ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 04:20 PM) yes, but a lot of his hits he's given up have been on 0-2, 1-2... though he did work up in the count a few more times than usual last night. However, that slider he was sporting was f***ing nasty, regardless of the final outcome of the game. He should have stuck with that more than with the fastball that got slaughtered. The only one I can remember that was definitely ahead in the count was Lamb's homer. I'm pretty sure that the RBI single in the first and Berkman's homer were both on full counts. Stats by count: By Count AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS After 0-1 186 0 38 8 0 2 15 5 5 53 1 0 .204 .245 .280 .524 After 0-2 73 0 10 1 0 0 3 2 1 32 0 0 .137 .171 .151 .322 After 1-0 124 0 39 6 1 3 14 17 2 19 4 1 .315 .400 .452 .852 After 1-1 145 0 35 6 0 2 12 13 5 36 3 1 .241 .325 .324 .649 After 1-2 105 0 18 2 0 2 8 7 3 39 3 0 .171 .243 .248 .491 After 2-0 32 0 12 3 1 1 6 7 0 4 0 0 .375 .475 .625 1.100 After 2-1 60 0 20 5 0 0 6 9 2 12 0 0 .333 .437 .417 .853 After 2-2 71 0 16 3 0 0 6 10 3 25 0 0 .225 .345 .268 .613 After (3-0) 5 0 2 1 1 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 .400 .727 1.000 1.727 After (3-1) 16 0 3 1 1 0 1 9 0 2 0 0 .188 .480 .375 .855 After 3-2 28 0 4 0 0 0 1 15 0 11 0 0 .143 .442 .143 .585 Count 0-0 40 45 14 2 0 2 11 0 2 0 0 0 .350 .381 .550 .931 Count 0-1 35 0 11 2 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 .314 .333 .457 .790 Count 0-2 36 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 .083 .083 .083 .167 Count 1-0 25 0 9 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 2 0 .360 .346 .560 .906 Count 1-1 36 0 12 2 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 .333 .351 .389 .740 Count 1-2 61 0 10 1 0 2 4 0 1 24 4 0 .164 .177 .279 .456 Count 2-0 8 0 2 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 .250 .222 .625 .847 Count 2-1 22 0 11 3 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 .500 .522 .636 1.158 Count 2-2 49 0 12 3 0 0 5 0 3 16 -1 0 .245 .288 .306 .595 3-0 Count 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 .000 1.000 .000 1.000 3-1 Count 9 0 2 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 .222 .462 .333 .795 Count 3-2 29 0 5 0 1 0 2 15 0 11 0 0 .172 .455 .241 .696 According to that, he gets in a lot of trouble when he gets behind in the count. He has a low average but high OBP in a full count. He has very low averages when he's up 0-2 or 1-2. Looks to me like they need to focus on him pounding the zone a little more.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 04:13 PM) I agree that Vazquez has the ability to be just as dominating or at least pretty close as Contreras. There are many differences though. Contreras changed his style. He started coming from different angles. Going back to his old way of pitching also probably boosted his confidence, as even when he was the original guy the Sox acquired, he occassionally threw a gem. Vazquez is an 8 year veteran with a .500 record. Despite his HOF ability, he has had a mediocre career. He hasn't been too blessed as far as the quality of teams he's played on, but the best team he played on, he had one of the highest ERAs of his career. Before the Sox acquired him Ozzie talked to him, and Vazquez had a reluctance to return to the AL. To me that's a huge red flag. Hopefully his second half won't resemble the second half he had with the Yankees, he was so bad they thought he was hurt. I'm not giving up on him as a fan, but the "greatest rotation ever" does seem to have its weak points. The offense has been incredible, and you can't expect it to continue at the current pace. The pitching staff as a whole needs to get in gear. If they pitch the second half like Detroit is pitching in the first half, making the playoffs will just be a formality. The angles was a factor, but the bigger factor was that he started throwing strikes a lot more. He used to go through periods where he'd lose confidence in his fastball and just start chucking up forkball after forkball that he couldn't throw for strikes. His walk rate dropped significantly when he started pitching better. I think Javier is pretty similar. He isn't walking people as much, but he's getting behind in the count a lot, which makes life pretty difficult for him.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 04:02 PM) interestingly enough his WHIP (a more accurate description of how he has been pitching, is still only 1.31... only .05 worse than Mark Buehrle, .01 worse than Freddy Garcia better than Randy Johnson, Scott Kazmir, Brett Myers, Jon Garland, Joe Blanton, Zach Duke, Jon Lester, Brandon McCarthy himself... oh, and going into yesterday it was better than Buehrle's... similar to Contreras' season last year before he got rolling What's even more interesting is that his BAA has sky-rocketed during this stretch. Usually it's the walk-rate that causes a high WHIP (well, outside of Buehrle), but his was actually higher in May. His BAA was .211 in April, .243 in May, and .338 in June. My personal theory is that it seems like he's trying to nibble more for some reason, so he's behind in the count more, racks up higher pitch counts, and thus gets hit more when he has to throw strikes. That's very similar to what happened to Jose when he was bad last year.

