hitlesswonder

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 11:21 AM) because a snarly comment towards Chris Young, who hit yet another leadoff home run last night, was made in the original post. I think Vazquez can be a good pitcher but I don't think it's a coincidence that he's pitching like he was on the Expos while the Sox are playing like the Expos. Vazquez pitched well down the stretch last season when the Sox were still in contention. He pitched well early this season before the Sox fell out of contention. He's been one of the 20 best starters in the AL for over a year. I don't think he pitches well only when there's no pressure, but that's just me. Do I wish the Sox could rescind the Young trade? Yes, without a doubt. Young is more valuable. It was a bad trade. But the Sox didn't get totally ripped off. It wasn't an epically bad trade -- they did get value in return. Just not equal value.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 09:15 AM) Gee, I wonder why. No pressure = no problems Seriously. Let me know when Javier Vazquez pitches well in a game that matters. Sure, you could point out his 3.86 ERA in his last 12 games of 2006 when the Sox were fighting for a playoff berth. But I prefer to ignore that.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 07:03 PM) interesting that you didn't link the blog item from the sun-times that features the director of cpl basketball lauding the hire. whatever fits your agenda, i guess. Alright, just to enlarge my agenda, here's a link in which 2 AAU coaches say it was a good hire.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 04:48 PM) Maybe, maybe not. A 2nd peoria guy with no Chicago connections does seem like a bit of a strange way to go... Taylor Bell reports there's pretty intense dissatisfaction with the hire in the CPL. If you read the linked entry, it doesn't sound good.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 10:11 PM) So in other words, what you're saying is...the consensus number one pick doesn't always dominate? I think his more interesting point is that the Sox will pick Jordan Danks regardless of what number pick they have. I know that's complete speculation but I have a disturbing feeling that might be true unless they get the number one pick.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 08:03 AM) Josh Fields = Joe Borchard? (let the rumblings begin... ) Borchard could hit fastballs. It was breaking stuff that ate him up. You have to think that when pitchers learn they can pump 90 MPH heat down the heart of the plate and Fields can't do anything with it that he'll be in trouble. I wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to trade Fields now...it would have been better to do that before moving him to LF. For his career's sake, the Sox should trade him to PHI or some other place where they have someone that actually teaches players how to hit.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 12:41 AM) 0% chance that happens next season. If the only difference between that lineup and 2008 reality is that Rowand/Hunter is in CF, then I don't see a big difference (although maybe not a last place team). And if one of those guys is in CF, I wouldn't be surprised if Erstad or Owens is the starting LF. Ozzie has to get his official leadoff hitter. In fact, tonight Ozzie said that it's not a sure thing Fields will be with the Sox in 2008.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 17, 2007 -> 11:54 PM) Jeff Abbott put up similar power numbers as a rooking in '98, though Jeff actually had a higher SLG. Also, Jeff Liefer: 18 HR in 254 ABs in 2001. I was going to post the Liefer comparison as well. Fields hasn't done anything yet to make me sure he has a long-term future in MLB. At least not one any better than Liefer's was. Right now, Fields is a defensive liability wherever he plays and is generating less offense than a replacement-level LF -- he had a negative VORP coming into tonight. The HRs don't make up for the atrocious OBP. I'm not saying he can't become a good major league player, but he's not one now.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Sep 17, 2007 -> 09:45 PM) I believe it. I also believe this team will have another top 10 pick in 2009 and that Jerry Owens will play a large part in earning them that pick. I think there's little doubt about it: Owens/Erstad Eckstein/Vizquel Thome Konerko Dye AJ Crede Fields Richar I think that's a ticket to last place in the AL Central. Especially with a rotation that will feature Danks, Contreras, and Floyd

