Kalapse

QUOTE(michelangelosmonkey @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 04:26 PM) My point is you can't cherry pick. Chipper Jones...superstar. Arod...superstar. Junior...Superstar. Three .900 OPS guys in 40 years. Then some guys. Sure 3 is good...but its no sure thing. There's no such thing as a "sure thing" in anything in sports but you said it yourself, the #1 pick is "more" of a sure thing and that's good enough for me. There's just no downside to having the #1 pick over the #5 or the #8, the #1 is ALWAYS a better pick to have, ALWAYS.

QUOTE(michelangelosmonkey @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 04:19 PM) I've already surrendured on this...as I pointed out earlier...I wasn't watching very closely either...and the Sox are real close to the #1 overall pick because they need not be abysmal this year. 95 losses versus 105 losses...THIS year. But to get a whiff at #1 overall and it means losing 105? I don't ever want that because I think its still not a sure thing. Though yes, MORE of a sure thing. "More" of a sure thing is better than "less" of a sure thing especially when we're talking about 100% meaningless games. I understand your point of view here but there's just no downside to losing in my mind. I suppose we can leave it at that.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 04:17 PM) The 1 pick has also produced two of the most talented players ever in recent memory. Not that I'm comparing Alvarez or anyone in this draft to Jr. or Arod but you get a shot at a real special talent with the 1 pick. Hell, just in a 4 year span the #1 overall pick produced possibly the greatest offensive 3B the game has ever seen (Jones does have the highest OPS for a 3B , though I'm sure Schmidt would get the majority of the votes) and quite possibly the best player to every play the game.

QUOTE(michelangelosmonkey @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 04:00 PM) On Saturday the Sox lost 7-0. On Sunday they won 8-0. Tell me you didn't feel better? And the number of superstars at, say #5 since 1965...Mark Teixeira, JD Drew, Vernon Wells, Jack McDowell, Dwight Gooden, Dale Murphy. Or #6...Rocco Baldelli, Derek Jeter, Barry Bonds, Gary Sheffield, Andy Van Slyke...is not wildly worse than the group at #1 over all. Winning makes me feel good and I think losing doesn't particularly ensure anything. In the NFL being worst ensures you the best Quarterback in the draft (Carson Palmer, Peyton Manning, Michael Vick in the last ten years) and an easier schedule. I barely watched either game so I didn't really have any feelings either way but I suppose the loss made me feel better than the win since the loss can only help this team in the long run and the win will do absolutely nothing. Having the #1 pick would allow for the Sox to take their guy, they can draft the player who they feel is the absolute best player in the draft. If there's someone that a scout or KW has fallen in love with and they think he's the balls then they can take him, no one can stop them. Picking up an extra meanings 7 wins at the end of a miserable season and pushing the draft pick back to #8 would only limit the White Sox's draft flexibility. Flexibility can only be a good thing IMO. I couldn't care less about past top 3-5 picks, the Sox having the ability to take their guy, someone who people feel is the most talented player in the draft sounds pretty damn good to me.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 03:49 PM) If you're going to say it wasn't Ozzie's fault, it was the players....then KW or Walker or Cooper should be fired. I just can't believe this team is so bad, and the big four, in terms of coaches, are going to be back. I agree. I will not however, get into any arguments over managers and coaches. It's just such a tired, old and boring debate and there's NO tangible evidence to work which makes it that much worse. It would be nice if people would just avoid these boring debates and instead realize that some people are just not going to like a manger and some are going to love him and just let it be. There's just no way to make an airtight argument either way. The distribution of blame argument is one that's filled with circular logic and assumptions which makes for some seriously boring discussion.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 03:44 PM) Once again, a contract extension takes into consideration your career and track record as a manager, during both contract extensions I compared the manager's record. Wedge had ONE season of above .500 ball, Ozzie has a ring, 90 wins seasons and one horrible year which is basically 98 percent the players fault. If it's so easy to divvy out the blame/recognition then how much of '05 was Ozzie's doing? I didn't realize it was so easy to figure out how much of an effect a manager has on a ballclub's success, are the good seasons good because of the manager and the s***ty seasons s***ty because of the players? I just don't think giving a manager a contract extension during one of the worst season's in club history is a very good idea.

What's the downside to losing?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 03:24 PM) And your point? He also never won a WS, never won back to back 90 game seasons, and had at that point only been over .500 ONCE. Ozzie is a winner and this years lack of success falls solely on the crap KW put together and the horrific years that several of our stars are having. There is no better option out there for a manager. This is a good move. You don't give a manager a contract extension during a season in which they're possibly the worst team in the league. You decided to compare the '06 Indians to the '07 Sox, this has nothing to do with '05. You're the one who started the Wedge/Guillen comparison.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 03:24 PM) And your point? He also never won a WS, never won back to back 90 game seasons, and had at that point only been over .500 ONCE. Ozzie is a winner and this years lack of success falls solely on the crap KW put together and the horrific years that several of our stars are having. There is no better option out there for a manager. This is a good move. You don't give a manager a contract extension during a season in which they're possibly the worst team in the league. You decided to compare the '06 Indians to the '07 Sox, this has nothing to do with '05.

The Indians finished 6 games under .500 that year, this year's Sox team is on pace to win 68 games.

