Kalapse

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 28, 2007 -> 02:00 PM) Lee, Westbrook, Sowers, and Byrd in their rotation - which is better than the White Sox. This isn't mentioning a solid bullpen and one of the best offenses in the MLB. Sowers could turn out to be better then a few Sox starters next season.

QUOTE(Melissa1334 @ Jan 27, 2007 -> 11:00 AM) i dont think thats the case...plain and simple, buehrle doesnt deserve to be the opening day starter, yea garland should start over contreras...but it shouldnt be buehrle Contreras was the Sox' best starter last year I don't see why he wouldn't start opening day over Garland who was pretty average last season.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 10:28 PM) I think a goatee might raise his BA by at least .020. Don't you? I'm not sure it could possibly get any sexier than Brian Anderson with goatee.

I've gotta agree with Heads on this one, as big of a Sex Symbol as Brian has been come in the City of Chicago we can't have him walking around looking like that. The clean cut look works much better for BA.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 04:35 PM) ...and that based off what? Go ahead, admit that you saw it on BP in an article writtenby "clueless" Joe Sheehan. How is it 75% is "pathetic?" and 76% is "pretty good?" I don't read Baseball Prospectus all that often so no I didn't see it in any article by Joe Sheehan, it's just a philosophy I've adopted from following baseball in many different forms over the years. And when you're dealing with stuff like this it's always a problem to break it down in segments because it's impossible to say 75% is bad and 75.1% is good that logic makes no sense. I knew someone would quote that and well I'm not going to elaborate much because I don't really care. When dealing with SB% and stats like it you have to go on a case by case basis for obvious reasons. I think you're bright enough to figure out what I was trying to say instead of taking the numbers so literally. I will admit the terms I used to describe each percentage segment were poorly chosen but the post was rushed and I wasn't really thinking it through.

QUOTE(SnB @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 11:18 AM) download bit tornado http://www.bittornado.com/download.html go to torrent spy http://torrentspy.com/default.asp search for whatever you want, download the file, windows will say "open with...." and bit tornado should come up. Open the file with that and it'll download. I just learned about this stuff earlier this week and love it. utorrent is the superior torrent client. It takes up no hard drive space or memory and is incredibly easy to use and port forward. I've been using torrents for somewhere around 2 years now and it doesn't get much better.

QUOTE(rpmahr @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 01:03 PM) we have the pretty much the same core as in 2005 and 2006 and both teams were winners...we just did not produce as much as 2005 in 2006 and played in the best division in baseball....how can we not contend, especially when minnesota is weaker with their pitching and detroit will most likely have a sophomore slump and cleveland still doesnt have the pitching minus CC? the way i see it we are the favorites to win the division and possibly go deep into the playoffs if there is no key injuries. I'm not really sure how you can say the White Sox' starting rotation is really any better than Cleveland's. Both have a bullpen that's a question mark the Sox' has much more upside but is still a major question mark and Cleveland's offense is better than that of the Sox.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 10:46 AM) Am I crazy to think he should be the starting LF and leadoff hitter? This guy we got from Anaheim seems like he jumped the shark about two years ago... You're not crazy, you're 100% correct. Mack should have been leading off since mid '06.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jan 26, 2007 -> 03:07 AM) I think most people focus on the bad coverage job their CB did on that series and the fact he was benched afterwards. There's a ton of great catches that come on terrible coverage, that's never stopped them in the past. If it were anyone else regardless of the CB ability that catch would be getting major play from ESPN. Like Wite said if Bernard had a crazy personality like most of the WR in the game this wouldn't even be an issue.

Best bench player in baseball. Currently the best leadoff hitter capable of playing LF. I think it's impossible to predict what will happen with Rob in '07, it all depends on how he's used and it's impossible to know what Ozzie wants to do with him.

You know that Berrian catch is easily one of the greatest catches ever by a Bears receiver and has to be one of the best in Playoff history I'm just surprised (or maybe I'm not) that it's really not getting much national pub. I suppose if it were Chad Johnson or Terrell Owens who made the grab it would be running on a 24 hour cycle on ESPN2 it's just a damn shame that Bernard isn't getting a little more publicity for one of the greatest catches I've ever seen.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 11:39 PM) Just try to make sure it's something that you can live with yelling around other people if the dog runs off, so you're not yelling the name of a Disney character or something fruity and embarassing like that... That's why my next dog will be named Stansworth, there ain't a damn thing embarrassing about yelling Stansworth across the neighborhood that's the a name to be proud of.

QUOTE(effectivelywild @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 10:45 PM) In a slightly different vein, I think I've read that a base-stealer needs to have a ~75% success rate to break even in terms of net runs created. Anyone else heard this? Certainly this may be a bit different in close-and-late games, in which the difference between a man on first and a man on second can be more valuable. Yes I have heard this and I personally believe in this line of thinking, 75% and under is just pathetic, 75%-79% is pretty good and 80%+ is money. If a baserunner can't have atleast a 75% SB% then they should not be stealing at all. Anything below the 75% threshold is hurting the team more than it's helping. This just makes Podsednik's 70% (99/141) SB% in a White Sox uniform look all the more pathetic.