QUOTE(southsida86 @ Sep 14, 2007 -> 11:30 PM) If that's what you believe, then I'd take it that you'd condone KW trading each of them away this offseason to fill holes at other positions or to upgrade from them to someone else. What did you think of McCarthy then? AAAA? Bullpen? Trading either Danks or Gio would be fine with me. Trade both even. Neither one is an elite pitching prospect. I agree that Danks looks like a 5th starter with limited upside right now.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Sep 14, 2007 -> 06:39 PM) I have to say though, we would have received the package that Jennings got, but we asked for Hunter Pence as well. From what I've read, that true. But keep in mind that Garland had 2 years left on his contract at that time & hadn't piped off about having a "knot" in his shoulder. His value is down from this time last year. A package like what the Sox got for Garcia would be fine I think. I wouldn't consider that dealing Garland for scraps.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 12, 2007 -> 08:34 PM) I believe that is fair. What isn't fair, IMO, is to call a 22 year old that almost cracked BA's top 50 2007 prospect list a "Non-Prospect" at this point. I just don't buy that. So, first of all, I just want to say I don't like criticizing Sweeney. He's an excellent baseball player, and I'm sure he's better at his job than I am at mine. I'm just not optimistic he'll do well in the majors. As far as "non-prospect" goes, I think you and I may simply disagree about what qualifies one for "prospect" status. Sweeney has never been much above average at any level he's been at. He has been young for each level, but at some point I'd like to see a performance that really stands out. Until that happens, I don't see any reason to think of him as "prospective major-leaguer". Of course, scouts know way more than I do about Sweeney. But I wouldn't be surprised if he drops out of BA's top 100. And I don't see how the Sox can project him as a key future OF right now.

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Sep 12, 2007 -> 01:02 PM) I disagree. He can't have much value at this point and I think the organization has too much of a soft spot for him to trade him for scraps. I hope you are right, given that Sweeney could only be a throw-in now coming of a wrist injury (which seem like very bad news for hitters) and a couple of years of below-average performance. The Sox have no reason to trade him now. He doesn't cost anything and could still raise his value. Still, at this point I think he has to be regarded as a non-prospect.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:47 PM) That's funny, because Broadway has 3 options remaining while I believe Haeger only has one. Haeger's the one with limited time to establish himself, at least with the Sox anyways. Clearly, Haeger will move to Red Sox organization. It's destiny, not just because of Wakefield but because of the decided tilt of the analytical baseball community (Haeger's main champions) towards Massachusetts. Anyway, if that does happen, it will be hard for me to blame the White Sox. You can't keep Haeger in the majors based solely on the faith that one day he will be effective there. It's a shame he didn't get more time this season instead of, say, Bukvich. As for Broadway's age, brought up by Jeremy, I'm not really sure I care about a pitcher's age that much. Certainly not as much as I would with a position prospect. It's clear, given Broadway's age and mediocre AAA performance that he's not headed to the HOF. But a lot of major league pitchers had poor starts and became effective in the bigs later. Halladay and Carpenter are obvious ones. Rich Hill made the bigs at a relatively advanced age. Broadway has yet to fail repeatedly in AAA so I won't write him off completely yet. I'm not his biggest fan, but at least the Sox and he are working on something specific to make him a better pitcher. Maybe it will work for him.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:04 PM) Broadway was second in AAA in walks allowed this year, and tied for 9th in all the minors. That's not good. Last season, Charlie Haeger posted similarly poor walk totals in AAA, came up to have an improbably good September with the White Sox and carried that through to a... another year in AAA. 4 innings of work with the White Sox isn't enough to convince me that he's anything other than his performance at AAA indicated. I'm going on about 15 pessimistic posts in a row. I can't muster up too much optimism, but I'll try. Broadway spent the year working on throwing a 2-seam fastball, didn't he? So maybe there's some hope he could drop that walk total if he actually does learn how to throw it. I agree that nothing anyone saw tonight should make them think Broadway is anywhere close to being effective in the bigs, 86 MPH fastball and all. But if he could somehow learn the 2-seamer maybe he could be a semi-effective junk-balling reliever or something. That would be a triumph for the minor league system.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 11:07 PM) Agreed 100%. For too long the White Sox have suckled on the tit of Earl Weaver, waiting for the 3-run HR and working young pitchers in through the bullpen. From now on, it's baptism by fire, low OBP grinders, and Andy Gonzalez at 3B! Think how good Johan Santana would be now if he hadn't pitched out of the pen.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 02:45 PM) Yes and a lot of the good defense is because Regier purposely wanted good defensive players behind the promising young pitching like Poreda, Ely, Hunt, Mabee, Moreno and a few more. Are there any decent position prospects at either GF or Bristol? Gallagher obviously had a good year, but he's 22. That's not to write him off, but it's not like a he dominated a league that was older than him...

