BrandoFan

Going back to second half of 2000, this has been my beef with our "Murderer's Row": inability to see the breaking pitch; to lay off it; swingig for the fences. Give Carlos Lee 4 rolling curve balls and he will hit 4 homers, but give him 4 pitcher's pitches, and he will make 4 ugly outs. Ditto for Val, Pailie, (then) Ray Durham, Hurt and to some extent Maggs. Outside of Crede (though I'd like to see him walk once in a while), we are a great mediocre pitching hitting team. Against good pitching we suck. I guess fouling off tough pitches with shortened swings and letting mediocre pitchers beat themselves is for suckers like Minnesota and Anaherim. We absolutely must put a huge HR swing with 2 strikes every.single.time. ETA: Carlos Lee has improved in walk/OBP department in the 2nd haf of 02...BUT he still has ways to go: last couple of SO's he he swung at 4 ball 4s on 3-2 count, against mediocre pitchers at that. That' 2 walks (and 2 extra baserunners in a close game as far as the team is concerned) wasted right there. By comparison, Robbie Alomar must have taken about 4-5 close-call balls from very tough Mark Prior in today's game alone. Common, Carlos, stop beating yourself...Alas, you can't teach an "eye", but you can teach someone to stop f***ing with the fences ALL THE DAMN TIME. Even Thome shortens his swing occasionally. I am watching Randa as I type engaged in a 12-pitch battle against tough Gordon. Carlos, you have more talent than Randa, but he can teach you a thing or two.

Good. I always liked Lee and his batspeed (in 2000, it was probably in the top 5-7 in the game), though his walks last year came as a TOTAL suprise. OT: Also, there goes the "work ethic is overrated- these are professionals and they all work equally hard for their living, blablabla" arguement I've heard so much. Folks there is a reason why terms "overachiever" and "underachiever" exist, and Lee, along with Jimenez (and Andre Agassi until he turned 29 in tennis!) have much moe pure talent than they have shown. Alas, as everyone knows, on the highest competitive level that is ML, pure talent is not enough. Not by a long shot. So, I am glad to hear that Borchard has "what is becoming legendary work ethic" and that "Honel is an extreme hard-worker".

Now that Wright may be facing surgery, this discussion is getting more irrelevant by the day. In fact, the only way it could more pointless if Burhle and Garland complain of "soreness"/get "tired arm" by July... To your credit, you did everything you could to save this topic. And then some.

It doesn't have to be all back&white all the time. Saying Nardi and management are f***ups doesn't mean that a) the former is responsible for EVERY single injury (though enough s*** happened under his watch as most intelligent posters would agree. Players like Malone and Stumm are responsibilty of minor league personel, not that it it somehow disqualifies my "they were mishandled" point, mind you) and mechanical/mental problems, nor b] that the latter hasn't made any positive decisions, etc. I guess it's all in the percentages and case-by-case basis analysis is absolutely required...Having said that, I would have loved to see Sirotka, Rauch, Barcelo and Kip back/uninjured. I only ask for 4- y'all can have Stumm, Biddle, Ginter, Kane, Fogg, etc 1. Hitters ain't pitchers, esp. when it comes to instruction/promotion dynamic and injury-related issues. Not even close and you know it. Besides, I only mentioned Crede and a few others to prove that some fans are too impatient/uninformed as to condemn everything and everybody if they don't produce immediately. It's wasn't a main arguement, but I got sucked into it so I had to mention it. (BTW since you asked, I think Leifer will do well with Expos and that Harris is indeed a AAAA/utility type player- not that his AA/AAA were all that great to begin with, nor did I or any scouts ever consider him a can't miss mofo. If Sox MANAGEMENT did, don;t blame me for it; then it only strenghtens my orginal point.) 2. You are not reading my posts, something that is overwhelmingly obvious because if yo did you would see that mentioning 12-15 players out of hundreds in our organization does NOT a homer make. I also made several qualifiers, modifiers to most posts because people kept bugging me with rhetorical detours. 3. What's your point? I hope it's not "prospects are prospects, minor league numbers don't necesarily translate into major league stats, scouts often make mistakes and s*** happens" because that was SUCH an obvious thing from the get go that I didn;t even feel the need to mention it.

