. You're basing everything on a conference call. Remember, KW also said Gio Gonzalez was one of the top 2 left handed pitching prospects in baseball along with Danks. People on this board, since the White Sox dumped him say he sucks. If Minnesota traded a .219 hitter who strikes out all the time and was owed $24 million for 3 players including Marquez and said Marquez would be the 4th starter, your opinion about his ability would be no higher than mine, and maybe lower. Its not up to me to "give him a chance." The White Sox will do that. I hope he does well, I just don't see how anyone can expect itinnings? BTW, you seem to be hypocritical. Why don't you give Clayton Richard a chance? After all he has a lower ERA, WHIP and walk rate and a higher k rate than Marquez in the minor leagues. Here's a quote from you: Selective memory? Richard doesn't suck? An era over 6? A WHIP of 1.55? BAA of over .300? He's garbage. A typical White Sox farmhand. And we've got people saying he should've started game 1 of a playoff series because he pitched a couple of nice innings? Here's scenerio's response to your post: Hey, if the 'typical WhiteSox farmhand' dominated at AA and AAA and got selected for the Olympic Team and the Futures Game, we'd all be very happy. Why is it that people think when a rookie player comes up that they either have to dominate everyone right away or they suck? You seem to be the one with the selective memory. Garbage. Typical White Sox farmhand. So its not the "his minor league numbers suck, so he must suck" you live by. You're opposed to that. But, White Sox farmhand and garbage go together. Don't have time to respond to this entire post. But here are a couple things I've posted about Richard since then. From December 15th. From December 14th. So there it is. Funny you remembered my negative post but forgot the others. And I've also said in the Jon Garland thread about 20 times that we're better off giving Richard a chance over bringing him back. And not that this is an excuse, but I was so mad from Javy melting down in game 1 again that I was taking my frustration out on everybody. And even if I hadn't realized I was off base regarding Richard, he's a totally different situation from Marquez anyway. Clayton is a White Sox draftee. And we've had little to no success in developing our OWN pitchers. So at least I would have a somewhat decent arguement in my initial reaction, even if I hadn't changed my mind. Guys like Marquez are where Kenny has shined. And people like you seems to be the ones that forget that, I don't know, every single year.

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 20, 2008 -> 07:43 AM) Didn't Nash leave via Free Agency? Yes. And letting that happen was a big mistake even before he went on and won damn near 3 MVPs in a row.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 20, 2008 -> 08:42 AM) I'm thinking his 6-7 record in AAA with a 4.69 ERA with a 1.45 WHIP with 2.7 BB/9 innings and 3.7 k/9 innings with 1.3 HR/9 innings all at the AAA level suggest something totally different than what you predict. You think he will do better in the AL than in AAA. I find that hard to believe. He's never pitched more than 155 innings on the minor league level and has pitched over 102 innings twice. I think he may wind up in Masset's old role if he isn't in Charlotte. Maybe someday a 5th starter. He's not nearly the elite prospect Danks was when he was acquired. So I take it you wanted no part of guys like Contreras, Floyd, Marte and Thornton when they were first brought in? Since you love putting so much stock in raw numbers and raw numbers alone. The selective memory around here by some baffles me. And it's the same predictable people every time. Marquez could very well suck ass. Who knows. You haven't seen him. I haven't seen him. Even if we did, it still wouldn't mean s***. We all know how Kenny operates. He, Rick Hahn and their people don't obsess over raw numbers. They scout overall talent/stuff/makeup/I.Q./ect. Is it a perfect formula? Of course not. But he's had more than enough success with these kinds of acquisitions that the guy should at least be given a chance. Not the typical "Well, his minor league numbers last year sucked. So that means he must suck" drivel we go through EVERY year.

QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 10:17 PM) How is thinking Tex is overrated being outrageous? His stats are typical for power-hitting first basemen, he's not worth 160-170 million. Boras is just inflating the figures as much as possible so he can get a bigger commission. You used the words overrated and scrubby. Those words hardly apply to one of the top offensive forces in baseball. There's nothing "typical" about the numbers he puts up every year (last year in particular being impressive due to his much improved BB/K ratio). I won't even get into the fact he's one of the best defensive first basemen in the game. Of course, he's not worth that much money. No one player is. But if some team is dumb enough to invest that much into one guy, so be it. He's still an incredible player.