Well, one problem can be where the gun is aimed. You'll get three drastically different readings if you're measuring the speed right out of the pitcher's hand, when the pitch is on it's way to the plate, and when it crosses the plate. That could easily be a 6 MPH difference from one end of the spectrum to the other. The other problem is that it's a precision instrument that's going to need to be calibrated fairly regularly, and it probably isn't. I'm not exactly a science major, but that's the way I always understood it.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 03:54 PM) Last night was the third time in 10 starts that Javy has given up more than 5 ERs. As of a month ago, his ERA was 3.86. He's been maddingly inconsistent and his overall numbers don't really justify his contract or his reputation. I'm sure that has a lot to do with the criticism, and rightfully so. Well, I can understand that, but it's more why he's the target and not the others. Freddy and Jon are making about the same amount of money while being just as bad. Freddy just got his ERA DOWN to 4.66 with his last start, and Jon is still up at 5.76. I wouldn't have any real problem with it if he were our only starter that was struggling, or if he had been consistently bad all year.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 03:41 PM) I'm sure that he could initially. But what about August and September? Young arms that aren't conditioned for 200+ innings tend to wear down in that period. Maybe B-Mac would've done as well as you think, but I'd rather Vazquez be out there. He's the better bet over the long run. It's laughable how one really bad start from Javy on national TV has turned into a "McCarthy would've been better" thread. Vazquez threw a few gems earlier this season and was pitching relatively well up until a few weeks ago, but apparently that doesn't matter anymore. :rolly Not even until a few weeks ago, until LAST NIGHT. His ERA before that was 4.43. I don't think B-Mac would have been better than that total. I don't understand why Vazquez is suddenly coming under fire. His numbers weren't a problem until he laid an egg last night. Freddy and Jon have had ERA's over 5 for most of the year, and the latter is still well over that total, yet somehow Javy is the one that has to go. The others have been just as inconsistent, in fact probably moreso.

QUOTE(bmags @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 02:53 PM) Eh..El Duque was a minor part of the deal. Chris Young was the centerpiece of this, and yes I'd expect we get more value out of Vazquez considering what we gave up. Considering the run support Vazquez has gotten, he should have an even higher win total. I believe if Brandon McCarthy spent the entire season in Vazquez's spot, he'd have more wins and better numbers. I also think Vizcaino would be posting better numbers out of the pen than McCarthy, since McCarthy clearly is still adjusting to bp duty. And, we'd still have a valuable trading piece and insurance for Anderson in Chris Young, who's having a great season at Arizona's AAA club. Right now, this trade is a loss for the White Sox that will likely become more lopsided with time. Sure, there is a chance that Cooper can fix the breakdowns that Vazquez seems to experience. But, at this point, my money is on Vazquez continuing to be the same pitcher he's been the last 3 years. You make some valid points, but I don't see how you can chalk this up as a loss thus far. Vizcaino has been okay thus far, but El Duque got traded already, Young is still in AAA and is probably at least two years away from being a major factor, and the money is about a push. I'll take the starter with stuff over a non-elite reliever and a prospect any time. As I said before, he was solid early in the year and only recently started struggling. Would McCarthy have been better than Vazquez thus far? I personally don't think so. Before this last start, Vazquez had been decent. He really only had one gift win, a lot of his run support came in his better starts. Every other win was a quality start. McCarthy would have been a much bigger wildcard. He pitched well after his second call-up last year, but so did Felix Hernandez, and he's getting shelled this year. My vote is he would have struggled going through the lineup more than once, especially when he leaves as many pitches up in the zone as he does. He's not exactly dominating either, and I'd tend to lean toward the veteran in that case. Having Vazquez on the roster also gives us the flexibility to deal Garcia or Garland, who have struggled more consistently this year and don't have the raw stuff that Vazquez does. Chris Young isn't exactly a sure thing, so I wouldn't panick about that yet. He's got talent, but he's not exactly a contact hitter. He hasn't cracked .280 since A ball. Considering that Anderson hit .295 in AAA last year, that's probably not a good sign. The comparison I hear the most about him is Mike Cameron, who is a solid but not stellar player. I'm not going to worry about him being a Carlos Beltran like star until he does it. QUOTE(Damen @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 03:20 PM) Exactly. Until I see Vazquez have a run like this one, I'm going to believe McCarthy is the better starting pitcher. And I don't think you can hold his bullpen numbers completely against him. There is going to be an adjustment period in knowing you need to be available to pitch every day versus every fifth day. Wow, 5 starts. That's plenty of evidence, he's going to win a Cy Young award. How about that his numbers from his previous callup? Javier has actually done it in the long run on the major league level. Take a look at his numbers with Montreal, and the first half for the Yankees. Or his performance early in the year for us for that matter.

