Jake

Whenever you're trading pre-arbitration players as part of a rebuild, you're doing it wrong.

Has there been any detailed comment or update on PK's injury? It seems to me that this is a sham.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 04:30 PM) Or it could be Hahn simply telling Ventura to stop abusing Sale's arm. I think a text would suffice Stop it w/ Sale re: pitches k thx bye

I'd imagine it's nothing big. Probably letting Robin know what's going on in terms of player movement on the horizon. Maybe seeking his opinion on certain players. I'm sure it's difficult for them to find a time and place to talk during the season

Are we really THAT shallow at 3B? Michalczweski in low minors, Morel in high minors, Gillaspie/Keppinger in MLB. None of these guys are world-beaters but it seems like we are far better off at the position than we were 12 months ago

QUOTE (bbilek1 @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 12:54 PM) I don't think you're being cynical at all. In fact, that's a good point. Seeing how he adjusts to pitchers after the league adjusts to him will be a huge part of his rookie season. This is often something we don't get a good look at until the second season

The surge to a division victory begins today!

There is some chance you could get similar production for similar money in FA. This means you could get Rios-like production AND prospects for $13 million instead of just Rios.

Like most things, it depends. Some women will (perhaps subconsciously) be turned off because you're doing yoga. If that's the case and you like doing yoga, those women probably aren't for you anyway and therefore you have missed out on nothing. Either way, first impressions don't last forever anyway. I'm sure we all can think of people who had us pegged completely wrong and vice versa. Disregarding the potential for looking at woman-ass/looking like a woman-ass, I still would be hesitant to do it until I'm more flexible. Something like illinilaw's class where I won't be the only inflexible dork wouldn't be so bad. I'm becoming a runner so increasing my flexibility would be immensely helpful

I met my current girlfriend when she had a long distance boyfriend. I instantly became infatuated with her (I am prone to do this) and when I found out she had a boyfriend I was sick. All the hyperbole came to mind, this is the final straw, the perfect woman for me is unavailable, nothing is meant to be, yada yada. Anyway, we still had enough mutual friends that we got to know each other better and it became readily apparent that this long distance relationship was a highly dysfunctional one. I would suggest that you get to know her, make it clear that you're interested in her, and see what happens. If this boyfriend business is true, she'll probably be somewhat coy about whether or not she is interested in you. If you play it slowly and just enjoy the friendly/intellectual part of your relationship, she'll be able to better process her level of interest and how that affects her current boyfriend situation. If she wants to get down, I can't say not to do it, but be ready for those privileges to get revoked after a little bit when boyfriend finds out and they have to actually break up. Now, that doesn't mean things will be easy for you if you find out that maybe this long distance guy is expendable. After I more or less accelerated the end of their relationship, I had to back out for a while. This can go with different degrees of smoothness, but you want to really kindle the flames when she has recuperated from the end of her current relationship. Try to avoid being the target of her angst if/when she has second thoughts about her current breakup (I think everyone has a stage after a breakup, no matter what the situation, where they second guess the decision). You don't have to be out of the picture completely per se, but you probably wouldn't want to be chomping at the bit to get (back?) into bed with her; in my opinion, even if she offers post-breakup I'd hesitate to reciprocate. Don't be the rebound. Anyway, I'm probably skipping too far forward. Just talk to her, continue to enjoy her company as you have previously, but from now on make it obvious that you're interested. See where that goes, the boyfriend stuff may well be negotiable in the end. I'm a grad student so I see these long distance relationships everywhere between classmates and professors so I'm projecting my past experiences/observations a bit.