Who knew you would take it to mean that "HOF stuff/caliber prospect" = "HOF career". Because it's not like there is a difference between the two. Nice job evading. Again, Nardi was only PART of the problem repeatedly stated throughout my posts on this thread. I admited to the players' role in their own demise LONG f***ING TIME AGO and have also criticized the whole ORGANIZATION (from JR to JM and people under their command). Game, set, match. But if you choose to not think about players on case-by-case basis and analyze the situation, instead leaning on "s*** happens" mantra and/or thinking it's all a harmless coincidence, feel free. I mean it.

I guess when Wright, Garland and Buerhle go under the knife, you'll be convinced. Except, you'll probably dismiss it with the oh-so-wise "s*** happens". Let's try this: if I remark "I am great" when talking about my arm health, it doesn't necessarily mean that "I am getting ready for the induction ceremony". What it does mean, however, is that health-wise I am fine, something that allows me to further showcase my talent (or lack thereof). (btw: several respected people on the Sox ESPN boards are already calling Kerry Wood and Mark Prior "great" without getting at each other's throats, and Juan Cruz has done nothing but dominate in his short ML stint. Again this is a side-issue, so it doesn't really alter my point, though your vigorous contesting of semantics is annoying) I wonder what's next for you? Are you going to debate whether or not Barcelo really did reach 97-98 on his fastball or just go straight to spelling errors? Pretty weak if you ask me. Why bother replying if you can't actually stay on the point and debate the pitchers' health/organizational screw-up issue? I have to "battle" 3-4 people as it is. Just say you have ADD and be done with it. Your pointless (I mean, really --does it matter if Siro is a true #1 or "mere" very good #2 when talking about labrum tears and TJ's and Nardi's "methods" and ill-advised promotions?) twisting and out-of-context pasting skills are remarkable, to say nothing of your clear lack of knowledg about actual pitchers in question...Bravo, sir.

Flatout lie. Forgive me if I don't read the rest of your post as you clearly did not read mine.

No, over-using my logic and ignoring what I actually said on the matter would lead to that conclusion. (Kinda like me using that Little League exaggeration earlier...hehe) Slightly OT, but it was CLEAR to quite a few at that time that out of the 4, only Sirotka was actually very talented; other 3 along with Navarro, Snyder, etc were overachieving mediocrities (see I am not a misguided homer! lol). Each of his three full ML season, he improved. Despite having an AWFUL (I mean really) defense behind him, Mike Sirotka was an All-Star pitcher with a ERA in 3.70s; even if his progress had stopped at that point (hindsight 20/20), that's still pretty f***ing close to an ace material. I mean, if he played for the Tribe and their D. at the time, his era would be a HALF point lower. No doubt about that. Tell me with a straight face you wouldnt want to have Mike as you THIRD starter if he remained healthy. (Not that Sirotka's case couldn't serve as a warning aganst over-using another lefty who shall remain nameless) I said "scouts + empirical evidence (mine and other Sox fans) + minor league stats". Reading is a skill. Not that I was debating the future of these players in the first place (hint: it's the injury/mechanical problems and Nardi and Co. that were the crux of the debate)...Still, I guess I should ignore Fogg's and Wells's success. I should ignore Barcelo (albeit injured one) and Rauch's great performances. I should ignore Biddle, Stumm, Honel, Malone, Wright's, Garland's stuff and accomplishments when healthy...yeah, those scouts are soooo stupid: when Barcelo spots a 97 mph fastball opn the outside corner to blow someone away, they should pretend he threw 87 mph batting practice pitch and gave up a homer instead...sure. Scouts are wrong often, but some things even they can't screw up What does this have to do with anything, chief? Unless you can find where I said that "Sox should totally give up on this season because too much damage was done in the last few years by coaching ineptitude and ill-advised promotions", you might have as well saved your cyber breath...Also, I bet you were saying the same thing when Bevington, Nardi, etc were still with the team: i.e. "let's stop bashing them and instead concentrate on our opponents" which would have been intellectually lazy at the time. So what makes you think it's not now? Substitute "conspiracy" with "Sox f***ing up" and you got it...more or less. Oh, I think Mike Caruso was the only one that didn't work hard. Everybody else was fine from the effort standpoint.

