Marty34

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 11, 2013 -> 10:32 AM) Yes, it is definitely odd that I'd bring up the Astros after other people already had made several posts about them. Definitely weird and confusing of me. Who do you not trade from this team and why?

QUOTE (Jake @ May 11, 2013 -> 10:25 AM) FWIW, if I was doing an Astros-style teardown, I would be playing Jordan Danks every day in CF. I would never ever do an Astros-style rebuild though. That's stupid. I'm not familiar with what the Houston Astros are doing. What is the reason for the Sox to keep the few players of value they have. Specifically the older players, Rios, Peavy, and Ramirez?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 11, 2013 -> 10:25 AM) And the team you are trying to pattern off of has 0 playoff wins in 7 years and in exchange for that is borderline top 10 in their minor league system. It's an awesome plan! Like I said, I do not give one damn about the Houston Astros. Odd that you keep bring them up though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 11, 2013 -> 10:17 AM) Still a helluva lot better than the Astros. And yet people pretend that is somehow a positive result. I could not give one damn about the Houston Astros. The Chicago White Sox have 1 playoff win in 7 years following whatever you would call this half-assed strategy they've been using.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 11, 2013 -> 10:12 AM) I know, how impressive is that? 4 straight losing seasons, 5 losing seasons in their last 6, fewer than 60 wins over the last 2 years, selling off every player they can figure out how to sell off, and they're barely a top 10 system! That's awesome, I know that's the decade I want for my team. Well . . . 1 playoff victory in seven years.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ May 11, 2013 -> 09:40 AM) 1- I actually think Bell has improved this system a lot. These things take time. And this is coming from someone who isn't impressed with 8 rookies playing last year. 2 - Whatever. I'm not going to argue about the 24th man on a roster. Long term I think Phegley is an NP 3 - Why? Ramirez has trade value and it's not like his contract is awful 4 - How does Ramirez not have trade value but De Aza does? IMO, De Aza has been flat out awful this year. Danks is another NP. I have never bought into the Viciedo is an impact bat that seems to go around here. I mean I get what you're trying to accomplish here. I agree with you that this thing is over. And they ARE going to be the Astros in 2 years. If you can get anything for Ramirez, by all means they need to do it to get rid of that contract. When you have Danks and Dunn's contracts having Ramirez "not that bad of a contract" is a luxury they can do without particularly because they are not going to win anything with him. De Aza can play a passable CF, hit a little, and most importantly is cheap. Any team in MLB can afford him that's why he has more trade value than Ramirez. Like Ramirez though, De Aza will be in decline by the time the Sox are good enough to win again. I don't think Danks and Phegley are starters, but given they are the two best options the Sox have in Triple A there is nothing to lose at this point in giving them a chance. Same goes with Morel.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 11, 2013 -> 07:45 AM) 1 and 2 make sense. The others........you obviously want the Sox to be the Astros. The Sox are a 90-loss team as is.

No quick fixes here. First step is to get rid of as much money as possible (and Buddy Bell.) 1. Get rid of Buddy Bell. 2. Release Gimenez, bring up Phegley. See if either him or Flowers can be at least a back up catcher. 3. Put Ramirez on waivers, hope someone picks up that contract, replace him with Keppinger. 4. Deal De Aza, Rios, Peavy for certain. Put Danks in CF, Viciedo in RF. Heck, put Dunn in LF if for nothing else to keep him in shape.