QUOTE(Goldmember @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 12:33 PM) might need to put a thread in pub linking to here. i imagine most ignore this part of board. i usually do... besides, i hate drafting too early, but, the earlier we get leagues set up, the better draft date/time choices we will have... Just posted in the pub, 3 times actually. I don't plan on setting the draft until at least late-July, probably later.

I know it seems a little early, but fantasy football sign-ups are open on basically every site out there, so Soxtalk will be starting as well! Post Here to get on the list. Crap, thought there was an error the first two times, now I got 3 threads.

Sweet, finally got it pinned. I'm not ignoring you guys, just waiting until we get more interest before I start assigning people to leagues.

Yeah, that .898 OPS in June is really pathetic. He's killing this team... Edit- I just can't find the right shade of green anymore.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 09:50 AM) Overall, there isn't a whit of difference between Freddy Garcia's and Javier Vazquez's numbers this year. Freddie, in fact, is the one giving up the long ball more frequently -- 17 v. 9 for JV. Freddy Garcia 15 15 9 4 0 9 0 96.2 102 50 51 17 24 57 5.31 103.3 1.30 4.66 Javier Vazquez 15 15 8 4 0 8 0 95.1 101 53 54 9 24 75 7.08 103.9 1.31 5.00 So, both of these guys need to pick it up. But I think there is evidence they will. We know Freddie's history. Here's Vazquez's game log until last night. Apr. 8 @KC L 4-3 7.0 5 2 2 0 1 7 5 11 98 28 65 - - 2.57 Apr. 14 TOR L 13-7 6.0 9 7 7 1 1 4 7 9 102 27 29 L(0-1) - 6.23 Apr. 19 KC W 4-0 8.0 2 0 0 0 1 7 6 9 108 26 84 W(1-1) - 3.86 Apr. 25 @SEA W 13-3 6.0 4 2 2 0 2 2 9 3 109 22 56 W(2-1) - 3.67 May. 1 @CLE W 8-6 6.0 6 1 0 0 3 7 7 5 100 26 62 W(3-1) - 3.00 May. 6 KC W 9-2 7.2 4 2 2 0 0 6 10 8 116 26 69 W(4-1) - 2.88 May. 13 @MIN L 8-4 5.2 10 7 7 1 0 2 10 9 86 29 23 L(4-2) - 3.89 May. 18 @TB L 5-4 7.0 8 5 5 2 1 4 7 13 109 30 44 L(4-3) - 4.22 May. 23 OAK W 9-3 6.0 6 3 3 1 4 3 9 7 109 29 47 W(5-3) - 4.25 May. 29 @CLE W 11-0 6.0 2 0 0 0 3 4 7 6 106 23 69 W(6-3) - 3.86 Jun. 3 TEX W 8-6 6.1 11 5 5 0 1 7 10 10 115 32 37 W(7-3) - 4.14 Jun. 9 CLE W 5-4 5.2 7 3 3 0 1 9 10 4 110 29 51 - - 4.19 Jun. 14 @TEX L 8-0 6.0 10 6 6 2 2 7 11 6 99 30 33 L(7-4) - 4.54 Jun. 20 STL W 20-6 6.0 7 2 2 0 2 3 11 8 97 26 51 W(8-4) - 4.43 Out of 15 starts, 9 have been "quality" starts. That's not very consistent. However, it is also very possible he'll have a run like he had at the start of the season with 5 out of 6 very good games. After all, none of our starters has been perfectly consistent this year -- not even undefeated Jose Contreras. I think the jury is still out on Vazquez. But there's no way we'll trade him mid-year at this point (and I was the one who wrote the "Sign Contreras, Trade Vazquez mid-year" thread in the offseason). McCarthy has been inconsistent himself and still gives us important bullpen depth. We need to hang in there with our starters. Once our bullpen comes around -- and with the addition of Riske and the maturation of Matt Thornton it is looking a lot better -- I expect our starters to start to click. Actually, 9 quality starts right now is pretty damn good. Only 25 pitchers in baseball have more than that (surprisingly, none of them are White Sox). Javy's problem is that when he is off he gets completely rocked (at least his last couple of years). Edit- Oops, Javier only has 8 quality starts. 47 pitchers have more than that. Look, he's going through a rough stretch. That's pretty much what it comes down to. In April he a 3.67 ERA with a .211 BAA, and in May he had a 3.99 ERA with a .243 BAA. He's been awful in June though, I don't even really want to post the numbers. It's the same thing that happened with Contreras in between his good stretches last year, and it happens to pretty much every pitching in the league at some point. Even in June though, 2 of his 5 games weren't that bad. He needs to iron out some kinks. If he's keeps pitching like this then we really have an issue, but I'll worry about that bridge when we cross it. So we're basically making generalizations about one 5 start stretch in his first year with the Sox. You really need to give a player more than a couple of months to prove himself. As we can see in this case, all it takes is one bad month to screw up his totals. I really don't see us trading him before next season, and that's a good thing. That's a heck of a knee-jerk reaction otherwise. Besides, it's not like we'd be able to get anything for him right now anyways. We don't need to make the Loazia for Contreras trade in reverse.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 26, 2006 -> 12:15 AM) Don't give me that s*** cause comming into this game his era was like 4.52 or so. If he have a 6+ 0-1R game this thread wouldn't even be up here. That is my point. 4.43 actually.