Just kill me now.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 4, 2007 -> 12:12 PM) I believe there are some arbitration-clock issues at play as well given that he was called up earlier this season. Sweeney was only up for I believe 23 days earlier this year, even if he were called up right now and stayed up for the remainder of the season it still wouldn't count as a year of service. So no, there are no Arb issues here.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Sep 2, 2007 -> 07:59 PM) Who cares about next year's draft? GO SOX! Everytime you guys make dumbass posts about the draft after a victory I'm going to make my own dumbass post about how happy I am we won. Just curious. Why did you give Thome cheers in your game recap? My box score said he was 1-for-6. Did he get the hit that broke the game open or something? One for six is not exactly good. Driving in 1/4 of the team's runs for the game is, however.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 2, 2007 -> 08:12 PM) Please, for the sake of the board, try and understand the economics of the game, a little better. Your asking for the Sox to spend 40+ million on two players. TWO. The Sox payroll this season is roughly 103 million, which I believe is in the top 5 in all of baseball. If you really expect ANY owner to spend 40 million on two players in the same off-season, it's unfair of you to slam ownership, as you have no idea on how things work. Not just $40M+ a year but a probable $250M+ investment in two 32 year old players.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Sep 2, 2007 -> 08:01 PM) If we want to contend, we need to sign Torii Hunter caliber type players. I love Rowand but would rather have Hunter and A-Rod. This organization needs to act like a big money WS champion not shoot for cheap alternatives like Richar, Erstad, etc. Big Money Organizations (BOS/NYY/NYM/CHC/CHW/LAA) all have young, cheap alternatives on their rosters, it's a necessity really. The key is to have a nice balance of high priced veterans and very cheap younger players which is something the Sox are trying to do right now with Fields, Richar, Jenks, Dye, Konerko, Buehrle and Thome. I'm pretty sure everyone would rather have Hunter or Arod over a guy like Aaron Rowand but in a league where Vernon Wells is getting $100M+ and A-Rod is looking for $30M a year sometimes the cheaper alternatives are the better value buys.

QUOTE(Jake @ Sep 2, 2007 -> 12:10 AM) A small defense for David Eckstein, he is very popular. He puts asses in seats, because there is something to like in a 5'7'' grinder shortstop. If he's so popular then why aren't the Cardinals even making an attempt to re-sign him? They have no other in-house leadoff options and no middle infield prospects. Why are they letting him walk?

Pfft. It's been done before and at a younger age.

3rd No hitter of the 2007 season.

2nd career start for Clay. Long bottom of the 8th could hurt him.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 11:39 PM) Maybe the Angels will take Erstad back. There must be some Rowand-like love for Erstad back in Cali. Reggie Willits has already taken over the short, white, grinder role in Anaheim except he's 7 years younger than Erstad and . . . wait for it . . . good. I do think they'd take Darin back, of course he'd have to retire first but I'm sure the Angels would give him some sort of managing position within the organization.

QUOTE(CarlosMartinez @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 11:25 PM) I swear, if I have to watch Erstad play another game I am going to kill myself. I love how he get's his AB's every other game rather than bringing up our so called "future" and letting them figure things out. Hell, they could put Harold Baines out there and get better production! Instead, Darin Erstad is the future, let's ride that pony all the way to the World Series. It's painful to watch him and McCrazy get the pt they do. Sorry, too many Miller Lites, tired of watching this hores*** team take the field each night and piss it away in one way or another. Thank God football is here to ease the pain. Better get used to it, he'll be back again next season.

Do you suppose Ozzie will put Mike Myers on the playoff roster or elect to add Ozuna since he's on the DL?

I know everyone is already aware of this but Boone Logan is the balls, seriously he's just that good. I love him like a son.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 31, 2007 -> 10:15 PM) Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but if Ryan isnt' brought up in September, I'm pretty sure it actually saves us a year on his arbitration clock since he won't be on the major league roster at the end of the season and will only have been up for a couple weeks. If I'm right, that's a major benefit of just sending Ryan to winterball and not calling him up, considering that I think he's just not ready yet. I believe you are correct on this one.

Going into the draft the White Sox put together a big board -- a list of players who they have scouted, think are good and would like to draft -- if the White Sox have the #1 overall pick then they can choose any player they want off their big board, anyone that they think is good can be added to the farm system but if they have say the #8 pick because they won a bunch of meaningless games at the end of the year then there are 7 players that the Sox can not take, anyone of which could have been #1 on their big board. At least with the #1 pick they can take the guy they like, the player they feel is the best in the draft, a player who they think will be able to help the big club sometime in the future. Another point, if a #1 overall pick -- a player who a lot of people thought was the most talented player in the draft -- just puts together 2 good years in the minors his trade value will be incredibly high. Meaning, even if that #1 overall pick never amounts to anything in the majors he could still be dealt for a very good major league piece simply because he was considered the most talented player in the draft. How can more draft flexibilty be a bad thing though? If the Sox have a top 3 pick then they can take who they want whether that player is considered the best, 3rd best or 13th best player in the draft, they can take their guy. If the Sox end up with the #8 pick that flexibility is destroyed. I just don't see the downside to finishing with the worst record in baseball this year.