jackie hayes

The point is, this is a generic statement that all free agents give. "I want to play for a winner, but I want fair value..." Who hasn't heard that a million times? But when it comes out of Valentin, he's "talking out of both sides of his mouth". This is getting absurd. If he built a children's hospital in the west side of the city, everyone would say he just wants to molest little boys with scabies. Jose is the man who can do no right. Why the animus? The season's over and he'll be gone soon, just let it go.

So if it's not about the money he should be willing to play for free? He doesn't name a dollar figure, like Magglio essentially did, he just says fair value. And Magglio was not asking for fair value, not even close. And frankly, w/ all the hints, everyone knows he's gone, even him. This is a trial balloon for other teams. He's played well for us, there's no need for the venom. I hope he gets a chance to play and does well.

If we get equal value in return (at a position of need), then okay. But I'm sceptical about that.

Why are you arguing with me about Frank? I said exactly the same thing about Frank, that he should absolutely not be traded. But how do you know that "almost everyone" thinks that? A lot of people do, probably a majority, but "almost everyone" means over 90%, from my way of thinking. Why do you think it's so nearly unanimous?

My point was that the same logic applied to Frank. I don't get the impression that almost everyone thinks either PK or Carlos has to go. (Jose is another story.) Was there a poll on this?

They won't get that much b/c none of them is as good as Tejada. Renteria is the closest, but I wouldn't think too long about that choice.

So Frank and Carlos should go too? Also puts Buehrle, Garland, and KW on the bubble. I just don't see how this trumps his actual play.

It just gets annoying when it comes up again and again, when it is totally meaningless. We could just as well say, "Some thought Rowand couldn't play, so maybe Borchard can play. Trade Lee (or Frank)." That's not even an argument. I always wanted the Sox to let Rowand have a long shot at the CF job b/c we didn't have a good CF (sorry, I thought Everett was just atrocious). Now we're talking about getting rid of one of our best players, largely b/c this bench guy has played out of his head the past month. And he has been good, and maybe it's a sign. In the minors, he seemed to be able to adapt (unlike Borchard, say). But I don't have enough confidence in that to want Konerko gone.

I never said they were mutually exclusive. What the discussion was about was how important bunting is. obp is important no matter what you believe, but bunting is only important for "small ball" philosophies. I was saying, yes, obp is important, but past that I don't agree with small ball. (With a slight qualification; I do think speed is important, but less important than small ballers think, and for different reasons -- stretching base hits more than stealing.)

Okay, I'm tired of seeing this. If you want to use this for individual posters, fine, argue it out w/ them. I wasn't posting here at the time you're talking about, but I've always thought Rowand would be a good starter in the ML. And anyway, it's totally irrelevant for this discussion. So just stop w/ it.

If the Sox got rid of Thomas, only then would I believe that KW has lost his mind and must be fired. What kind of sensible move is it to trade your best obp guy, with a ton of power, who walks almost 100 times a year? Frank is not still the best hitter in the ML, like he was in the 1990s, but he is still great, big-time great. When healthy this year, Frank was the best hitter on the White Sox, hands down. He is NOT expendable. I don't like the idea of trading Konerko. At least, I expect the Sox to get equal value, which is unlikely if they are the peddlers. If he leaves, giving Gload a chance is okay. But I'm not sold -- I worry that this is arrising from Gload's great August + September performance. 47 abs in those months, who knows what that means for a full season?

Oh yeah? Well Borchard hit one over 500 feet, which proves conclusively, Borchard > Bonds.

And if we offer arbitration and it's accepted, there's no reason to believe his injury will reduce the arbitrator's decision, right? If so, it's quite possible that he'd get about the same salary that he had this season. But I'm not sure about this. It doesn't seem impossible that Maggs would sign a contract before the arbitration deadline. Suppose you're the Mets, and you're able to sign Maggs to a $9-10 mil/yr contract (perhaps with team or vesting options to limit the risk while escalating the contract), a big savings over Hidalgo. You may be willing to part w/ the picks rather than risk losing him to arbitration. (The Sox, you think, may be willing to offer arbitration, if they have the same health info that you have. Moreover, it's just a 1-year risk for them.) Of course, this only happens if you have reasonable assurance that he's healthy.

Not just to you, but related to your point -- how did Harris play?

I hope so too!

Still may have to change the sig, though.

I still don't like negative categories related to individual players, even biggest disappointment -- not because negativity is bad, just b/c it will (I think) carry some official soxtalk label. It's fine in the threads. But say "favorite game" -- I don't know, "most important game" seems better. Just can't ignore that Burke-Hunter thing, I think. It erased in my memory whatever my favorite game was. I'd use fewer categories and a bunch of nominations (5 may be too few, 10 too many, it's not divisible by 5, but why not 8, or 7 if you prefer?).

His obp is no better than either Cabrera's or Lowell's, while his slg is much lower. He has more steals, that helps a bit, but his % is a bit low (64%). His big extra value is in the low k-rate. Now, don't get me wrong, he's almost an ideal leadoff guy, especially w/ the slight bump in slg this year. But it doesn't mean anything w/o Cabrera and Lowell. I just value that middle-of-the-lineup guy more than the leadoff man.

Okay. But personally I'll believe it when I see it in the numbers. Not to say that game watching is not informative, but I think a person would have to watch minimum 1/2 of the games of a team (spaced more or less evenly) with REALLY good recall to have a better sense of a team than the stats can give. As for steals, hey, I still point to the fact that PK is perfect on the year. I believe in the obp story, not the small ball story. I think Florida's most important hitters have been Cabrera and Lowell, not Pierre and Castillo (although you do need high-obp types in the top spots). Anaheim, what can't Vlad Guerrero do?

I admit, I don't have the stats on outs to the right side of the infield when there is a runner on second with none out. I've looked and looked and... If you have these, please share them. If there is a very large discrepancy between the Red Sox and the A's, and the rest of the league, fine. I doubt it. The Twins are only 11th in sb%, good but not great. It hurts you when it doesn't work at least as much as it helps when it does work.

Moving runners over how? Not with sacrifices.

Well, if your team's not bunting well, stop trying it! What you're saying indicts the coaching staff more than the players. I don't agree with your argument, that teams that are not as well-rounded can make up for it in bunting. The Twins and Rangers have low obp, and low sacrifices, and they've played well. Anyway, obp appears to be much more closely correlated with winning, why don't we work on that and ignore bunting?

We have more sacrifices than the Angels. The Expos lead the majors, the A's and Red Sox are 29 and 30, and they're headed for the playoffs, so it seems. The Twins are 23, well below the Sox at 13. So where's the advantage?

LOL! His little chocolate donuts!

Maggs too? Tough crowd...