I have a feeling the Sox would rather go with a known entity at 1B than take a chance on a guy via trade when they have several young guys like Wilkins and Dayan that might be able to cut it there. I suppose it wouldn't blow my mind, if they are unable to shore things up with outside acquisitions, that they might give PK a one year deal if he wants it. I don't think that's very likely, but they might do that if they don't think they have someone to play there. PK could be a guy that gets valuable at the deadline, at which time you might have a guy like Wilkins or another young player ready to come in and play that spot.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 02:24 PM) Sanchez also draws walks, Keppinger does not. Not a very good comp. Kepp has a career 6.6% walk rate. Sanchez has been just over 7%. Similar walk rates, though they aren't similar players

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 12:48 PM) Was it really that many players? 3 position players & a 5th starter? Most of the bullpen was in place in 2004. I would think that's pretty common in today's game. Rostered players: Iguchi, Podsednik, Dye, AJP, Widger, Pablo Ozuna, El Duque, Dustin Hermanson, Luis Vizcaino, Bobby Jenks Players sent away: C.Lee, Magglio, Sandy Alomar, Jose Valentin, Dan Wright, Scott Schoenweis, Jason Grilli, Robbie Alomar

Of course, Carlos Sanchez still isn't as old as Gordon was as a draftee and he was VERY advanced for his age.

So...please raise your hand if you're glad we didn't trade the farm for Chase Headley

We've gone through the same thing with Gordon. It isn't always readily apparent whether Gordon is/was a bad player because he had so many at-bats of unsuccessful play or if he was simply too young for the level that was giving him trouble.

I think Jaws laid it out pretty well. Trestman can give him a good scheme, but it is demanding on the QB. The version of Jay Cutler that we know has bad footwork and is a slow (yet aggressive) decisionmaker. This means that he will either take instruction and become much better as a result...or this offense will magnify his weaknesses. It is hard to prognosticate when it comes to Jay, but for the most part he leaves us wanting, which is why his ranking fell this year.

Right - when he's blazed through the minors at age 20 and lower, it's very bold to say that we've seen his best already. His potential must include the possibility that he continues to grow into his body and hit the ball a little harder. Obviously, we think that even without much change in his athleticism that he will at least begin to bat for average in the next year or so at AAA. I also don't see a reason to think that he is without a position. Reviews are positive on his defense at SS and 2B. The only reason he has changed positions at all is because of perceived organizational need. Since we no longer have dire need at the MLB level, we're letting our best prospects play their natural positions; in his case, shortstop.

I think we've all gotten a little too sour on Sanchez. I would counter that utility man is his floor, not his ceiling. He's not going to hit like Jeter, but it's not impossible for him to grow into an .800 OPS player. This is why it's called "ceiling." If I had to place bets right now, I would guess that he becomes an 85-100 wRC+ bat with 1-2 wins on defense/baserunning.

Cutler day on Jaws' QB rankings. Jaws has always been the most optimistic pundit when it comes to Cutler, but he's losing faith.

2005 is amazing just for the sheer roster turnover. I remember the Soxtalk banner had the faces of each new player on it entering that season. When do you see a team bring in so many new people and immediately succeed?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 09:33 AM) I will always love that team, and it was constructed incredibly well, but that was just about the flukiest team I've ever seen. I would also probably argue that the 2006 team was one of the most stacked teams I've ever had the chance to see up close and they ultimately missed the playoffs. Weaknesses of 2005 team: designated hitter, 5th starter Additions to 2006 team: Jim Thome, Javier Vasquez Fail.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 9, 2013 -> 09:17 AM) Well that's interesting. Guys on the board are happy Rios almost physically attacked his superior (let's not act like Williams is some unathletic punk either, considering his major league heritage, son who played professional baseball, and son who plays for the 49ers) when Williams kept the Sox extremely competitive for the better stretch of 10 years. I look at 2003, 2006, and 2010 as years where the team literally fell just short, while I look at 2005 and 2008 as years where the team broke through, and most other years the team was atleast competitive. Really, in the grand scheme of things, the Sox were probably one of the top 10 most successful franchises of the past 10-15 years. I'm so ready for everyone to attack you. But I totally agree. I wanted more, but things could have been much, much worse. It's interesting to think/wonder how many playoff appearances/runs were cost by winning the one WS. 2006 certainly seemed to be a byproduct of overtaxed pitchers while we seemed to piss away some other golden chances because our manager went insane but couldn't be fired.

It wouldn't be the feminine part that makes me embarrassed. It would be the part where I'm horribly inept at it. I don't think I'd have a problem doing it in public if I was able to look like I knew what I was doing.