Think Devin Harris wanted to send Mark Cuban and the Mavs a little message tonight? 41pts/12ast/3stl/14/25fg%/5-9 from 3. What a terrible trade from the Mavs' point of view. Much worse than the Nash debacle.

At least we hung tough for a half. lol. Rondo/Perkins looked like Malone/Stockton tonight. We're going to be real sorry we didn't take better advantage of our earlier schedule. We've got some really tough games coming up.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 08:05 PM) I agree with your premise Rock, but the Celtics are the best defensive team in the league. I think last year's team and the '04 Pistons are the best defensive teams of the decade.

QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:14 AM) $160-170 million? Ugh. I think Teixeiria is one of the most overrated baseball players in the Majors, probably THE most overrated. I just don't think he's worth that much money and he never impressed me. Typical of scrubby players getting fat paychecks just because their agent's name is Boras. I've seen some pretty outrageous posts tonight. But this one takes the cake. I take that back. Nitetrain claiming Brandon Roy is no better than Ben Gordon has got to be tops. But your're #2.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 07:40 PM) Seriously, this Celtics team couldnt hold a candle to the 72-10 bulls team. They are so soft on D, and have zero depth. What???!!! Please tell me you're talking about tonight's game only. Yes, this team isn't at the level of the '96 Bulls. No team since that team has been at that level. Their depth isn't as good as it was last year with Posey and P.J Brown. But I wouldn't say they have zero depth. They've got a pretty solid 9-man rotation. Their bench could probably use another big (I hear they're interested in Mutombo), and another wing player who can D up and knock down the open jumper/3 (sounds like James Posey). Other than that, they're without question the best team in the league.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 05:55 PM) I still like Mayo over Rose and I think he will by far be the best out of this class. Is this based on anything other than just wanting to say something that will shock people? QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 05:57 PM) No better than Ben Gordon. Um, I don't even know what to say.