Nobody but nobody said every single one of these guys should have won a Cy Young in their first year...Sheesh. It was INDEPENDENT scouts who rated them high and it was their actual pitching that did all the talking: Rach, Barcelo, Wells, Fogg, Buehrle, Stumm, Galand, Malone, Ginter, Biddle, Wight, West, Sirotka were all DOMINANT in AA/AAA and showed glimpses of excellence in the major league duty, though, like I said, Barcelo, Rauch, Wells and Wright were FAR from their best when called up for various reason that didn't have anything to do with actual talent. Should I ignore all the evidence to the contrary in favor of good ol' safe truism"most prospects are busts" ? Major props for your optimism. But. let's see: -Munoz is a relief pitcher and after what happened to Barcelo, I wouldn't dream to project him as anything but a bullpen guy/5th starter, Sean Lowe in his prime type. -Malone looked awful in 2002. Totally screwed up. Even scouts who had him in the top 30 (in the NATION!) dropped him off their radars. Could be coincidence, sure, but in light of his "arm problems", I don't tihnk so. -Rauch you already know my opinion about. -Even if Honel does get back his mid-90's fastball, he is still only 19-20 and 3-4 years away from contributing on the major league level. He is cocky and I like that, but let's allowhim mature physically (skinny kid to say the least), mechanically (needs a good change or a slider as a third out pitch) and mentally. No more A/AA call-ups. -Sanders? Meh. -Stewart? Parque Lite. Proving me wrong as I type this.

Actually if a (really talented) player busts, part of the blame, perhaps a big one, is still with the kid himself. That goes without saying, and I never intended to pretend othewise despite what a couple of central arguement-ignoring, word-in-the-mouth-putting fellas will have you believe...HOWEVER, many do underestimate the role of a pitching coach on one's development (or lack thereof) and injuries. Sure, Curt Shilling right now, at 37, is too much of a professional and a veteran to listen to his coach TOO MUCH (although I bet he still does- these all-stars not only possess more pure talent than an average pitcherm but also work harder and learn/re-adjust better), but when you're talking about a 19-22yo kid, the role of the pitching coach rises exponentially. It goes without saying that improper instruction not only leads to high ERA's, mechianical problems and "step backs", but also, unfortunately, to career-threatening injuries that do nothing to improve the former three. As far as I am concerned, Barcelo, Rauch, Wright, Sirotka, Stumm, Kane, Malone, West, Biddle, Wells, Ginter, Honel. Fogg, Ulacia and even Garland and Burehle (now) were mishandled at some point. (That's more than a DOZEN of really talented and minor-league dominating pitchers in the span of only 2 years.) I am sure Cooper is not entirely innocent in the matter, either, but Nardi and people who hired him share a larger part of the blame in my book. YMMV. Let's hope I am wrong and Burhle/Galrand don't go down in 2003 and that Diaz, Honel, Wight, Rauch, Malone and Stumm bounce back big time either with our ML team or as major talent-bringing trade bait.