I'd much rather hang onto Vazquez than Garcia or Garland. His stuff is considerably better than the other two, and the money is basically a push when you factor in the money we got from Arizona. His problems are in his head, and you can work with those issues. Contreras was an absolute mess when we got him, and that's turned out great. Give the guy a chance. Until this round through the rotation, he was still pitching considerably better than Freddy and Garland as well. His ERA at the start of the day was 4.43, which is a number we would have killed for from a bottom of the rotation starter 2 years ago. We got a little spoiled last year with all of our starters pitching pretty well most of the year. That doesn't happen very often. For a team that's 49-26 and was 3rd in the AL in runs allowed and 4th in ERA at the start of the day, people sure b**** about our pitching a lot.

QUOTE(zenryan @ Jun 25, 2006 -> 04:58 PM) and the Dutch coach needs to get fired. how can you not get Ruud into the game!?!?! Not only that, but he left a lot of National Team regulars off the roster like Makaay, Seedorf, Davids, and Kluivert. I know some of those guys are a little old, but they can still at least be useful players. So instead he goes with a youngster in Hasselbank that was playing in his first WC game instead of a solid striker in Van Nistelrooy. Sounds pretty iffy to me.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jun 25, 2006 -> 12:56 PM) Reyes: .300 BA, 67 R, 8 HR, 36 RBI, 33 SB, .855 (!) OPS are you insane? for a leadoff man! how can you say he's not one of the best in baseball? Wright: .336 BA, 50 R, 18 HR, 64 RBI, 11 SB, 1.015 OPS, he's just PRETTY good? Beltran: .286 BA, 55 R, 20 HR, 59 RBI, 12 SB, 1.007 OPS Delgado: .265 BA, 45 R, 20 HR, 54 RBI, .870 OPS - he's the only one of the stars of this team not RAKING, but he's still doing well Lo Duca is batting .280 with 18 Doubles, 22 RBIs and a .321 OBP, not bad for a catcher - his numbers aside from BA are on par w/ AJ Floyd is another masher, he's just hurt right now. 36 Homers last year if you recall. Nady's having a decent - middle of the road season Milledge is a rookie, played in 21 games, and has 3 doubles, 2 triples and 3 homers with 12 ribbies. nothing ridiculous, but it shows you that the guy has speed and power and lemme tell ya, he's gonna be damn good. he's only 21. those pieces of the lineup, combined with Pedro (7-3, 3.01 ERA, 110 K, 26 BB) Glavine (11-2, 3.33, 75 K, 30 BB) Soler (3.32 era in 6 starts) Bannister (when healthy again, 2.89 ERA in 5 starts), and Trachsel and el Duque... granted they really do need another starting pitcher, but if they add that, they're as good as anyone. their bullpen usually rakes. Wagner - nuffsed. Heilman, Bradford, Bell, Sanchez, Oliver. All of those with the exception of Heilman are UNDER 3 ERA! i'm just sayin that no one should be discounting the mets at this point. I just said why Reyes doesn't impress me all that much. His OBP is only .354 right now despite his high average, and it has been a serious issue in the past. He ranks 79th among qualifying players right now, and that's a high total for him. Slugging isn't all that important for a leadoff man. I'd much rather have Ichiro, Sizemore, Jeter, or Damon as my leadoff man right now. Michael Young and Curtis Granderson are two others that are as good or better. If he keeps his walks up in the long run that'll help him become more consistent, but I have my doubts. He's just not consistent enough and hasn't gotten on base frequently enough to be one of the top couple of guys, although so far this year he's taking a step in the right direction. He was hitting about .245 two weeks ago and has been on fire as of late to rack up those numbers. Nady's been out for a while. He's pretty medicore, just happend to have a hot start with his power. Milledge just isn't going to be that big a factor this year, although he has a lot of talent. Floyd is old and injury prone. He can hit a little when he's healthy, but last year was a bit of a fluke. He hasn't been that healthy and produced that well in a while. LoDuca hasn't slugged over .715 in a while. He's an okay contact hitter, but not much else, and he's rather mediocre defensively. Soler and Bannister are massive question marks, that's just not enough evidence to say that they are good. Trachsel and El Duque suck, and two of that group are going to have to make starts in the playoffs. I also don't expect their bullpen to hold up that well in the long run. Darren Oliver is a bum that is pitching well right now, and Feliciano and Bell are nothing special (1.76 WHIP for the latter :puke ). If they get another legit starter, they're a threat to go somewhere. Otherwise I don't see them getting past the NLCS. Their lineup looks like it's good enough to get them there, but their starting pitchers are really going to have to step up.

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jun 25, 2006 -> 11:54 AM) ok i know the NL is weak, thats a given, but to write off the mets as just playing well against weak opponents is just foolish. their squad is incredible. David Wright? MVP candidate this year Jose Reyes? Best (or will be soon) leadoff hitter in the NL, probably the game Delgado? Beltran? Lo Duca? Nady? (out of nowhere) Lastings Milledge? their lineup is one of the best in baseball, probably even better than ours. this team is set to hit the world series this year AND for years to come. Wright is 23 Reyes is 23 Milledge is 21 its pretty ridiculous... you guys can have your opinions now, but come postseason, i expect the mets to do really well - in fact, probably a mets v. sox world series. which wont be as easy as last year i can promise you that. I would call 6 of their players pretty good: Wright, Reyes, Delgado, Beltran, Martinez, and Wagner. I'm not impressed at all with the rest of the roster. Their offense is not even close to better than ours. They don't have the depth that we do, and even their better guys aren't producing as well as the middle of our order. Our starting rotation is considerably better as well. As for Reyes, he is not the best leadoff man in baseball, or even close. Even in a career year so far his OBP is only about .350. His career total in that area is .314. :puke He has no discipline whatsoever, which is generally a crucial factor for a leadoff man. LoDuca isn't anything special. He's an okay contact hitter, but he doesn't walk and has little power. Milledge has talent, but he's only a rookie. Pardon me for not being all that impressed with a .257 average and a .300 OBP. They're an okay team, but they're not even close to as good as the Sox or Tigers. I'd expect several other teams to end up better than them too as teams get healthy and/or hit their stride.

Ignorance - 10-2, 3.48 ERA 1.22 WHIP Those numbers aren't that great in the NL in a pitcher's park. Just because his numbers are good doesn't mean that he can cut it against better lineups and good opposing pitchers in the playoffs. There are plenty of rather mediocre pitchers that are still putting up good numbers in the NL.

