Kalapse

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 09:20 PM) BTW - How did he win the 1-0 game against the Cardinals this year? Well, this might have something to do with it: Eckstein, SS Taguchi, CF Pujols, 1B (first game back off the DL, looked pathetic.) Rolen, 3B Encarnacion, RF Perez, T, DH Luna, LF Molina, C Miles, 2B Heager could have shut down this lineup.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 09:13 PM) I would agree without even having seen him pitch that Linebrink appears somewhat better. But I would argue that you aren't properly factoring in the NL/AL difference, or the Petco/Cell difference. Add at least .5 to his ERA and then make the case that a 3+ ERA reliever is "absolutely shutting down his opponents." I don't buy it. Linebrink strikes me as overvalued. And, on our team, I'd rate Jenks and Cotts ahead of him. Even Thornton has much more upside. Josh Fields for that? That would be a huge mistake. You've never even seen the guy pitch, you've possibly never even heard of him until recently, how in gods name can you make statements like this? In '04 Linebrink posted a 187 ERA+ and in '05 it was 210. I'm sure you're not entirely familiar with this stat so I'll give you a quick idea as to what it means. ERA+ is the ratio of the league's ERA (adjusted to the pitcher's ballpark) to that of the pitcher. Above 100 is above average and below 100 is below average. So ERA+ Factors out the ballpark a pitcher throws in. Just for comparisons sake, Tom Gordon put up a 204 ERA+ and 173 last year. Cotts had a 229 last year, and Politte; 222. So in other words Linebrink pitches consistantly the way the Sox relievers pitched last year.

When comparing Riske and Linebrink you must also keep in mind that both have been used in different ways for the past 3 years. Linebrink has been the setup man to Trevor Hoffman meaning for the past few seasons he's been comming in to games in the 8th inning, crunch time and absolutely shutting down his oponents. Riske on the other hand has been more of a middle reliever, comming in to games in the 6th-7th inning and only sparingly in the 8th or 9th. The biggest knock on Riske has been his career pitching in crunch time when he's been known to give up the big HR (*cough*crede*cough*). So you have Linebrink who's one of the premier right handed setup men in all of baseball and on the other you have Riske who's a damn good middle reliever but not much of a late inning guy. I don't really see much of a comparison. Also, it's funny because I brought up a very similar trade to this at the end of the first game thread yesterday and about a month ago too. I'd love to get Linebrink, even if it costs Fields.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 03:29 PM) Considering guys like Paul Byrd got $7 million/yr, yeah he probably will. I imagine something along the lines of 4/50? I'd say 3/36 or 3/39 with a 4th year option along with a nice $1.5M/$2M buyout would be pretty damn plausible.

I still fair dem pesky Indians, they're laying in the weeds right now just plotting their takeover of the AL Central.

I wanted to go for something a little more realistic in this sig and I believe I accomplished that.

FWIW Scott Williamson will never play for Ozzie, plus he sucks. If you're giving up 2 of your SPs and your #1 prospect in order to fill a semi-need while creating a huge one in your bullpen I'd say this is pretty counter-productive. Not to mention the fact that this trade is beyond unplausible.

"Pinkeye" and "Spooky Fish" are probably my two all-time favorite episodes.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 01:28 PM) My question was not in response to anything . I was just randomly wondering when the last time was that the Tigers had lost two straight? How about a series loss? July 3-4 Vs OAK.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 01:02 AM) Now Humber could be a guy I could see the Mets trading instead of Milledge or Pelfrey. How's he doing in the minors this season. I think he had an arm injury for quite a while, IIRC. http://amazinz.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15776& It's not much and they don't talk a whole hell of a lot about Humber but it's a small look into what Mets fans think of some of their spects. Also, I didn't notice Ring has been pitching so well for them in the Minors. Basically Humber has been hurt forever and he's just recently gotten back.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 12:30 AM) Your bet suggestion has been noted and disregarded, unfortunately, as we've made our bet and have no problems with it. It is done. I suppose I should've read the fine print in your post: "for all intents and purposes suspended for ten days." What, exactly, do you mean? That people will be mean to me? If you lose your posting abilities for 10 days due to a bet that's basically a suspension. Probably a poor choice of words but I figured it was clear enough that you could figure it out.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 12:25 AM) I am not of the opinion that a Gestapo runs SoxTalk. If having that line in my signature would have me suspended for ten days, then something'd be more wrong with the staff here than with my signature, in my opinion. Needless to say, I don't think that any of the Admins would say, "JIMINY JILLICKERS, RADIOACTIVE SIGNATURE!" when they saw that and call Milhouse to suspend me, but, truth be told, if such an extreme and needless action were taken, well, I'm a big boy. Well you just totally 100% misunderstood my post, read it again and see what you come up with.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 17, 2006 -> 12:09 AM) I'm a big enough boy to make my own bets. And there we go. I appreciate you handling it with class, Bonderman. I don't mind having you Tigers around, although I wish your team would leave! I'm not sure I understand this bet, so 8-1 in his/her avatar is worse than being (for all intensive purposes) suspended from the board for 10 days? I'd think it would be the other way around a sweep would mean a 10 days of no posting and a series win would mean 7-2 being put in the avy. Also, I really think you should have to stop posting for 10 days if the Tigers sweep, it only makes it fair and it would ease the pain of a Tigers' sweep for a lot people on the board.