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 08:06 PM) It has been a battle for Danks for at least the last month. 76 pitches in 2 and 2/3 tonight and he was all over the place. He is not attacking the strike zone at all. I think it's been more than month...his control and (I think) mechanics have bad since prior to the ASB. If there was one guy Cooper should be earning his money fixing, it's Danks given what the Sox traded to get him. I haven't seen any significant changes. If they aren't going to do anything with him, they should just shut him down. I do agree that the Sox being a terrible defensive team does not him in the least.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 07:57 PM) I just don't see it with Danks. His fastball is nowhere near what I thought it was going to be, and he's wild in the strike zone. I'm not even sure you can count on him as a #5 next year, but I know he'll probably be our 4. I think the truth is that he isn't very good. He doesn't have much stuff and his control is actually pretty bad. I'll admit I know squat about pitching (hence starting the post with "I think") but his mechanics look terrible. He flies all over the place. Scouts said his ceiling was a #3, but I don't see him ever being more than a fringe major leaguer. He just doesn't have the raw stuff to do it, or the control.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 01:58 PM) KC has Bannister, Meche, and Greinke looking as a solid 3 in the rotation, and Odalis Perez and De la Rosa have been no worse than the Contreras/Danks combination. Thanks -- people really need to look at the stats before declaring everyone on the Royals sucks. the 5 man rotation the Royals have now will be better than the Sox rotation next season (subtract Vazquez or Garland and add Floyd).

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 12:06 AM) Give me a freaking break. I may over-rate Garland, but some of you guys are saying he's a league average pitcher and thats flat bulls***. T You can look up the stats, Garland is a league average pitcher. A league average pitcher that will throw 200 innings is valuable -- if he's a one year rental and making $12M he's probably worth a B prospect and C or two. Pretty much what Garcia brought in return. The Sox aren't going to get what the Rox got for Jennings.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) He faced the Tigers struggling, without Sheffield, no Ordonez, really Hawk was laughing at their line-up. Cleveland is cruising and it was a rainy night. What about the starts when he was crushed? There really is no race in the AL Central. I agree. Do people not watch the games? Even against a lousy DET lineup, Floyd would have been crushed if that park didn't turn HRs into outs. What do you want to believe, Floyd's entire career up till now, or 3 starts in September? He's not good. And neither are any of the other young players on the Sox (Richar, Fields, Danks, go on down the line). Danks is young enough that he could still turn into a league average pitcher at some point for a few seasons. But realistically, no team in baseball has as bleak a future as the Sox. I wish it weren't true, but watch the games -- I don't see anyone that looks like a future all-star.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 09:42 AM) He did suck before he threw one pitch for the Sox, check his performance in Philadelphia. As far as I can tell, even with his September awakening his ERA this season is near 6.00. Maybe you think that's outstanding, but I think it sucks. Luke Hudson had a string of games last year where he pitched a really well against contending teams. Amazingly, it turned out that he wasn't the second coming of Chris Carpenter or Roy Halladay. Floyd having a couple of decent starts in bad weather and at DET where HRs become outs means absolutely nothing.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 01:33 AM) We have a real good core for a rotation. Buehrle and Vazquez are a solid 1-2, Garland is an above average starter, we have 2 youngsters who have shown flashes and then a 94 year old who needs to find a new employer. A lot could possibly depend on Danks and Floyd next season(we'll see how things work out) but the rotation is the least of our problems right now. The Sox rotation is bad. It just looks good compared to the rest of the team. Buehrle is above average. Vazquez is a 4.5 ERA or worse pitcher having a fluke year (doesn't mean he's bad, just not above average). Garland is average. And no one else is good. In 2008, it will be the worst rotation in the AL Central.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 10:23 PM) don't forget about what the Rockies got for Jason Jennings... Jennings was coming of a much better season than Garland will be and was significantly cheaper. And that was abad deal for Houston, which I'm sure GMs have noticed. Garland won't get anything close to what Jennings brought.