I really don't get how Hernandez is struggling this much. The guy has a great arm with some monster stuff. I could understand if he was walking a ton of guys, but his rate isn't that far above normal. After watching him last year, I wouldn't have thought that he'd have allowed 100 hits in 90 innings to this point. QUOTE(whitesoxin @ Jun 23, 2006 -> 12:24 AM) Would you guys rather have a staff of solid proven veterans like we have now or young studs with unreal potential? Well, I'll go with the cop-out answer and say a mix of both. I don't think you can take a staff entirely made of young studs because they're likely to be a little less dependable and more erratic in their performance. On the other hand, if you take a staff that has several solid but not dominant veteran starters you're a little more susceptible when you run into elite pitching and your offense might have to do a little more work. Ideally I think you'd want three veteran types and two young studs. That way you have a fairly good idea what you're getting from three of your guys while still having ace potential in the two younger guys. If I had to chose, I'd go with the solid veterans, especially if that's supposed to represent our staff. I guess that depends on your definition of solid though. Contreras and Buehrle are both ace-type pitchers (not quite shut-down types like Zambrano or Santana though) and Vazquez fits in that category too when he is on. If we're talking something a little more like the St. Louis staff where their guys are nothing special outside of Carpenter, I might take my chances with the young guys though.

I'd say he's got to perform like this a bit longer to even enter the discussion. He's been very good lately, but he still hasn't really proved it over the long haul. IMO consistency is a very important factor in closer quality, and you can't make judgements off of only one year. He had kind of a rough April, and despite good periferal numbers he had a higher ERA in May. Obviously he's been lights out in June. If he keeps pitching like he has lately for the rest of the year, obviously he has to enter the discussion. Right now I think I'd go with B.J. Ryan. He was a dominant reliever the past two years and his numbers are ridiculous this year. Papelbon has also obviously been good, but I want to see him do it for at least a season and a half before I put him #1. Before his poor start to this season, I would have said Brad Lidge without hesitation. Rivera and Nathan are also still pitching very well. Honestly, outside of those guys, there aren't a whole lot of closers that are consistently dominant. Even guys like Francisco Rodriguez and Billy Wagner struggle for decent stretches.