Chisoxfn I didn't say YOU should be embarassed. I was responding to that other dude. That's just not fair. I never said that. If you read the comments carefully, I was first talking about Nardi and Co. and only then mentioned some of the better ones (which statistics, empirical evidence and scouts' reports more than support, btw); whether they would become "all-stars" had they stayed healthy/with Sox organizaiton/with different pitching coach is a TOTALLY different issue. I expressed my opinion and didn't feel the need to preface every single statement with a lazy cop-out "...of course most are busts anyway so blaming the organization or Nardi for any wrong-doing is pointless." Oh, common, I only semi-seriously mentioned TWO out of hundreds--no, thousands of prospects. I assumed that those reading it would be smart enough to know that HOF talent is NOT the same thing as HOF career, not by a long shot. Besides, my priginal point was about Nardi and Co; even if you disagree with my assessment of talent, the inordinate amount of injury busts is still a concern. Yes, I do think that Barcelo and Rauch had absolutely amazing skills** and were ruined. Nothing unreasobale there. **- (I am experiencing deja vu all over again typing this) Barcelo: in 99/early 2000 was consistently in 94-97 range, touching 98 on occasion. Yes, doctors indeed did promise that his elbow would actually allow him to reach triple digits, not that he needed it anyway. He slider was a plus-plus pitch and curve/change combo were average at worst. His maturity (even while clearly showing signs of injury while in BP for the Sox, he was still very effective and his walk/inning number was nothing short of excellent for a declining power pitcher) and Pedro-esque fingers were yet another asset which would have ensured a dominant ML; career in my opinion. Rauch: 92-95 fastball; great curve; plus slider; improving change. Great control for someone who is 6'11. He was a pitcher, even more so than Barcelo. You're seriouslyt underestimating his size: when someon with his leg and arm span and size is coming you at a weird angle, as Hawk mentioned, a normally tough 94 mph fastball looks 98-100 mph and is unhittable if spotted. Mix in very good breaking stuff Rauch had and an adequate change and you have someone who is practically untouchable when on. (Add to it 2-3 years of ML experience -Randy Jphnson, Curt Shilling were all that good in their first 500+ innings and you have a making of HOF player. Since Rauch (unlike Wells) was solid mentally, physical health was the only concern. Alas, the worst case scenario happened...sigh. ). The game against the Twins late 2002 was just a tiny glimpse of what could have been (and still could be, but unlikely) Speaking of so-called Sox fans' bias/hype, back in '97-98 (my first year following the Sox)people were saying that Maggs and Lee were not going to amount to much and are overhyoed because they were held back. (Hell, Lee was bashed 6 months ago!) in '99 everyone was screaming that newly acquired Konerko was only let go by the Reds because he failed to prove that he deserved the Minor League PotY and would only be mediocre DH-type for the Sox...Also in '98 Sirotka was considered to be a solid #3-4 at best ...in 2000 everyone bashed Sox for over-praising BOTH Kip Wells and Joh Garland and were dumbfounded as to why a AA pitcher Mark Buerhle of no impressive stuff would be promoted. Same with Fogg in 2001...Oh and if I have to count how many people COMPLETELY gave up on the "career AAAA player" Joe Crede as recently as middle 2002--the very same people who complained that Borchard "is not and will never be McGwire-type" and pronounced that A's won the Bradord-Olivo trade and Jimenez was "just another Yankees bust"...all that for the sake of garden-variety "counter-hyping" as a form of backlash against the team's recent bouts with gross underachievement. The reasoning was as follows: "the team sucks, JR is cheap, management consists of his favorites--therefore the prospects that other scouts deemed worthy must be bad too if they are not producing IMMEDIATELY" or some variation thereof. Afterall Kerry "Jesus" Wood and Mark "Messiah" Prior were dominant right off the bat... It's true- some people are guilty in over-praising prospects and pipe-dreaming...but many are also condemning some really talented guys too soon, often without even SEEING them pitch, hiding behind the "most prospects don't pan out" wisdoms as if "most minor league prospects" have anything to do with Barcelo throwing a screaming 98 mph moving fastball on the outer part of the plate for a K...I guess the "sceptics" claiming that healthy Barcelo and Rauch weren't someting really special are the same bunch who think that, say, Jose Valentin's defense is HORRIBLE, seeing only errors on paper and that Carlos Lee's batspeed is just average because he only hits 25 homers or that Keith Foulke was "god" because of that ERA or that just because not everything can be blamed on Nardi, he (along with people who insisted on hiring him) isn't reponsible for a big part of our pitching ills...one-dimensional thinking is what it is.

