Kalapse

Well it's official, I am sick. This sucks ass.

Found it (oddly enough it was exactly a month ago today that I wrote this): QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 22, 2007 -> 08:29 PM) It has been over 6 years since the White Sox last found themselves alone in the cellar of the American League Central. You have to go all the way back to May 25th, 2001 to find the last occurrence that did not take place in the month of April. The White Sox have never finished a season any lower than 3rd place in the AL Central. If the Sox lose tomorrow and the Royals win it will be the latest in the season that the Sox have ever found themselves in 5th place (7/23) with July 12, 1998 being the previous low point. The last time the Sox finished a season alone in last place of their division was 1989 when they finished 29.5 games back of the Oakland Athletics in the American League West. Days spent alone in Last place of the AL Central (May 1st or later): 2007: 0 (tied for last) 2006: 0 2005: 0 2004: 0 2003: 0 2002: 0 2001: 12 (latest: 5/25) 2000: 0 1999: 0 1998: 4 (latest: 7/12) 1997: 8 (latest: 6/20) 1996: 0 1995: 0 1994: 0 Total: 25 days Days spent alone in last place of the AL West (May 1st or later): 1993: 0 1992: 0 1991: 3 (latest: 6/21) 1990: 0 1989: 134 (finished in last) So going back to 1990 the Sox have spent a grand total of 28 days alone in last place from May 1st or later. So Sunday was the latest in the season that the Sox have found themselves alone in last place since 1989.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 09:54 PM) Edit: I mean before this year. Have they ever been in 5th a decent way into the season since they went to 3 divisions? No I did the research about a month ago, I'll try to find the post.

Hopefully he's had his final AB in a White Sox uniform.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 10:54 AM) is that based on fact? Well, we're dealing with hypothetical body parts here and much of this is based on personal feelings. I suppose you could make a case that it's opinion, though I'm not sure why anyone would ever consider Aaron Rowand to be "an arm and a leg." Especially when you're getting one of the best power hitting lefties in the game in return.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 11:03 AM) Does that mean we need to keep Pods too? Should we have held on to Freddy as well so we'd have a basically worthless starter instead of Gio and Floyd? Maybe we should keep Contreras around and give him a few more shots in the rotation. Seriously, if you want to pick out a few starts you can make just about anyone look like a superstar. Just look at Jeff Weaver last year. Come on now, I'm glad he has done some good things, but he's just not consistent enough to justify paying him what we'd have to in order keep him around past next year. This is his 6th full year as a starter and thus far he's had one that you could say merits being a $12 mil+ pitcher. As long as we're getting some solid pieces back that can help the franchise, I have absolutely zero problem with moving him. Brandon Backe, Nate Robertson, Jeff Suppan, Jeff Weaver . . . that's just from the last 2 Championship series/World series. Jeff Suppan has been incredibly dominant over his last 5 CS starts and his only World Series start with the Cards was a beauty. I don't think I'd throw ~$13M a year at Jeff Suppan.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 10:13 AM) He is a bargain for that price. But you can't act as if he were a free agent pickup. The sox paid an arm and a leg extra, just to get him at a fair salary. BTW, who ever said he isn't clutch, has no idea what they are talking about. Aaron Rowand is not an arm and a leg, it was made to look worse by the failure of Anderson but Rowand is hardly a finger.

So Podsednik is hurt once again?

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 22, 2007 -> 12:14 AM) you pretty much showed how you feel when you said " I'll take it." I just could not agree, that's all. How isn't he earning his money? I didn't think I had to justify those numbers coming from a hitter who's guaranteed only $21.5M over 3 years from the Sox. Good luck finding a better bargain from a player with at least 6 years of service time.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 11:44 PM) Kalapse ... my question to you is what pitchers nowadays are better No. 3 starters than Garland? Who can you get in baseball that is consistent besides the aces? I mean I know what you are saying, but what I am saying is Garland is as good a No. 3 or 4 as anybody you'll find. Garland is a damn fine pitcher in the "non-ace" category. How can you deny that? What pitchers would you prefer? An average starting pitcher is considered a ~#4 starter these days. I never said Garland was bad or that I didn't want him on the team, just that he's closer to league average than anything else. Like I said before, a league average starter can be a very valuable commodity, just ask Ted Lilly's accountant.

It's pretty interesting looking at Garland's game logs for the season. BR has a GameScore for each outing where anything around 50 is meh, over 60 is damn good and under 40 is bad. This year Garland has had 8 outings with a score of 60+, 9 between 40-59 and another 8 below 40. I'd say that's pretty consistent.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 11:27 PM) That's strange. Garland has had some dominant performances in his Sox career. Dominant. The problem I have with those who want to dump Garland is like many of you said ... who do you replace him with? I mean the Sox aren't going to find 5 Johans out there. Everybody has bad outings in modern day baseball. Garland has shown me plenty to say he's a good pitcher, not just a slightly above average pitcher. He's had some GREAT outings. How can you deny that?? If Garland has 5 very dominant outings he tends to come right back with another 5 that are terrible. There's a reason why his ERA ends up around 4.50 every year. Hell, Ted Lilly is often dominant but he also tends to implode a couple times a year, hence why he's pretty close to league average by the season's end. Same goes for Jason Jennings and Doug Davis.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 06:51 PM) You can justify it if he were a free agent pickup I suppose. I'm not trying to justify anything.