Liriano appears to be the right answer right now. However, just for fun I'll throw Scott Kazmir and Justin Verlander out there.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 03:54 PM) I dont care what people say, the Mets are good and the White Sox or any team from the AL should not take the NL lightly. Reyes, Beltran, Delgado, Wright is a hell of a line up considering they do not have a DH. And unlike most NL teams who suffer when it comes time to play with a DH, the Mets have guys like Milledge, etc who are just looking for a place to play. True the Mets pitching is not that great, but their offense has the tools to win any game. And in a 7 game series with Pedro going atleast 2 times, that is only 2 other games that they need to win. Its one thing to be confident, its another to be arrogant. And Reyes just went for the cycle last night, imagine Pods being able to do that. That's assuming that Pedro wins both of his starts (or two of the three), which is far from a guarantee at this point in his career. He's a toss-up at best with Contreras or Mark, and the other one gives us an edge over Glavine. The Mets have no chance against us with Trachsel or whatever other crap they throw out there on the mound. I really don't see them as a major threat unless they add another legit starter. You're going to have a tough time winning a 7 game series with Glavine and Trachsel starting twice each. Their lineup can probably get them one with those two going, but I wouldn't count on it past that unless Glavine gets his old Braves strike zone. I'm not saying that we're totally beyond competition, but I see us as a pretty solid team that can take on all comers. There are a few teams that I think have a chance at beating us (Red Sox, A's, Cardinals, and Astros, all of which need to get healthy and get their s*** together), but only the Tigers really seem to be a major threat right now.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 02:48 PM) In the recently closed thread, LVSoxFan said this: THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU, pal. You're the one arguing that he has all these positive articles coming out... well, where are they? The people who who are anti-Mariotti have already posted the blog-spot, in which he flip-flops MULTIPLE times. He goes from calling Williams an idiot way-back in December to being his biggest fan. Jay's a tool, and I'm personally glad I'm not contributing one penny to his 'cause' by subscribing to the Sun Times or by watching Around the Horn. After I say this piece, I'm out of this. That isn't entirely true. If you wanted to spend the time, he did write a few articles last year when things were going well. He'd get run out of town if he didn't. However, that changed rather quickly around August. There were also a few more late in the playoffs. However, these were the first I've seen of him writing good things about the Sox. In the past virtually every article was bashing Reinsdorf, the current GM, or the current manager. He has a history with the Sox that isn't very pretty, and a half dozen or so positive articles last year doesn't change that. I also haven't seen any in the sampling of articles I've seen/read this year, although I admit I'm not actively looking for them.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) You built your straw man when you said I was "flipping out" about the Swoon. Your words, not mine. Straw man. Then you said I said I thought they were GOING to blow the lead, which I also did not say. That's two straw men. And for all your huffin' and puffin about what a great fan you are who never complains, you certainly haven't heard me complain about the Sox this year--what's to complain about? In fact, when they had their crappy start I was one of the many who told everybody to relax. You're all over the place on this. Too bad nothing you wrote about me was true. Oh well. And you supposedly hate Mariotti for the same thing. Irony alert! And what's unfathomable to me is you apparently totally ignorant of all the great stuff he's written about the Sox. I'm not defending the "jagbag," I'm stating the facts. And if you think you're being a superfan by standing by Ozzie saying things like "f****ing ***," then whatever dude. "we