hitlesswonder

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 10:16 PM) Tracey shouldn't have sit there sobbing into his hands. And Guillen wasn't necessarily yelling at him in public. It was in the dugout. Maybe he should've taken it in the dugout but he has the right to let his players know what he wants them to know in the dugout at any time he wants. OK, the dugout of a major league game has TV cameras on it almost constantly. That's "in public". Sure I agree, the best thing Tracey could have done was to just sit there stoically and let Guillen scream at him since he didn't have many other options. But imagine if you're a AAA pitcher and you've just seen your career end, with the rest of the world watching. I'm not going to rip into him for sobbing. It's a tough moment. Managing through intimidation can work, but I'm not a big fan. Ozzie should have shown Tracey the same respect he shows veterans on his team, but he didn't. It was unprofessional.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 10:05 PM) I can't understand the nonsense Ozzie gets on Sean Tracey and Brian Anderson's and Brandon McCarthy's behalfs. So, it's OK for Ozzie rip someone in the media apart if they aren't performing well? I don't care if a player is complete crap, Ozzie should be able to represent the Sox organization in a professional manner and not lay missing the playoffs at McCarthy's feet on the radio. Does Ozzie going off on Magglio Ordonez bother you more? Magglio actually has some talent, so maybe that's not OK. If an employee isn't performing well, you try and fix it in-house. You don't rip them apart in public. And if performance doesn't improve, terminate the employment and move on. Don't lay into them after they've left the organization. It's classless and unprfoessional.

On the positive side, Kenny Williams in the Trib: In my opinion, that's a good response.