QUOTE (fathom @ May 8, 2013 -> 08:46 PM) How would that impact their defense though? I don't think they play defense in the WBC.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 8, 2013 -> 02:21 PM) LOL. Should they dump Sale as well? They are in last with him. They should get rid of everyone. How old is Sale? How old is Peavy?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 8, 2013 -> 02:14 PM) After the White Flag trade, it took until 2005 for the White Sox attendance to be as high as it was in 2012. Not even a division title in 2000 drew as much as they did last year. The 6th straight year of decline. Doesn't matter.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 02:14 PM) So a half a decade of last place teams is going to help attendance? They are in last place now with Jake Peavy. How can you explain that?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2013 -> 02:05 PM) How long has it taken for guys like Tyler Flowers to be declared failures? How long did it take you to declare that Viciedo would never learn to hit? Axelrod didn't even get a chance to start before people wanted him replaced because he didn't throw hard enough. If your point is they need better prospects, I agree.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 01:51 PM) It will be called a White Flag trade, and that is how the fans in this town will portray it. It doesn't matter where we are in the standings. It has everything to do with standings. Sox fans know what time it is.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ May 8, 2013 -> 01:33 PM) Name more than a handful of pitchers that are? Verlander and who??? Exactly my point.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 8, 2013 -> 01:24 PM) If it doesn't set you up for next year, it will hurt. If the team could score runs, they would have a decent record right now. The Sox could use some hitters. Floyd, Konerko are off the books next year. $25 million more for the national TV contract. If payroll remains the same, that's $47 million freed to get some bats just next season. Why, unless it's a no brainer overpay for Peavy would you trade him? Lose the next 3 months and then re-tool. I don't understand anyone wanting the Sox to dump their best players. They have difficulty developing players. It's a fact. Unless you are a fan of "sustained losing" as some here without question would really enjoy , that is not the way to go. Because Peavy is far from a guarantee of pitching at a high level for much longer.

102 reports from Doug Laumann.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 11:55 AM) You honestly believe teh Sox trade Jake Peavy in midseason and attendance does nothing, and no one writes about White Flag? Now I know you are trolling. I honestly think that attendance will not be adversely affected by a Jake Peavy trade. 10 games out is no white flag.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 11:23 AM) 20k, not 22k now. Down from 24k last year. And the message of trading Jake Peavy will collapse attendance. The legacy of White Flag is not dead in this town. It's even at the same point as last year. White flag was when they had a chance to win, this team doesn't with or without Peavy

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 11:10 AM) If this really does end up as a 90 loss team, we aren't adding big dollar free agents. Attendance is already down about 20% or 4000 a game. If we are this bad still when the summer months hit, that number will crater, especially if we start selling off guys like Jake Peavy. We would probably end up at about 15k a game, which would really destroy any idea of adding players. The only way we add free agents is if this team recovers and plays like they can, and they get fans out to the ballpark. I thought attendance was even with last year? Jake Peavy is not the difference between 22k a night and 15k.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 8, 2013 -> 09:43 AM) Why? If Danks comes back, we're already sitting on 6 major league caliber starters, and that's without even considering that there seems to be more on the way in the minors. Are you going to repair what's wrong with this offense in one year with the likes of Utley and Morales? I think you're asking for more trouble if you sign those aging stopgaps.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ May 7, 2013 -> 10:33 PM) I was only suggesting two of the three, most likely Morales and either McCann or Utley. I don't think we'd need to move Peavy to accomplish that. The point is improving the offense without sacrificing the rotation. Can't be done sufficiently, imo.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 8, 2013 -> 07:45 AM) Amazing what happens to a pen when you start taking starters out of the rotation, and take your best swing man out of the mix. I was lead to believe the Sox had the pitching depth to withstand trading Floyd this offseason.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ May 8, 2013 -> 06:44 AM) He gave up a walk and a single in his second inning. It happens. Relievers aren't going to be perfect. That's why you need to have an offense that can hit and score runs and stuff so then you can have 2+ run leads when your relievers give up those runs. Sox relievers are under the microscope right now because every single run they give up either loses or ties the game. That's not how it's supposed to work. The bullpen has a 3.39 ERA, which is pretty remarkable considering that almost every single inning they pitch is high leverage. What more needs to be said about the offense? If anything, it has masked how awful Nate Jones and the bullpen construction is.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ May 7, 2013 -> 09:08 PM) And that bullpen in 2005 was arguably the least talented of them all. Bullpens can be such a crapshoot. Absolutely. What bothers me is it's the same make up every year. Hard throwers who can go 1-inning. They need to find a guy who can pitch multiple innings and 3 times in 4 days. Yes, easier said than done. Just tired of the same plan every year.