AddisonStSox

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Apr 15, 2007 -> 04:27 PM) Our guys need to go back to shortening their swings up,and concentrating on contact and line drives. They are still in long looping swing for the fence mode right now. Just bad approach all around. I'm seeing a lot of bad swings in bad counts. That said, the play on the field was still good for two more wins than they got on this road trip. If Jenks doesn't blow a save in Oakland the Sox were looking at a sweep and if some guys executed today in a few situations, this game could have at least gone to extras. I'm not entirely discouraged from what I've seen. However, there is going to have to be some adjustment made at the plate. It's far to early to write that off. EDIT: These Guillen strawmen are cracking me up...keep em' coming!

QUOTE(Capn12 @ Apr 15, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) How about, for once, we blame the real culprit of the loss today: We can't hit for s*** right now. This loss wasn't on Ozzie, he did a pretty good job trying to throw anyone he could there at the end to shake things up. Pods for Uribe is only semi questionable. Get over it, we lost because we can't hit a damn thing right now, thats all QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Apr 15, 2007 -> 04:07 PM) Ozzie is now contemplating putting Gooch in the 2 hole next week, and putting Grinderstad back down in the order. Next week we face Texas who's pitchng staff has been near the last in the league in AL in ERA. If they shut us down, then something needs to be done. Pay heed to these voices of reason. Here's hoping sanity will prevail sooner or later.

QUOTE(shoota @ Apr 14, 2007 -> 12:04 PM) I've noticed a lot of Guillen defenders take a macro approach in defending him. I believe Guillen defenders take this approach instead of discussing a specific criticism because they understand Guillen's decision was wrong and there's no way to defend it. Hence the reason for avoiding the topic and basically saying while Guillen is bad at his job, he's often better than some! No, no, I think your approach is far more logical. Let us psychoanalyze every move he makes during the course of the season, and pay no attention to the win totals, or his ring finger. You are most right. This is a very baseball savvy approach. QUOTE(Wedge @ Apr 14, 2007 -> 12:17 PM) I think that Guillen defenders take the macro approach for good reason. I think even the most ardent Guillen supports would agree that some of his in game decisions are somewhat questionable, and yes, they may cost games. However, as we all know the season is a marathon. I think that sometimes those decisions help the team out in the long run. Cox has always been a master of this and I believe Ozzie tries to emulate it. Gets it. Always has, always will. QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Apr 14, 2007 -> 12:21 PM) I'm sick of people waving the "ozzie won a ring" flag and saying we can't criticize anything he does. There's been plenty a time when he's been wrong (especially last year), and he deserved to get ripped for it. See the former response, not the latter.

Great. What an honor.

This thread has been hilarious. Guillen has been nothing short of spectacular for a first-time manager, bringing a World Series to a city that has been without one for 88 years; and yet, people will still question his defensive substitutions (or lack thereof), bullpen decisions, and lineup card on a daily basis. Part of me wants Guillen to get axed just so all of you can sit through a manager that does everything by the book. Go ask Bob Brenly how that worked our for him and his career. Ask Bobby Cox how he was able to manage the same franchise for 17 years--by playing every decision by the book? Hardly...and, yet, Guillen developed his managerial prospectives while under Cox's tutelage. If managers' decisions are worth roughly 10 wins or losses per year, Guillen has earned this team far more wins than he has losses. You want Bob Brenly, you can have him. Get real.

Forget Geddy, ask Neil Peart.

Don't mind me

This was such an awesome surprise. Along with the play of the young defensemen and some of the other youngsters throughout and at the end of the year, it really does seem like this team is primed to turn the corner next season. Hopefully, they'll keep Savvy around long enough to be a part of it--he is my all-time favorite hockey player both on and off the ice. Question for some of you guys: is there a hockey equivalent for Baseball Prospectus or Baseball America? I'm sure there is; so, what is the best stuff out there? Also, why has everyone cooled on Alexei Cherepanov and Angelo Esposito? From everything I've read, those two seem like the best options out there.

You Illini-haters are digging pretty deep. Who gives a f*** what happens with the Iowa basketball program? The Illini have to worry about the Illinois basketball program. Remember, it is still Iowa athletics and Iowa basketball...ouch.