ALL thought they were gonna choke in September, and that was hardly Mariotti alone that was talking that up in the press" Apparently you didn't say that on page 4. Usually we is an inclusive term. Again, I never said that I never complain. However, recently I haven't. You said yourself that you complain when things aren't going well in your last couple of posts. I don't see how that's putting words in your mouth. Honestly, I've only seen you on here when there is something to gripe about, so I guess you could say that you haven't been complaining this year. Really, where are all of these "great" articles? The negative ones out-number the positives ones around 3:1 the blog thing, and it's been a lot worse in the past. Apparently Reinsdorf, Hawk, and Ozzie all have gripes with him for no particular reason. I never even mentioned Ozzie's quotes once, so I don't know where you get that last part. Honestly, I don't give a s*** what Ozzie says unless he's talking about me or my family. Indifference doesn't really count as defending. Mariotti is my problem. I don't see any reason to endorse that guy in any way. He blatantly goes after people whenever he feels like it and whines when people say something about him. I have no respect for Mariotti whatsoever.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 01:16 PM) You're in no position to question my attitude towards the Sox, pal. I had plenty of faith in the Sox or I wouldn't have been there as many times as I was last year, and the year before, and this year. Nobody said we (ME AND MY FRIENDS) were "flipping out" when they would "go through a rough patch." You said that, as you built your straw man. Like I said, if you are such a super-fan and weren't concerned at all during The Swoon, then I wonder how much of a fan you really are, because anybody with their heart in the Sox was hating that period. Cubs-like faith and never questioning moves/management is why they are destined to lose forever. Sox fans, as we--yes WE--all know, will be the first to question, demand and speak out when they think management is not doing the right thing. My God, son--have you never been to a game? A good chunk of the conversation you'll overhear is fans giving their take on how this should be done, how that should be done... even when we're WINNING. That's what's great about Sox fans; none of this love-goggle, we-love-you-no-matter-what mindless dedication. Make sense? How exactly is that a straw man? You said yourself that you thought that they were going to blow the lead, and you managed to get suspended/banned for expressing it in the past. I'm not conjuring that out of thin air. Maybe my language is a little extreme (I took a page from your buddy Jay), but that is basically what you said. I didn't say that I was happy about the Sox losing during that stretch, but I also wasn't assuming that they were going to blow the lead and go down in history with the 69 Cubs. I like to let things play out when we have a good team. Since when have I "never questioned moves/management?" I've been vocal in the past. I tend to complain a lot less when our team is in first place though (or very close to it this year). There's a difference between expecting a 4th place team to suddenly make a 15-game charge up the standings and expecting a 1st place team to hold the lead. Like I said before, I think they earned a little good faith, instead an awful lot of people were pre-maturely leaving them for dead. I'm sorry you feel that b****ing is part of being a Sox fan, although it's obvious from this board that some of you think this is the case. I've been guilty of it in the past, but not now when they are winning. It's not a requirement that you do it at all times. I didn't have a problem with it in the past when they were underacheiving, but it gets annoying when they've been playing as well as they have. Besides, the we-love-you-no-matter-what thing isn't and shouldn't be exclusive to Cubs' fans. God for bid we enjoy it when the team is doing well and have a little faith. They take it to the extreme, but griping about your team when they're in good shape isn't any better. Forgive me for trying to enjoy the team when they're doing well instead of worrying about what might happen.