UP TO THE SECOND SP TRUST LEVELS: 1.) Jose Contreras - I have much faith in the Titan, I truely expect him to kickass every time out. - - 2.) Jon Garland - The tallest of the midgets at this point in time, he's been pitching considerably better than the other 3. - 3.) Mark Buehrle - 22 ER (24 R) over his last 14.1 IP, that's 3 straight horrid starts. I hate him right now. 4.) Javier Vazquez - I have much faith in Javy, faith that 4 out of his 6 IP in each start will be stellar but he'll end up allowing 3 runs per in the other 2 because an opposing hitter looked at him the wrong way. - - - 5.) Freddy Maddux - No real reason for him to be pitching for this team in August.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 10:19 PM) BA is my Joe Crede. I'm so much behind the guy, because it's the first guy I've been able to follow from the beginning for the Sox since I became a hardcore fan. I'm in a similar boat as you when it comes to BA. It's funny because I never thought that highly of him when he was a prospect, he always put up solid numbers in the minors but nothing spectacular along with some nice tools but nothing eye popping there either. Whenever I saw footage of him hitting, especially in Spring Training his swing always looked drawn out and incredibly long, similar to Crede's back when he sucked so I never thought much of him in terms of an offensive threat either. But damnit that son of a gun has grown on me, all through his struggles he stayed so concentrated and never seemed flustered, he'd do interviews and instead of being nervous as hell just rallying of sports speak he would joke about how he sucked and such, he and Bmac are probably two of the better interviews on this team (with AJ being the best). His defense has been f***ing crazy good which really shocked me, I knew he was going to be pretty good out there but nothing like this. Also he's managed to shorten his damn swing and is absolutely crushing the ball over the past month+ which shows to me that he's serious about being the best player possible and is willing to make adjustments if necessary. The guy is just real similar to Rowand in terms of his ability to attach himself to a fan base, one of coolest things I've ever seen from an athlete in this city was Row appearing on the JHood show night after night for like an hour each day to just bulls*** with him and the fans about baseball, the Bears and anything else people would bring up. Anderson just seems very similar in his personality. In other words, I'm a fan.

Gotta say, I'm not a huge fan of this whole outline kick you're on.

QUOTE(beautox @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 09:35 PM) where is Tejada on that list? Numero uno

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 07:18 PM) Here we go again with the Pods bashing. I know it makes you Saber guys excited to point out what a worthless player he is, but if you haven't noticed, he is doing a pretty decent job of getting on base lately. I suppose it would be the ultimate coup d etat for the WS Saber community to replace worthless Pods with the god-like Abreu. I'm not a saber nut by any stretch of the imagination and I'd LOVE to replace Podsednik with Abreu, that would be a hell of an upgrade.

QUOTE(SadChiSoxFanOptimist @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 06:00 PM) Any of you stat guys know how many double plays Paulie has hit into? Seems like a bunch. 15, good for 6th most in baseball.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:35 PM) Willis? To be totally honest, tough I'm not entirely optimistic about his long term success in major league baseball, I'd be thrilled if Kenny found some way to pick him up before the deadline. He'd more than likely dominate the American League for the rest of this season with his funky delivery and arm angles.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:32 PM) lol I see way more exaggerated bashing around here. Predicting doom may be the cool thing to do, but there's nothing wrong with a little realistic optimism. Realistic optimism or blind optimism? Once you throw away stats, current and past performances and trends and just go with odd gut feelings and optimism to form your arguments I'd say you've lost any attachment you once had to reality.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:16 PM) How is being optimistic about a World Series-caliber team in a good position to possibly repeat but currently in a funk anywhere near close to being eternally optimistic about a perenially horrible franchise?? Confusing warranted criticism with pessimism and panicing and in turn preaching unwavering optimism while calling out anyone who cares to air their concern is pretty ridiculous IMO and does seem like a pretty Cubish thing to do.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:10 PM) And to think we make fun of the fans to the north for doing the same thing that this thread is preaching. Too true.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:08 PM) Is there any need for saying Javy has the testicular fortitude of a nine year old girl? I was just teasing. It's a fine way of describing the mental makeup he shows on the mound IMO.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:00 PM) Yeah, actually, if you want to simplify it, that is what I'm going on. His problem, historically, has been the longball. Now it isn't. It's the "big inning," usually including a defensive miscue and a squeezing umpire. The point is, his problems now are in his head, and I also think he's got an issue with relying on run support. He never had run support elsewhere, and now he's got a ton; he's taken to expecting it, and being a bit lazier because of it, IMO. Besides, going more with Mentality, Javy was VERY unhappy in Arizona last year, so that too played a part in him pitching so bad there. Overall, his stuff is still there, and I'll bet he winds up okay. Vazquez has always had mental problems this is nothing new to him. So instead of having the testicular fortitude of a 9 year old girl and giving up a ton of HRs, he's decided to keep the former and add the big inning to his list of problems. QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 16, 2006 -> 05:04 PM) Oh, come on mate, don't pretend that I've ravished your feelings by teasing you about The Sureness of the Source. That doesn't make the comment any less out of line. There was no need for that.