Brian Anderson isn't going anywhere, Anderson fans. Relax. It behooves the White Sox organization to keep Brian Anderson as the team's starting center-fielder. Do you really think the organization does not know this? Boy, bring in some veteran competition for a struggling, loud-mouthed former-top-prospect and everybody on Soxtalk gets a little bit jumpy. You can still wear your Anderson fan-boy jerseys for at least another year.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 04:31 PM) Anderson has done everything the Sox have asked of him and is out-playing Erstad in ST thus far -- how has he NOT earned the spot? QUOTE(Craig Grebeck @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 04:48 PM) Erstad hasn't proven s*** except that he's a terrible ballplayer. Two perfect examples of meatballs that have missed the gravamen of the argument. In no time, the prospect-fanatics will arrive and complete the obliteration of intelligible baseball discussion. I have finished here.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 03:57 PM) But...so you're saying Brian Anderson should have to earn his spot. Why exactly should Darin Erstad NOT have to earn his spot? What about the .635 OPS Erstad has put up this spring in 50+ at bats says that he is has earned the starting spot and Anderson hasn't? I'm willing to say that Anderson should have to earn the starting spot. But I think Erstad should certainly have to earn it too. And the reason I'm making such a big stink about this is...every single thing we've heard so far suggests that Erstad is having it handed to him. Balta, if you will review my previous posts (especially my first in this discussion), you will see that I am not advocating handing anything to anyone--including Erstad. My biggest bone of contention with the Anderson issue is this: the perception that the organization is stacking the odds in favor of someone else. You will counter by saying (as you already have) that everything we have seen thus far suggests the organization is handing the starting position to Darin Erstad. You must remember that Darin Erstad has the advantage of being a veteran with a proven track record and a proven ability to contribute on and off the field--the same can not be said for Brian Anderson (this much is a fact). In my opinion, better competition should have brought in. Erstad should have to earn his roster spot just as Brian Anderson should have to earn his. In my humble opinion (which really has no effect on this discussion either way), Erstad was not the proper choice. However, he was the choice of the Chicago White Sox. Now, if Anderson hopes to be this team's starting center-fielder (as he was once projected to be), he is going to have to shoulder the burden himself, make no excuses, and earn such a distinction--so far, everything I have seen suggests the playing-field is level and not tilted to the degree some posters would have you believe.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 03:20 PM) So...if Anderson goes out and does everything we've asked over the offseason, comes back, and looks better in ST, seems to be saying all the right things, doesn't complain about having to earn his spot, doesn't bash anyone...what exactly does he have to do to make the team happy with him? Quit baseball? Balta, Am I to understand that because Brian Anderson has got himself into playing-shape, adopted a professional attitude, and stopped disrespecting his employer to the media, the White Sox are to make-nice and hand him a starting position? Imagine such preposterousness in any other profession. That would be the equivalent to a mid-level-manager getting dismissed for two weeks because of office misconduct, only to return after the two weeks with a positive attitude and a public-adoption of professionalism and asking for a promotion. There are no hand-outs here. If you want to start for a Major League ballclub, earn it. Don't speak it. He might be talking the talk, but he is not yet walking the walk and that is why veteran competition has been brought in. The cream is going to rise to the top. If he earns a starting spot with his play on the field and has been absolved of his previous indiscretions by his superiors in the organization, I can not imagine the organization blackballing the kid. All he has done thus far in 2007 is what should be demanded from any minor league player vying for a spot on the Major League roster. These are not insurmountable odds...quite the contrary.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 20, 2007 -> 02:32 PM) Good to see that we are really getting to see what Anderson can do, and allowing him to fight for the job. Tom, If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck... At this point, I think a very logical step to take would be the admission that this organization has soured on Anderson. So, what has led to such a souring? Could his play on the field have merited such a souring? Yes. Could his off-field antics, work-ethic, level of seriousness, maturity, etc. have merited such a souring? (I do not claim to have any inside sources or first-hand information; I am simply using what I have read/heard to make this claim) Yes. So, rather than place the blame on the organization--as so many loyal Soxtalkers/prospect-martyrs have--can we please start to place at least some of the blame on Anderson? Brian Anderson need not look any further than the mirror for a reason as to why he is being thrown to the way-side at the age of 24. This was a once-heralded top-prospect who is in serious threat of losing significant playing time to a very suspect, injury-prone, declining thirty-year-old center-fielder. Is this because the organization had it out for Brian Anderson? No...a resounding no. Brian Anderson finds himself in the position he is in today because of Brian Anderson--no one else. I just can not continue to sit here and read these posts suggesting the organization has it out for Brian Anderson. It behooves the White Sox organization to have found its center-fielder of the future in Brian Anderson. This organization traded the single most popular player on a championship roster and traded one of the brightest outfield prospects in the game because it felt Brian Anderson was the guy. The fact that Brian Anderson is getting s***canned in only his second Major League season suggests that there is more here than meets the eye. But, rather than use any logic, let us all put the blame on the organization for having it out for such a prized prospect. How can a guy like Todd VanPopple (once dubbed the second-coming of Roger Clemens) get chance, after chance, after chance based on his Minor League merits, but a very successful top-center-field-prospect get s***canned in just his second year? I can not believe that this perception has become reality on this once-intelligible baseball fan site.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 19, 2007 -> 01:51 PM) Patton will probably take some of Bruce's mid major recruits, so it does matter. I didn't even know Northern Illinois had a basketball team. The Northern Illinois Huskies aren't even a blip on the radar. Get real.