QUOTE(chisox72 @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 08:08 PM) I am sure he was just using Freddy as an example of a veteran presence and nothing more. For christ sake, this Brandon McCarthy love-fest is beyond me. I am okay with what Ozzie had to say, especially after reading Merkin's article. B-Mac was immature, and his attitude on the team based on all of the reports was also immature. Then he leaves and rips the organization in various news sources. But yeah, he did no wrong, Ozzie is the asshole and B-Mac is the saint. Afterall, he is paving his way to Cooperstown. Maybe without B-Mac around, BA can get his head out of his ass too before he gets sent packing... What does "veteran presence" mean? Garcia's a guy that, fairly or not, has long been rumored to enjoy his evenings out, admits to taking it easy some games (and certainly looks that way), and shows up his teammates on the field. And it's not like Freddy had a Cy Young season in 2006. His run in September saved him from a truly bad season. He's not the best role model for a young pitcher. Look, I'm not siging up for the Brandon McCarthy fanclub, I'm just saying that Garcia is at least as "immature" as McCarthy was. Did you read what McCarthy said? He hardly ripped the Sox. He would have been better off not saying anything sure, but nothing he said was really inflammatory. Anyway, forgive me for wishing the Sox manager would conduct himself publicly with a little more class than blaming McCarthy for the Sox not making the playoffs. Guillen has said much worse about the organization when his Sox playing career ended. For him to go off on McCarthy is ridiculous.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 07:48 PM) This article seems to clear up a lot and includes some more quotes: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws That's funny...Guillen thinks that McCarthy should have learned how to act on the field from Garcia. Freddy could have explained to Brandon how you only need to try hard in "Big Games", you don't really have to go all out unless you've got a national TV audience. I remember at least twice last season when Freddy showed up his teammates during a game, on the field. All Brandon said was that he didn't have a lot of friends on the Sox and he felt the coching focused on the negative. Which is worse?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 06:18 PM) Coaches get too much credit and too much blame for what happens on the field. They don't get enough credit or blame for what they do off the field. That is two different things in my book. Setting aside Oz's on field decisions, which we could debate forever, does anyone think he handles the stuff that is 100% under his control (his mouth) well? If he was a poster here he would have been banned a couple times over. He is a terrible spokesperson for the franchise. He places his greatest fans in the position of trying to defend b.s. comments he makes. I agree wholeheartedly. He's incredibly unprofessional. I actually think he's not a terrible manager (I thought he was pretty good till he kept playing Mack in CF and Pods at all last season). But this is just lame. Acting like a jackass just make the franchise look bad.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 01:26 PM) Sisco doesn't? He is a 6'10" lefty that consistently gets his fastball to the 95-97 area. He also has a very good curve. He has some control issues but his stuff is pretty damn good. When I saw Sisco pitch last season I saw a fastball clocked at 92 to 94. Which is still good. But I didn't see him sitting at 96. Maybe he is faster -- I don't know for sure. The Sox have a policy of not going beyond 3 years for a contract with a pitcher. That's not going to sign Johan Santana. I think the chances of the Sox signing an ace on the FA market are extremely small. They'll need to develop or trade for one, unless they are willing to top contracts like the one Zito signed. I'm not saying this is a bad policy, just that if they stick to it they really need to develop some pitching. Which it looks like Williams is trying to do.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2007 @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 01:19 PM) Great minor league pitching? This should be good. The Yanks have one guy they actually drafted worth a damn in Hughes. Well of course he hasn't proven anything at the major league level. He's a prospect. The Yankees have Hughes, Sanchez, Clippard, Garcia, and Chamberlain. That is a very good set of pitching prospects. My point wans't that the Yankess were drafting better than the Sox, but that the Yankees had great prospects despite having poor draft position. I just would like the Sox to do the same.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 11:46 AM) I don't know sometimes. It just seems like we're assembling a collection of #3 (at best #2) starters while teams within our division have #1 and #2's. Within the next several years, with one/two veteran starters probably on the block, I expect more in return than the Cliff Floyd's of the world. We have to aim higher. I absolutely agree. Bonderman, Verlander, and Miller all have great, great stuff (the first 2 have fatsballs that legitmately sit at 95 and 98 MPH, in addition to good breaking stuff). There isn't a single starting pitcher in the Sox organization outside of Contreras that has an arm like that. The reality is that none of Danks, Gio, Sisco, and Broadway project to be dominating in the bigs. They simply aren't in the same league as guys like Pelfrey, Hughes, Bailey, Garza, etc. I understand that the Sox haven't had the best draft position, but neither have the Yankees, BoSox, and Twins and yet they have great minor league pitching. And the Sox bear repsonsibility for routinely not offering arbitration to FAs to get more picks, and not drafting guys with signability issues. I'm assuming that both those issues come down to the budget they have for the amateur draft. Anyway, I'd really like to see the Sox have a minor league pitcher with legitimately great stuff. I don't see one right now. The Sox aren't going to get an ace on the FA market, they have to develop one on their own.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 11:56 AM) I admit I've never seen him throw. Perhaps the newbie is right -- this is spring training, and he might not have full velocity. It's just a little shocking to me to hear his fastball is ~90mph considering the archived news stories and message board posts from Ranger fans seemed to suggest otherwise. From USA Today at the time of the trade: And for those really wanting some pessimism this Ranger's blog didn't think Danks would be even a #3 starter in the bigs due to his fastball. But I have no sense at all how credible that blog is, so I think it's possible to chalk that one up to simple displeasure with the Rangers historical lack of pitching development. Back to Danks fastball, I've never seen him pitch. But it seems to me that BA routinely takes the top speed anyone has seen a pitcher hit on a gun somewhere and reports that as his normal speed (and fans take over from there promulgating the myth). So, I feel pretty confident that Danks can't pump it up there at 94MPH. I would expect him to hit 89,90,91 on the gun routinely. Has anyone here seen him pitch in person? I'd love to hear a new scouting report about how his stuff looks.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 09:33 AM) At a certain point, there's probably a fair amount of similarities among players and they're merely plugging names into slots. Perhaps reputation and/or scouting reports, as well as statistics, factor in. Remember, how often have we heard articles which suggest scouts love his swing? I don't know exactly how much time Baseball America puts into these rankings. Or how they judge the difference between #30 and #55. Even though I suggested 55 people might have shown more progress than Danks, it was more a theory than something I personally believe. BA is traditionally very toolsy and Danks doesn't have great stuff. Someone with a fastball that sits around 90 MPH isn't going to get rated that highly by them, I think. Also, they may be using the fact that the Sox traded for him as a strike against him (i.e. if the Sox scouts think he's good, he probably isn't ) Scouts still like Sweeney, and BA seems to veer more towards scouting rather than stats.