Well, he had as good if not better stuff and maturity than Kerry Wood and Mark Prior. Just say you've never seen him pitch healthy and avoid embarassment. Besides, I never said he was a "HOF player", just that he had "HOF ceiling". Too bad his arm fell off. You only mentioned a FEW pitchers from different organizations. I mentioned no less than 12-15 quality prospects from just one. Not such an aberration. (Look at Cubs: Kerry Wood is still relatively healthy and Zambrano, Cruz, Prior are looking great. And we had BETTER, deeper for sure, pitching system) Quit yer extrapolatin' in other words.

Re: "hyping" 1. I only talked about 8-10 best of the best (that's what gets me mad)) guys outt of hundereds that are in our ML system. 2. Scouts from varying publictions have been VERY high on ALL people I mentioned. Perhaps MORE enthusiastic that your average fan would be. 3. Those pitchers were/are going a DAMN good job of justifying the hype. Ginter, West, Biddle, Fogg, Ulacia, etc up VERY good numbers at AA. I mean ERA's under 3.00. Malone was downright dominant. Honel and Stumm were GREAT hs pitchers as well as dominating the A ball. And I don't even need to mention Barcelo, Wells, Garland and Rauch. Re: Nardi and injuries/"mechanical problems"/Kip Wells Syndrom is another story altogether and I don't wish to confuse the two. Malone was reported to have "arm problems" all OF 02 and Jason Stumm was told he had a dead arm in 01 before realzing that it was a TEAR... Refer to my previous posts for more. Barcelo being "amazing", but not "HOF? WTF? If he has great stuff and, more importantly, maturity, then saying "HOF ceiling" and "amazing" is appropriate. Ditto Rauch. The reaosn Wood, Cruz and Prior are great is because they are HEALTHY and our pitchers are NOT,.

Great retort. Did you even read the whole post or just picked up on the "doctors" part? Do you even know who Barcelo is/was?

Like I said, if you choose to pretend like it's the players' fault and/or just a big freakin' coincidence all the while ignoring the evidence and the pervalent opinion (I am not alone in this), go right ahead.

Yep. He wasn't the key part of the White Flag deal for nothing: great poise and control for a 20yo; 95-98 mph moving fastball (which was supposed to reach triple digits in the future as doctors promissed), excellent slider and nice, improving off-speed arsenal. Huge, long fingers that would have allowed him to put freaky spin on the ball had he decided to become a truly all-around pitcher later on... He was that good of a prospect before re-injuring in 2000. I went over this before.

Whatever. Keep missing the point and arguing around the concrete examples. (Also look up "exaggeration" while you're at it) Have you ever played pro ball? I'd love to see you say "no, coach, I will NOT _____!". or refuse an ill-advised promotion...If you don't think prospects barely out of HS need (a lot of) guidance, I won't be the one to start convincing you.

How intellectually dishonest of you...if you look at those (quality) pitchers on case by case basis (their track-record prior, stuff, etc) and then look at how MANY of them got f***ed up...and THEN look at most OTHER teams' prospects and rookies...there will be a PATTERN emerging, supported by many opinions, including Shueler and Piniella. Just because not EVERYTHING can be blamed on the coach doesn't mean he is not responsible. I mean, your arguement can also be applied to the Little Leagues- afterall if a youngster fails because noone taught him/her proper footwork, we could blame the genetics and/or youngsters' apathy...

Lou said that? No s***! That cheap f***er Jerry cutting back on pitching coach' salary possibly led us to losing Sirotka (ace material)...Barcelo (HOF material)...Stumm (too early to tell, but people say back in 99 he was dominant in his first year in the minors)...Kip Wells (no injury, just f***ed up mechanics and mental health)...Rauch (HOF material)...Malone (dominant power lefty with 1:5 bb/k ratio before getting "help"? See Kip Wells Syndrom)...Buerhle (loss of velocity and movement since late last year...50-50 he goes down before ASB). GarLand already had a surgery and only his fluid delivery has saved him from Nardi's methods, though we'll see if he can make it through one full season before concluding anything...UNREAL. Thank god Honel is only in A-ball. It could he salvation. I won't even mention JB (All-Star before injury) and Biddle (every here knows about his nasty stuff), Ginter (Kip Wells Syndrom), Ulacia and Brian West (era in 2.00s before "mechanical problems"..list goes on. In just 2 friggin' years!!! I blame the cheap bastard JR for pressuring his personel to rush these guys (I mean out of ALL promotees, only Sirotka was over 25 and mature enough), JM for being a pus-over...as well as The Bespectale'd Toad. Nardi is that you? I thought you drank yourself to death...that sounded like a good plan. What happened?

