hogan873

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 05:15 AM) http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,2642783.column The inevitable "maybe we should bring Mark Buehrle back" column by Phil Rogers. Well, in Rogers' defense (shudder), he didn't really say the Sox should think about bringing him back. He was just stating that the Sox could use a guy like Buehrle...innings eater, sturdy, reliable. And of course, we all say, "No duh."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 07:51 AM) Yes Hmmm. So, it's an $18 million difference. He's pitching like he's worth it right now, but I'd much rather see something done to keep him for 2 years or so.

The only game I'm planning on going to is July 4th. And that's only because we got "free" tickets when we signed our son up for the Sox/Bulls summer camp. I would love to go to more games, but it's so damn expensive. Then add parking, beer, and some food?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 07:44 AM) At this rate, he might actually be worth exercising, which I never thought I would say. Is the option $22 million or a $4 million buyout?

Well, I guess I see where you are coming from. Sorry, I mis-understood it at first. But, 7th fewest runs allowed still isn't too bad. I suppose you could expect it to be a bit better based on the other stats. However, are there some stats that hide the fact that Floyd and Humber have been pretty bad lately? Didn't both of them have high strikeout totals in games where they gave up a lot of runs? Plus, is the awesomeness of Peavy and Sale being overshadowed by the bad outings of their teammates?

Well, it's hard not to think that the pitchers are not getting adequate run support when our best pitcher gets one freaking run in his last two starts.

Time to act like a big-league pitcher, Gavin. Oh, and offense, those sticks you carry to the plate are for hitting the baseball.

This article makes me angry: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/wood-outpitch...33669--mlb.html First of all the title stating that Wood outpitched Peavy. Uh, no. Then there's this blurb: "Wood (1-3) was simply terrific. He has spent time in the minors this season after coming from Cincinnati in the trade for Sean Marshall, and he finally came away with his first win since a relief appearance for the Reds at Pittsburgh on Aug. 19. He hadn't won as a starter since he beat the Los Angeles Dodgers last June 15, but he finally got one after allowing one run and four hits while striking out five and walking four." He was far from "simply terrific". Four walks in six innings is not terrific. What's most aggravating is that had the Sox picked up 3 runs in the second instead of 1, there would be no discussion about how well Wood pitched. Just because an entire team can't hit a freaking baseball (how many strikeouts looking were there?), doesn't make the opposing pitcher terrific. Peavy was terrific, but his offense let him down...and Hudson with his error.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 06:28 AM) I know someone will respond that he doesn't owe anything to the Sox, but if he's got any of that working man's ideology that he so often preaches, he will. It will be interesting to see what happens. Although it may be true that he doesn't owe the Sox anything, you're right about him hopefully practicing what he preaches. If the Sox do not trade him at the deadline (and I would be surprised if he is), I certainly hope a discussion starts with him soon.

The season premiere of Falling Skies was pretty damn good. For a TV show, the special effects are pretty good. The scene when they removed the "parasite" from Tom's eye was fairly disturbing.

Jake Peavy is a bad ass. It's a shame that the team couldn't score more than 1 run last night. I would say that the game was lost in the second inning when Travis Wood tried to give the Sox a handful of runs by walking three guys. It's amazing how the offense is either on or completely off. But back to Jake. What a performance last night. He obviously had no intention of coming off the mound. What did he end up throwing? 130 pitches? And he was still firing it in there. Wouldn't we love to see this guy with the Sox next year? Too bad his option is so monstrous. Maybe he'll offer to restructure it into a multi-year deal...