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 11:30 PM) Give Bobby 2 weeks off... do some stretching..have him throw a few innings see how he feels.. if he's comfortable, then we will be good to go. I'm hoping and praying for da best. W/O Jenks we are in big trouble. Actually, without Jenks the Sox are in better shape than most teams would be. MacDougal really isn't a bad pitcher, and he could slide into the closer role (he's done it before -- he's a "proven closer"). Losing Jenks would be a blow, and would thin out the bullpen significantly, unless Masset is everything Williams thinks he is. But at least there's a reasonably competent replacement.

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 11:24 PM) FWIW, Ozzie and the coaching staff was aware before the game that Jenks was having shoulder tightness. Well, before anyone gets nailed up on post for having Jenks pitch, "tightness" is a pretty vague description. I think it's hard to know what's going on in a pitcher's arm (even with MRIs, people often make mistakes). It's possible that it is just muscle soreness/stiffness that will improve, and in that case having Jenks throw I don't think is that bad. Of course, as a Sox fan, I'm bracing for the news that he's lost for the season.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 11:07 PM) Chris Young? Who the hell is that? He pitches for the Padres...Texas traded him for some "proven" veteran starter that wasn't very good. Wow did they get ripped off in that deal. Horrible, horrible trade. Only thing worse they could have done was ship off some surefire all-star CF prospect instead. Luckily, nothing like that has happened on the South Side. Nope. No Chris Young has ever been a White Sox, so there's no way they could have traded him. That's what I'm going to keep telling myself.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 08:36 PM) They picked us to finish fourth in 2005...and were wrong. It's a crapshoot. I agree (well...I don't know what the odds are in craps, but I agree in principle). I was just saying that I'm not going to call the BP people idiots, because I thought they were last year, and yet they weren't. I'm not saying I think they are right about the 72 wins thing. I'm expecting more. I am getting pretty tired of the Twins bringing up young pitchers that excel beyond any reasonable expectation.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 06:00 PM) Thanks. Wow...someone over there is smoking some SERIOUS crack. Twins? Without Liriano? And an unproven staff besides Santana? Whew. I'll give them the Tigers and Indians. Ridiculous! They picked the Sox for third last year...and were right. And they also picked the Twins to win the division...and were right. So, I'm not going to accuse anyone of smoking anything. I'll just go get ready for Garza pitching like Liriano. Bastards.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 06:44 PM) Then when a company does step in and help its workers to qualify and receive all the benefits that we try and provide the working poor, they are called villains. I don't understand... who is the company, who thinks they are villains and why?