This just in from the department of who gives a s***.

Love it. We need more of this.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 15, 2007 -> 04:01 PM) Angel was AMAZING in high school. I remember being 100% certain he would be big-time. Looks like he still has a chance to be just that. Dominating the high school game and dominating the college game are two very different things. What about his pedestrian junior college numbers make you think he could still be "big-time?" Just asking.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 08:49 PM) santiago is an interesting case. i'm actually not surprised he surfaced on our radar. really tough upbringing and a lot of scuttlebutt when he was in high school that suggested he was a bad seed. not a dumb kid per se (20 on the act) but just people who wondered if his head was screwed on straight. some of the negativity came when he spurned a high profile aau coach to train with the puerto rican national team. anyhow, his crappy high school grades (lack of effort, not intelligence, folks say) led him to juco. since then he's put up decent, although not spectacular numbers and has stayed out of the police blotter. of the candidates who have been mentioned for a fifth scholarship, he is one of the more intriguing. he's more of a scoring point guard, not a fantastic three-point shooter but a good penetrator and someone who brings some excitement to the table. i'll be curious to see what our interest ends up being. It sounds like there are better options out there for the fifth scholarship. Not only does this kid have well-documented character issues, but, there are some outstanding guards in the 2008 class that should get a look. Unless, of course, Jamar Smith is out for good, I think Weber should either put that fifth scholarship in his back pockets, or, if a guy like Baines shows you something, bring in a wing like that. If this kid were to come here and cause more headaches for the Illinois basketball program, Weber would have some serious egg on his face and I just don't think that is a risk worth taking--not for those pedestrian JuCo numbers.

Angel Santiago. What's the skinny on this kid?

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 04:17 PM) They are prospects in the loosest sense of the word. I beg to differ. Ask some of your cronies about Heath Phillips--the lefty that the White Sox will regret trading despite his blatant roadblock to a White Sox roster spot.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 01:39 PM) Him, Rogo and Tracey all seem like likely trade bait. Trading prospects!? You can't do that. That's blasphemous around these parts.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 03:57 PM) Ian, The only issue that I have with Mack in center today, is that you have 2 kids fighting for a job and you want to give them the best opportunity for success. Having someone play a position that they are not comfortable at with 2 contact pitchers on the mound is not the best for success. Its not a big deal in the long run, but you just want to evaluate it with the best light. Tom, You know as well as anybody that a million factors could have led to Mackowiak playing CF. Perhaps Erstad felt a little tight in the pre-game warm-ups and Ozzie wanted him in a corner outfield position where he may not have to cover as much ground. Maybe there is an actual possibility Erstad starts the year as the White Sox starting left fielder. Maybe he wants Mackowiak to get out there for one game with the big skys so that if called upon during the season, he can fall back on a spring training performance rather than not playing CF since the previous year. It's a spring training game. This is the place to work all the kinks out. There are absolutely no grounds on, which to call out a manager, present today. C'mon. QUOTE(ptatc @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 04:00 PM) Maybe Ozzie wants to see how mentally tough the pitchers are to pitch over mistakes made by fielders. Sometimes this can be a good mark for a pitchers. Do they hang their head? Do they glare at the feilder. Do they fall apart and give up a big inning> Also a possibility. Use a bit of baseball acumen here.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 04:11 PM) I cant believe there is still b****ing about the lineup in a split squad spring training game.

You people are joking, right? You are seriously joking? It's spring f***ing training. Get over yourselves.