Thanks for missing the point...It's not the question of "panning out"; it's a question of guys' arms and/or mechanics getting f***ed up at an incredible rate under Nardi and Co.' watch. Kip Wells and Burhle have been exceptions, but the former hated Nardi and struggled with trhe Sox (fastball at 90-92 versus 93-96 with Pirates among other things), and the latter...well, re-read my edited post. We had best arms in the majors 2-3 years ago. Now I have to watch Cubs trot out Woods, Clement, Zambrano, Prior and Cruz, knowing that Rauch, Beurhle, Wells, Malone and Barcelo would have been just as good if not better had Nardi not...you get the idea... I've been very optimistic about this team since 2000 and tihnk we will win 99 games in 2003, but this s***ty trend has GOT to stop.

Sox already f***ed up one HOF-caliber pitching talent in Barcelo. Now it's Rauch's turn? Unbelievable. I heard he is injured again/will never recover from labrum tear. Couple that with them screwing up both Corwin Malone and Jason Stumm; I am seriously starting to worry about Honel's progress. I mean these are the guys are suposed to make ther Sox the Insians of the 2000s...damn. Thanks Nardi- you left a true legacy. Oh, and Danny Wright is going down too?! I hear Buerhle's experiencing velocity and movement drop off, since last last year in fact. I guess Garland is set to re-injure himself sometime during the pennant race. Sweeeeeeeet!

Word. BB' horrid, vomit-inducing drivel makes Eminem look like a cross between Marina Tzvetaeva and Elvis Costello.

At first I thought he was another unfunny pretender from the UK, but two of his characters (ali g and the Khazahatani bachelor) and absurdist antics/deadpan zings have grown on me...the way he grills squares and experts (who are often, to be fair, fame-whores playing along with him just to be seen on TV) like the surgeon general or a drug czar or the panel on modern technology...when he mentioned "that's not what I heard backstage" when discussing antique, non-flush toilet systems with some stuffed shirt, I lost my s*** BIG time...lol "Is cat a human being?" "Is Disneyland a pah-t of da UN?" Your favorites?

Yeah, but the question is: is he gonna be "Jackie Brown" cool or Rules of Engagement/Shaft "cool" (which is to say "not cool at all"). Both him and T-bone can do no wrong in my book because of Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Do The Right Thing, etc...but in all fairness them two can also make some steaming piles of s*** like no other (General's Gratuitously and Repeatedly Naked Daughter? Battlefield Scientology? WTF?!) if conditions aren't right. 50-50 chance of Basic being really good AFAIAC.

I'll give you this: as a dramatic or comedic actor, he is pretty inadequate (overrated more like it since after Boiler Room many were quick to crown him the next Brando or next Crowe...lol). However, since there are so many amateurs, hacks and mediortities swimming around in H-Wood (I'd say 90+%), having racially ambiguous bouncer as your next Sly-Auhnuld icon may not be such a bad idea. Rather see him (or camp-y Dwayne Johnson!) spank women in oil-drenched thongs in TBURG than having another Ben "Oscar Winner!" Assleck or Colin "But it's Bradd Pittt Only With Acting Chops!" Farrel vehicle. YMMV. As far as fugly men "making it", Vin Diesel can't compete with Nicholas Cage/Sean Penn/Dustin Hoffman/John Torturro/James Gandolfini in that department. I am not that suiprised that his popularity among Gen X'ers.