This Malcolm Gladwell article on healthcare starts off discussing tooth decay. Almost prophetic. It's a long read, but for the tiny percentage of people out there interested in public health policy, I think it's interesting. I don't believe Gladwell is a knee-jerk "socialist" either, IIRC he used to be in favor of the government staying out of healthcare.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 12:24 PM) One of the few things Blago has done right, IMO, is to give every child medical coverage in this state. That program is simply a bunch of PR garbage. It's essentially unfunded (it's maintained by underfunding the State pension liabilities), so the State's policy is to pay at low rates and to delay payment as long as possible. As a result, medical practices hate to take patients covered by the program and many simply refuse to. You can't really insure all the kids in Illinois unless you raise taxes. And that's not going to happen. Liberals have to face up to the fact that taxpayers don't want to pay for programs like this. There's no way you can convince a majority of people that it's good idea to take their money to pay for insurance for people without jobs. Just for record, I'm actually in favor in of some form of basic taxpayer-funded insurance for everyone (which doesn't prohibit the purchase of private insurance to get better benefits). I'd be willing to pay more taxes rather than have to worry about losing a job and being uninsured, being denied coverage for a pre-existing condition, etc. But that's just my opinion, and I can't go pick the pockets of my fellow citizens just because I think something is a good idea.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 10:21 PM) Contrary to what Doug Gottlieb will tell you Purdue's conference schedule really was not a lot harder than Illinois. Well, I actually looked up the numbers and you're right -- the records of Illinois and Purdue's in-conference opponents is almost identical. That's a pretty crude SOS measure, but I'll admit I was wrong, though I doubt anyone cares. Still, a 17 point loss head-to-head is pretty nasty even if it is on the road. I'm just unimpressed by Illinois. No bad losses, but no big wins. And a very uninspiring style of play (I know -- aesthetics shouldn't count). There's a reason why the Illini are a bubble team despite being 3rd in the Big Ten. I think the national commentators see the same thing, which is a pretty mediocre basketball team. I will admit that my perception of the team, which I've liked watching in previous seasons, is probably colored by all the off-court stuff that has happened.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 09:49 PM) I got it from an article on CBS.sportsline. And yes, it is flawed. I would probably go with team Illinois as well. Drexel has those nice out of conference wins though. The mid-majors should be rewarded for playing all those road games though. I'd take Drexel. Illinois is the worst twenty win team I can remember seeing. Any team that loses that many games in the sludge that is the Big Ten, and beats no quality teams outside the Big Ten, doesn't need to go to the dance. If 5 Big Ten teams get bids (the max in my opinion), Purdue is more deserving (since they ripped Illinois by 17 points and had to play OSU/Wisc more than twice). Although if Illinois would get a bid, that would make it possible for Kansas to eviscerate them in the first round. I have the impression that several posters here would find that quite entertaining.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 01:28 AM) This is why I continually mention, often under criticism, the White Sox need a legitimate front line starter to emerge within the next few years if we want any hope of competing. This division is literally stacked which pitching talent. Whether I'm proven wrong and Danks or Gonzalez develop into aces I don't know. It just needs to be done, impossible or not. I agree completely. The minor league arms the Sox have remain pretty mediocre, IMO. They do have a lot more of them, but the Sox don't have anyone on a level with prospects like Hughes, Bailey, Pelfrey, Humber, Miller, Lofgren, Miller, Garza, Slowey, etc. It's possible that they don't even have anyone as good as McCarthy. That's not to say the Sox haven't improved their system. I'm sure a few of these prospects will turn out to be useful major league pitchers. But pretending someone like Floyd is a big step toward a great rotation of the future seems delusional.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 09:30 PM) I'm not confident about our chances of reaches the playoffs, but suggesting we're the second worst team in the American league -- even behind Seattle and Baltimore -- is a little bit ridiculous. I expect the Sox to contend this season, but I don't think those projections are ridiculous. The Sox best players are all older, so it's not unreasonable to project a decline in the offense (see the 2nd half of last season). And all the projection systems hate the Sox pitching. And they were right last year. The PECOTA projections did OK relative to the competition last season & Sheehan at BP did a good job picking the Central results as well (Silver , not so much). See Diamond Mind's 2006 wrapup. Part of the problem is that the Central is IMO the best division in baseball. The unbalanced schedule can make a team look worse than it truly is compared to the rest of the league. Anyway, I expect much better than 72 wins. Here's hoping....

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 11:46 AM) If that happens, the Sox will go into rebuilding mode next year. There's no way that Ozzie can be a manager during that time, as he's too much of a competitor. If the Sox tank this year, I think we'll have a new Manager and General Manager. Ozzie might hit the road, but Reinsdorf isn't going to can Williams 2 years removed from a World Series and then a 90 win season for one disastrous season (if that's what it proves to be). Look at how long he carried Krause on the Bulls. I do think Williams trades will not look good at the end of this year. Chris Young is a ROY candidate, and Vazquez is still Vazquez. I think both Garcia and McCarthy will perform very well. And I think Floyd is going to be bad (if he has such great stuff, why are his minor league K numbers so bad? Broadway has done as well as Floyd did in the minors...). Danks might salvage something, but that won't be known for a couple more seasons. I think Williams is a decent GM, but from my persepctive he performed poorly this offseason. The OF is a disaster and the team traded two starting pitchers and is weaker than 2006. In retrospect, I wish Buehrle had been dealt instead of Garcia, and I wish McCarthy were still on the team. I know KW is trying to make sure the Sox don't have to bid for FA pitching, but that seems quixotic to me. Pitching prospects so rarely pan out, I don't think you can escape the need for FA pitching. Even Beane signed a FA pitcher last season. I guess I've transitioned to the "win now" philosophy.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 26, 2007 -> 07:32 AM) I would assume that means Ozuna at 2B and Erstad in LF. At this point, I don't think they're even considering Podsednik being ready for the opener against Sabathia. I honestly don't know what Guillen's plan is. According to the trib: The Sox 1-2-3 against LHP was pretty bad last year. I agree that sitting Iguchi would against LHP would be wise if hits them like last season (either Ozuna or Cintron would be worth a shot at 2B in that case). But I'd even give Iguchi several starts into the season to see if can hit lefties better. And I really want him to stay in the 2 slot.