If Danks and Floyd regress even a little bit in '09 we have no shot at winning anything anyway. Both those guys have to be as good or better for us to have a chance at anything next year. As far as the young guys not being able to throw 200 innings? How many teams have 3-4 starters that give you 200 innings a year? You'd even be hard pressed to find many rotations made up of veterans that have that many 200 inning guys a year.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 01:46 PM) He actually pitched very solidly for us after about mid-May in 06'. Kept us in the race into September when the rest of the rotation was just god-awful... I think most of us understand what we're getting from Jon, and in my humble opinion, that is easily worth $8-9 million... I remember. He had a nice little 8-10 start stretch in which he carried the staff. Even with that, his era was a full run higher than the previous season. I won't even get into his peripheral's. I'm sure you know they were bad. Jon was disturbingly bad last year. Especially when you consider Angel stadium is more of a pitcher's park.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 01:16 PM) I'm confused...most of us seemed to be fairly happy when Kenny re-signed Jon after 05' to the 3 year/27 million...why would some of you now balk at $8 million per? I'd personally love to take him back at 3/$27 or so... Because he's done nothing but regress since 2005. I for one thought that he had turned the corner after that season. I was wrong.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 12:33 PM) http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/pgStory?conte...p;photo=8948490 Rosenthal says Hudson's price will drop and potentially could end up with the Sox. Not really citing inside info or anything though. At this link you have to scroll a few FA's up I'd love to have him. Not sure what you would do with Getz, who I'm very high on.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 12:28 PM) He would not be a waste of money at 8 million at all. I think he is a league avg guy whose value is in how he fits in with his current team and his ability to give the team quality starts and eat innings. For a team that is trying to inject youth into their rotation, he is a great value. Will just agree to disagree. If you can get him for 1 year at 5 or 6 million, that's the only way I'd consider him. I pray Kenny feels the same way I do.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:57 AM) The White Sox have a very established track record of not overpaying for pitchers, salary wise. The only way the Sox are going to be successful is to give the young guys they have faith in a legitimate shot to succeed or fail and hope they have enough good yound pitchers to succeed. I'd also like to add that I've become a big believer in our organization's philosophy of scouting the stuff/makeup/I.Q. of certain players over just raw numbers. Going by raw numbers alone guys like Gavin Floyd, Jose Contreras and Matt Thornton wouldn't have sniffed Chicago. You can't get 'em right all the time (Andrew Sisco and Nick Masset come to mind). But we've had enough successes over the years that I'm more than willing to give KW and his scouts the benefit of the doubt in regards to some of the young guys we plan on going into battle with next year.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:52 AM) I dont think you quite understand the concept of having a rotation pitch a certain amount of innings. You are really focusing on the overall ceiling of the arms in the rotation and are not taking into account the spillover effect if eat SP can only throw 140 innings. We have an extremely injury prone bullpen, we are going to have at least 3 young arms in the rotation, the other two slots need to be filled with guys that are guaranteed to go over 200IP no matter what. OK, so basically we're in agreement that Garland is below average and would be a waste of money at 8-10 million (I'm sure he's looking for at least 8)? I'm assuming this because you're only reasoning behind signing him is that we have multiple young starters and he could save your bullpen some with the innings he'd be able to eat (despite the fact that a lot of the innings would be bad ones). If you sign him as a one year stopgap to one, get some of your young guys some more seasoning, and two, set yourself up to go for a big free agent at the end of 2009 when Dye, assuming we don't trade him, and Thome's contracts come off the books, at let's say 5 or 6 million, I might be inclined to do that. But what are the chances Jon would take a deal like that? I say less than 1%. So he's not a legitimate option, IMO.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:44 AM) So, you want want 3 young arms, Buehrle and a guy that probably wont pitch over 140 innings in your rotation? Thats just bad baseball. Like I said, his injury history would scare me off. As in I wouldn't do it. But those are the kinda impact guys you look for. Not below average vets like Garland.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:27 AM) I agree to an extent, I believe we need another arm but Garland is most definitely not the answer due to the fact that he has been terrible for the last two years and even prior to that he was only ever league average. Handing $10+/year to Jon would be a huge mistake, however if we could get a Ben Sheets on a similar deal then that would be a great move, then we'd only have about 4 spots in our line up and one spot in our rotation to worry about. Result! Now this is the s*** I'm talking about. Ben Sheets, although his injury history would scare me off, is the kinda move you look to make if at all possible. Jon Garland? I don't think so.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:14 AM) Garland did suck last year. He had a 1.50 WHIP. You're right, give Marquez and his 1.45 WHIP in AAA a shot. He HAS to be better. BTW, as great of prospect as KW calls Marquez, and I see your drinking the Kool-Aid, his minor league WHIP is higher than Garland's career WHIP in the major leagues. I don't really think Marquez is a guy you can count on. I figured you'd be the first one to respond with a post like this. I've never said once that I'm crazy about Marquez. Going by his minor league numbers from last year, and that's all anybody from this site can go by, he's not all that. But he won't cost me 8-10 million dollars like Jon Garland would. If we can add a quality guy, I'm all for it. If not, I think the team is much better off going in-house.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 11:07 AM) The problem with you theory there is that the young guys arent used to pitching over 200 innings which means that our pen and the rest of our staff would be more taxed thus really hurting our rotation and the team as a whole. There is alot of value in a player like Garland that can help the younger guys (Danks, Floyd, 5th starter) keep their innings reasonable and also keep our pen which is somewhat injury prone, from being over worked. You cannot just inject young guys into a rotation because you want to see if they work, there are many other factors to consider. Sorry, but I'm not throwing money at Jon Garland just because he can eat some innings. Especially when a lot of those innings were real bad ones. Like Kenny has said, you can't go out there overpaying or trading for every mediocre veteran out of fear of giving your young guys a chance.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 19, 2008 -> 09:08 AM) What? We're currently with only 3 proven starters on the ML level, one of which, Floyd, very well could regress. I'm all for a little battle for the #5 spot, but a team that has ANY aspirations of repeating as AL Central Champs sure as hell had better have another major league arm ready. Jon Garland SUCKED last year. He wasn't just bad. He was terrible. And he's pretty much regressed every season since his career 2005. But he's "proven" because he's been in the league a number of years? I guess scrubs like Jason Marquis are proven because they've been in the league 6-7 years. Some of you guys are going to have to get over this chronic fear of giving young guys a shot. You don't throw money at garbage just because "Well, at least he's been around a while. And he can eat some innings. Anything is better than giving a scrub like Marquez, a guy I've never seen before, a shot."