Netherfield

QUOTE(CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 06:32 PM) I still don't get your point . Does winning a glove glove mean you're an above average fielder , an average fielder , a poor fielder ? My point was Erstad would be a better option then Mackowiak, thats it plain and simple. A gold glove signifies excellence. Wether or not you deserved it the year you won it is of little consequence. At one point in time you were one of the best at your position. All awards are debatable but they usually are deserving. I think we both agree that Erstad shouldn't be an everyday CF but its not a bad option for the 4th outfielder. Its a decent move for the money. The Gold Glove is considered the biggest joke in all of sports, Derek Jeter is in the lower 25% of SS defensively yet he's the 2 time GG winner at SS now. A GG does not signify excellence it says that you're a pretty damn good hitter and you're popular enough to garner votes. The Gold Glove award should NEVER be used as proof for anything other than a player's popularity because the award isn't even regarded as a significant honor by the people who follow the game considering how much of a joke the voting has become.

So does MLB.tv show all the spring training games or atleast a good amount of them? I was thinking about getting it anyway and this would probably put me over the top.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 05:56 PM) Uh, anyone else watching SC? Springer did seem like the next logical step for A.J.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 05:32 PM) He said otherwise on the Score. Eh, not on draft day '03.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 04:32 PM) It has been pointed out before. It's sad that the Angels screwed themselves over that badly, and it's scary that KW almost traded Garland and Singleton for him. Another guy I would have loved, but would have cost a player rather than just a FA signing, is Brady Clark. He's also a guy I would not have minded starting in CF for the Sox either. I gave up on the whole Brady Clark thing a few months ago, it's just too perfect of a fit. He wouldn't cost much in terms of talent and he's only signed through '07 so there's no long term commitment there. He usually has a high OBP, good avg, ok power and a pretty good baserunner despite not stealing many bases but best of all he can play all 3 OF positions and well with an above average arm. The Brewers currently have somewhere around 13 OF on their active roster and have been looking to move the 30+ year old Clark for a while now. It's a damn shame that the Sox never made any kind of push for a player who could very well make this team even better.

QUOTE(retro1983hat @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 02:27 PM) Mike North, while annoying sometimes, went from a regular fan to a millionaire on sports radio and probably considered one of the top sports talkers in the country. The hating on him gets a little tired on this board sometimes. Just because he makes good money doesn't mean he knows anything about sports, the man is an idiot.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 01:26 PM) For 2007, or at least the first part of it, Erstad>>>Sweeney, Owens, and Terrero in terms of being a big league backup as well (mainly because I think Sweeney and Owens need to hang out at AAA for a while longer) Totally agree with you on this, no matter how little I think of Darin Erstad he's still a much better option than Sweeney who needs another year in the minors, Terrero who is bad and Owens who might be bad but definitely can't play CF. Atleast with Erstad we know that at a time in his career he was one of the best defensive OF in baseball. QUOTE(jphat007 @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 01:54 PM) They had plenty of time to go for other players before and either they decided not to because of money or they didn't like the player. Obviously they liked Erstad enough to give him the chance. It's not like there was anybody else that we could go after right nwo that would significantly upgrade us. Now if you want ot say we should have gone after somebody else who is now signed, that is one thing, but that time has past so as of right now, it was going to either be Erstad or Sweeney, Owens, or Terrero, or somebody else in the system, and I think they made the right should. Signing Erstad right this second isn't going to hurt the team. Not going after a right handed 4th outfield that was available early might, but they obviously didn't believe so. It was the right move at that time. Not necessarily the right move for the whole offseason. I'm not going to call the Erstad signing a good move just because they ignored the 4th OF spot for the majority of the offseason, it was a dumb move in my opinion. They should have found the backup CF first thing after the World Series but instead they waited until mid January and got a guy who I feel to be pretty bad. I'm not going to say signing Erstad is a good move just because they made the wrong decision early on.

QUOTE(jphat007 @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 01:24 PM) The 4th OF would have just been Sweeney or Owens or Terrero or somebody in that ilk without the Erstad signing, and that's who it will be if he gets hurt. It's not like getting Erstad was going to change that fact. It was going to be one of those people, and now it's Erstad. If Erstad gets hurt, it will be one of those guys anyway. It didn't have to be one of the young/bad players you mentioned there were others available this offseason that they could have gone after but instead they decided on Erstad. I don't really see why it would be Erstad or bust with this team he wasn't the only OF available this offseason.

Erstad will be guaranteed $1M. He'll make 750K in '07 with a $3.5M option for '08 that could increase to $6M if he gets 600 plate appearances in '07. The deal also includes a 250K buyout for '08. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6407652

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 01:02 PM) This is what I'd like to see statistics on. The effect of a base-stealer on the pitcher, the batter, and the game in general. What is the batter's batting average with a serious base-stealer on first w/ no outs/one out, etc? What is the pitcher's ERA, BAA, how many pitches does he throw, etc. ? How many thrown-away into right-field pick-off attempts did the base-stealer cause? How many throws into centerfield that allowed him to advance to third. Get on this, Bill James. Jerk. This stuff seemed really noticeable when Pods was dominating in the first half of '05. I was just looking at the mlb highlight archive '05. Two games in one week in like May where Pods stole 4 bases in the game. Dang! Totally different subject. James does have all of these manager statistics in the Handbook, but I wish he had 3rd base coach stats so we could see just how many times Cora sent AJ to get gunned-down easily. I believe Baseball Prospectus did a study on the effect of a basestealer on the pitcher and found that they don't make much of a difference.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 25, 2007 -> 02:08 AM) He'll want 5 years 20 mil per. Not enough years.