fathom

BTW, I've said this before, but I think it's time to repeat it. An AL scout told a close friend of mine that Blalock's work ethic and attitude were really poor last season (reminds me of 2 guys we traded for last season). They think that the whole homer or nothing approach done by the Rangers has robbed Blalock of his tremendous hitting approach. The scout definitely thought the player needed a change of scenery.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 11:18 PM) Most statistics? They show he is one of the worst hitters in the league away from Arlington. Well, if we're going to use statistics, Pods should have never been batting against Lidge in the 9th inning of Game 2 because he was one of the worst clutch hitters in all of baseball.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 11:14 PM) No Blalock is not "clearly" the better player. That is your opinion. And I would predict about 98 pct of the executives in baseball.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 10:48 PM) Most people get it. VAFan doesn't. Why don't we try to trade Garland and Crede to the Padres for Brian Giles?

QUOTE(hi8is @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 10:10 PM) if that was the case, id imagine we could just trade young for vazquez straight up then we could flip duque to someone else for prospects or something i doubt you know the way a deal is structured. I'd hope not. One of the biggest reasons the Sox are doing this is to unload Duque's contract. If this trade fell through, KW would be better off keeping our best offensive prospect in a long time, and using some of the money he would have spent on Vazquez elsewhere.

Since we don't have anything close to a replacement for AJP in our system, it was vital to bring him back. Great move, and not too much money at all.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:56 PM) http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb...t=.jsp&c_id=cws "Aware fo the situation. Whole world is aware of the situation." Listen around 6:00. But yah. KW is bluffing. Blah blah blah. ftw You really want to argue about the semantics of a person that has been notorious for overstating things in the press?

The funny thing is that I think the Sox would have to give up both Garland and Crede for Blalock. Not for one second do I believe that the Rangers would include another MLB player in the deal, and I highly doubt a minor league top prospect would be included. They've wanted a ridiculous package for Blalock all along, and their new GM is Chuck LaMaar Jr.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:49 PM) I agree that Garland will likely not be back. So you trade him for someone good. YOu don't trade him for a bad to average player that can't hit lefties and can't hit on the road. THat is the definition of not getting value. Last offseason, we traded a big time slugging outfielder for one of the worst statistical outfielders in baseball. When you're in a position where you're determined to give up a player, you can't always hold out for top value.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:47 PM) KW said that. KW said that Crede was doing well in the offseason and that he will be good to go. The thing is he said that he couldn't go into the season knowing that something bad could happen that he previously knew about, without doing something to back it up. Buts its possible KW doesn't know what hes talking about. I mean he's only the GM Yeah, since I'm sure KW would be telling EVERY baseball executive that he has fears about Crede's health!!! Come on man, he's saying the "smart" thing. It's just like when he was saying that Duque would be the 5th starter, etc. If you haven't caught on to KW's lingo yet, then pay more attention to his quotes. You can tell an awful lot by what he says in the media.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:42 PM) Well, if you had a contingency plan for every contingency plan, you wouldnt have enough spots on the team. Reports are that Crede's back is okay. It certainly was in the playoffs. There is a small chance that it flares up for a DL visit again, and Mack can play those 15 days. You don't trade Jon Garland, so you can feel good about your health at third. Especially with a player like that. Just go sign Joe Randa if thats the case. You dont ahve to trade a pitcher that just won 18 games. I'm not the person looking to trade Garland....KW is! Obviously, Garland or his agent have said something that makes them feel there's not a chance in hell he'll come back to the Sox. Thus, they're looking to get something for him now. KW is in win mode now. People are nuts if they think he'd rather get two draft picks when Garland leaves than someone who can help the organization now. And who knows how Crede's back is doing. The reports may say his back is fine, but judging some of the Sox's moves this offseason, it doesn't seem like they're confident he'll hold up.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:39 PM) Thats why we have Mack. Who can't hit lefties either. And then if we have to start Mackowiak on an everyday basis, the bench is severely weakened. And if you look at the prices getting paid to players, Crede will likely get equal to what Blalock does once he becomes a FA.

What everyone seems to forget with these rumors is that the Sox seem to have very little confidence in Crede's back condition. When you take the injury, and combine that with negotiating with Boras, it seems very likely he'll get traded also.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 08:33 PM) there are a few future GM's on here who beg to differ. Might those be the future GMs who would rather have Pods than Grady Sizemore lead off or would it the be the future GMs that wanted KW to pay Konerko 18 mil a year if needed?

Blalock is a better overall player than Crede. Especially when you consider he's locked in to a very fair contract for a few more years, there's probably not a single executive in baseball who'd rather have Crede than Blalock.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 06:25 PM) The indications from White Sox management are pretty straightforward, they've all but come out and said it - if Garland doesn't agree to an extension they'll trade him. Bingo! KW has become very easy to read when it comes to what he's saying in the media, and what his intentions are. It's that reason that I think both of us agree that Willie and Borchard aren't going to be on the roster next year. I'll be very, very surprised if Garland is on the opening day roster for the Sox in 2006.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 05:34 PM) The thing the Orton defenders seem to not get.....is most of us Sexy Rexy fans still think Orton is going to end up being a good NFL QB. Hell, he may end up being better than Rex.....but right now, Rex is CLEARLY better and it's an easy choice. Put me in the category of those who don't think Orton will ever be a good NFL QB.

QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 03:56 PM) Let us know when you getting around to pointing out the difference between Rex and Kyle. - Every single player on the Bears believes in Rex.....you can bet your ass that's not true about Orton. - Rex can create something, even if the pocket collapses around him. Unlike Orton, who just takes the sack or throws it 20 yards out of bounds, Rex showed a hell of a lot more poise in moving around a little and not giving up on the play. - I seriously can't believe that some people think there's not a big difference. Watching the difference between the 1st half and 2nd half was likely watching a college QB and then a pro QB.

How do you like this...we have a f***ing quarterback.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 03:46 AM) I don't know. I heard they're very pessimistic. It's gotta be that jphat and rowand 44 character who's doing that.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 03:46 AM) f***ing Moose. WTF. Who's he going to blame now?

What are these Sox games threads you mention?

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 03:40 AM) the Grossman pick wasn't really a bad pass, just a great defensive play IMO. It was also a terribly designed play. I think Moose and D. Clark were right in the same area, and it brought about 3 defenders into the area. BTW, am I the only one who gets annoyed with the constant whining by Moose?

BTW, credit goes out to Lovie for having the balls to make the switch.

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 03:27 AM) I don't like this at all. They are winning. If you are making a QB change, do it when you are losing, or in-between games. Not while you are winning. You don't play to win one game, you play to win the Super Bowl. Everyone in America knows that the Bears have no chance to win the Super Bowl with Orton at QB.