Well, this is not great news, but it doesn't change things from how they've been. Qunitana has filled that spot just fine. Now Ventura needs to let the kid pitch. I'm more worried about Humber and Floyd. Both have looked pretty bad of late.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 12:57 PM) If someone took Peavy, Dunn and Rios right now, it would theoretically free up over $81 million the next 3.5 years. I think you could find a centerpiece that could excite the fanbase. No doubt, but what about right now? I think that's where some of are confused. Why sacrifice this season for the POTENTIAL of the future?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:51 AM) If I was convinced Dunn would stay at his current level or previous level before he came to the Sox, I would agree with you. I am not convinced. He's doing great, but I said it months ago, if any of these guys plays well enough someone will take all their money, you have to move them. QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:56 AM) I think the collective at Soxtalk is over-reacting to some painfully blown games over the weekend. People need to chill, it's f***ing baseball! It's mid-way through June and the White Sox are in first. Talk of dropping Dunn or Peavy is asinine. I agree with Steve here. What is the sense of moving either of those guys even if someone wants to take on the money? Who would you sign/trade for/bring up to replace Dunn's numbers? No one. Unless, as I mentioned before, a team NEEDS one of those guys and they have a guy that we NEED. That's just not going to happen. If the Sox stumble and are five games out at the deadline, then maybe you try to move them. But if they are in first? No way.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:46 AM) So you've been to my family reunion before? Okay, more swearing and throwing stuff.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:38 AM) Oh yeah, the Sox without this year's Dunn are toast. Take away this year's Dunn, Peavy, and Rios and they are in third place, if they are lucky.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 11:25 AM) The future's even MORE NOW because of Peavy being on the way out and not knowing how long Sale or even Quintana can keep performing this well. With us unlikely to retain Gavin Floyd (at the present moment), when will there be a better chance to take the AL Central? Are DET, CLE and KC likely to be weaker in the future? By the logic of trading Dunn, Rios and Peavy, we should also be trading Addison Reed and annointing Nathan Jones the closer. Then we might as well be the Oakland A's. Rios, you can understand, if you had a player who could actually contribute to replace him....and no, I don't mean Fukudome or Lillibridge or Danks. If you're going to go ahead and deal Dunn, then what's the point of having Konerko and AJ and Thornton and Crain and Ramirez still around? The odds of being able to compete in 2013 and beyond without Dunn and Peavy aren't going to be that great anyway. Are we really buying this is a possible return to the 2004-05 acquisitions cycle, we're just going to dump all those big salaries and magically come up with another team on the fly with all the savings...? Why didn't we just do that in the first place, instead of going for the big names (which comes with big contracts)? This team can frustrate the hell out of us fans. We all hoped the team would compete, but many of us secretly thought there was no chance. Therefore, we were thinking of dumping a couple players at the deadline and continue building for the future. Now the Sox are in first place in the division, albeit barely. And, the other teams vying for first place (Cleveland and Detroit) are not exactly playing great baseball. So, what will KW do if come the end of July the Sox are in first place by 1 or 2 games? Or even if they are back a game or two? Trading Dunn, Peavy, or Rios wouldn't make any sense unless there's some team looking for one of those guys and they have a guy we really want (not likely at all). But do we really want to see some of the pieces of the future traded to make the team a little bit better? Do we really want to see Reed, Jones, Qunitana, etc. traded? I don't. But, the future IS now with the team playing the way they are in a weal division. I have a feeling there will be much swearing and throwing stuff come July.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 10:47 AM) You undo it because moving forward you have to be crazy to expect them to continue their resurgences. See Wells, Vernon. He bounced back somewhat, enough for another team to bite, and unloaded him on the Angels who will release him soon and eat a ton of money. It frees up a huge chunk of payroll for a re-do. If someone told you back in February, in June or July teams would take these guys and eat all of their money, if you're the Sox, you're doing cartwheels. We already had the Alex Rios tease in the first half of 2010. Peavy would be the guy I would be most reluctant to part with as his obligation is about to end. Rios is the only one of those three that I'm afraid will regress. Dunn is performing near his career averages again. So, I would expect him to continue that way. I don't think he'll hit 55 HRs (which he is on pace for), but numbers like .230ish, 45 HRs, and 100+ RBIs? I'll take that. Peavy looks to be back to form after two years of injuries. Regardless, if this team is still in first place at the deadline, I don't see any reason to trade any of those guys "for the future". The future is now with the team in first place.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 09:20 AM) Like I said I know you can't trade him now. Though it could get interesting if the Sox spend the next month and a half putzing around .500, and someone like Detroit or Cleveland gets hot and opens up a 5+ game lead. Do you then look to deal Peavy and Rios? I think so. If they could deal either of those guys and get back some decent prospects (along with ridding of the salary), I would think they'd do it. I wonder which one would be more heavily sought? Do you consider Dunn to be tradeable, too? The Sox could dump a ton of salary and pick up some pieces for the future. Of course, we want to win, but if they are 5 games back or so at the break...

Very hot and windy conditions tonight. Depending on how the winds run through the stadium, there could be many a homerun tonight. Adam Dunn may hit one out of the stadium.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 09:02 AM) Basically the Q on dealing Rios is risk/reward. This guy is a high risk of being a complete waste again, either in the 2nd half this year or next year, but the Sox won't win the division this year if they don't have him performing adequately, since D2 is not going to fill in his production. If they're going to decide to be serious about winning this year, then you have to bite the bullet and hold on to him. Exactly my thoughts. Ridding the Sox of the financial burden and the potential for him sucking again sounds nice, but unless KW finds some unbeatable deal that sends him away and brings back someone awesome that fits the needs of the team, you have to hope that the Rios of today is the Rios of the future.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 08:48 AM) Personally I am not convinced Alex is going to be a $40 million player the next three years. I know you can't trade him in this situation, but still I would love to see him dealt. The reality is the only way we can pick up a big contract is by dealing a big contract. This is true, but I don't see the reasoning behind dealing Rios. The Sox are in the thick of the race, and Rios has had a fair amount to do with it. If the Sox were out of it and Rios was playing the way he is, sure deal him. But then the Sox wouldn't be looking for 3B help in that scenario. So, the reality is that the chances of the Sox grabbing a big name 3B are slim to none.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 08:11 AM) For the deal Danks got, and the deal Buehrle got, the Sox made the right move without hindsight. Absolutely. The Sox were not going to match or beat Miami's offer to Buehrle, and it would have been stupid to do so. I love Buehrle and would have loved to see him back with the Sox, but not for that price. Danks' deal looked good on paper. He is a similar pitcher to Buehrle and younger. The injury to Danks couldn't have been foreseen. Hopefully it's nothing terrible and he'll be back with the club soon. If he's out for an extended period of time, there's nothing that can be done about that. I'm not a big fan of looking back and saying "what if?". And reading through this thread makes me dislike it more. Too much sniping and personal attacks. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you know the saying about opinions. Bottom line is, Buehrle is pitching in Miami for too much money and Danks is on the DL in Chicago, and his deal may end up looking bad, too. But how about that Qunitana kid?

Good finale of The Killing. When Jamie "confessed" to Richmond (and then was shot dead) I was surprised and not surprised. All of the evidence pointed to him, so I expected it to be someone else. And then it was. The scene where Terri confessed was very emotional. I would have let Stan kill her, though.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jun 15, 2012 -> 12:16 PM) Just realized that tonight will be Sale's first career trip to the plate, he bats lefty, and faces Kershaw. Good luck with that. I heard that the Sox were angling for a late rule change that would allow Dunn to bat for the pitcher but use Sale as the bat.