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 04:56 PM) Kalapse, your expert analysis of our players amazes me. Buerhle shouldn't have been traded either and wasn't. I spoke out against that trade idea too. Buerhle, Garland and Vazquez are better than "slightly above average." I am not too certain about Contreras anymore and if we get offered a good return in a trade that maybe Jose should go, but when he is on he is one of the best and has shown that. You don't mess around with trading away good pitching just because they have a rough stretch. There's nothing in the numbers that tells me Garland is anything more than a slightly above league average starter, not a damn thing. If you have some statistics that I have not seen that proves otherwise I'd love to see it. A career 4.48 ERA, 103 ERA+ (100 being average), 1.37 WHIP and a ~2.2:1 K:BB suggests he's pretty damn average. I'm not saying he's a bad pitcher or anything, I think a league average starter is an incredibly valuable thing. You seem to have a habit of overrating White Sox personnel. ERA ERA+ WHIP K BB HR 4.58 100 1.407 112 83 23 2002 4.51 99 1.367 108 74 28 2003 4.89 100 1.378 113 76 34 2004 3.50 127 1.172 115 47 26 2005 4.51 103 1.363 112 41 26 2006 4.84 94 1.407 90* 61* 23* 2007 --------------------------- 4.45 102 1.344 108 64 27 6 Year Totals *Projected totals What am I missing here?

QUOTE(BearSox @ Aug 21, 2007 -> 09:30 AM) Oh just to throw this out there, the Angels will have no interest in Crede as Wood will be their 3B next year. Dallas McPherson will also be returning from surgery and seemingly ready to go next season.

How is that P.O.S. Dergen in there over KW?

QUOTE(rangercal @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 03:32 PM) Before some else brings up Thome, I will. lol AVG .264 | HR 20 | RBI 63 | OBP .413 | SLG .502 Sal 15 mil not sure what he's costing the sox though. $8.5M a year for a .915 OPS? I'll take it.

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 07:19 PM) Jon Garland has some bad games and we want to trade him right away?! Mark Buerhle had some bad games too in fact a stretch of them last year. Jon is a quality pitcher and will turn things around. If you trade any of our starting group, who is going to take their place? Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Or you could trade a slightly above league average starting pitcher who will make $12M next year and fill a couple other holes with the return. It's kind of funny that this sort of talk bothers you so much seeing as how Buehrle was being shopped hard at the beginning of the season and Garland has nearly been dealt twice since joining the team (including one such deal that broke down just this past offseason).

I've been all for trading him since the beginning of the season. Removing both Garland and Contreras from the payroll would allow for some very nice financial flexibility come this offseason.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 12:46 PM) 1 mil salary + 4.56 signing bonus (9.12 split over two years) = 5.56 mil Thomas got the full $9.12M signing bonus in January of '07. You have to look at it as either $10.12M this year or $1M, there is no middle ground.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Aug 20, 2007 -> 09:51 AM) As for the arms...Buehrle and Garland don't have enough torque on their pitches to screw up their arms. Vazquez is the only one that MAY...I repeat...MAY have arm trouble, but probably not. We have a good amount of pitchers that are serviceable coming through the system. But remember, Buehrle is our ace...and he was a 38th round pick. Look, there are going to be your low pick, high reward guys like Buehrle and Piazza (51st round pick, IIRC). And you are going to have your busts...Gavin Floyd anyone? Or the Mets pitchers of the early 90's, Wilson, Van Poppel and I think Isringhausen. Like Poplar said, baseball is up and down...the Tigers just a few years ago, were the absolute worst team in baseball...BY FAR. Now, not so much. The White Sox need to do something about the instruction and the scouting, but I agree with Poplar that things can change, in a hurry. And I'd much rather have my team say, "We are going to retool and do our best to win NOW," than, "We are going to rebuild, enjoy these kids playing, but we are going to suck for a few years." I'd say Garland's mysterious 2 year "knot" counts as arm trouble.

Jerry Owens, Joe Crede and Charles Haeger have NO trade value. Believe it or not you can't trade a combination of these bad/injured players for a star in Crawford or an above average leadoff man in Figgins. I know it doesn't seem fair but you generally have to give something up in order to get something.

I assume a pitcher will be sent down to make room for the man with the very silly name. Mark Buehrle Ryan Bukvich Jose Contreras John Danks Gavin Floyd Jon Garland Bobby Jenks Boone Logan Mike MacDougal Matt Thornton Javier Vazquez Ehren Wassermann So I guess Floyd is the obvious choice to go. This is seriously f***ing retarded.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 02:44 PM) This team already has a LOOGY and he unlike Myers has been getting lefties out this season plus he's like 13 years younger and doesn't have a silly name. I don't see a lot of upside to this signing.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:03 PM) I also could care less about draft picks. Look who the Royals signed this year. Is there any guarantee a high school kid is going to hit in the bigs??? No way. No but there's a damn good chance that 2 years from now David Price will have great trade value.