AirScott

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 19, 2007 -> 09:08 PM) Just because bullpens are volatile doesn't mean you can't make bad moves and decisions about them. Oh, the Sox obviously did this season by not bringing in one proven veteran, although it didn't appear that way in April. But most of the time, good bullpens come by luck. Did anybody say that Cliff Politte and Neal Cotts would be two shutdown relievers before 2005 began? That Shingo Takatsu would bomb to begin his second season but Dustin Hermanson would step in and save 30 games (and 19 before blowing his first opportunity)? Is there even any way to predict this kind of stuff? As said above, Politte, Cotts and Hermanson aren't even in the majors right now (although Hermanson had back issues that forced him out).

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Jul 19, 2007 -> 07:08 PM) Says you? Says his .210 average this year, his career .311 on-base percentage, and his tendency throughout his career to strike out one every three at-bats.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 18, 2007 -> 04:04 PM) We needed more veterans in the pen this year. We went with so many young "stuff" guys. Something that was really strange was how much stuff every reliever we have, besides Boone, lost coming into this year. Jenks, MacDougal, Thornton, Sisco, and Aardsma's fastballs were all significantly down from last season. We needed a veteran in the pen this year. But the other point is good, lots of times you just get lucky with relievers like we did in 2005. Look what Dennys Reyes did for the Twins last year; he posted a 0.89 ERA! Dennys Reyes did that! ... DENNYS REYES!

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Jul 18, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) The problem with Sisco is that he always seemed to be close to figuring it out before it would fall apart for him. He has great stuff, and good power coupled with no control at all. I think KW and Cooper thought he would turn it around and they gave him every opportunity to do so. In retrospect, his problems shouldn't have come as a surprise. I remember usually when he'd face the Sox, our hitters would look uncomfortable facing him (a 6-10 lefty throwing 93-94), but in the end we'd hit him. What KW & Co. saw was the hitters looking bad facing him...what they should have put more weight in is the end result. You can have one or two of those kind of guys, but our entire 2007 bullpen was based on potential -- there wasn't an established reliever to be found. The pen looked good in the first month, and it all started falling apart just before the first Cubs series. I was suggesting a trade for David Weathers shortly thereafter, but he probably wasn't available yet. According to Buster Olney, he is now. But is it too late...?

We're now 1-for-5 in the category of "Guys who have started so bad that they can't not turn it around." Now let's go Dye, A.J. and Iguchi. The other was Crede, but...yeah.

I don't think anyone in our system would have fixed our bullpen woes. You can say we can find a Winston-Salem reliever who could do better than Day, or to bring up Carlos Vasquez...but you know what? I trust Kenny Williams' & Co. to bring up the best reliever in the system. They have more insight than somebody reading the Baseball America Prospect Handbook (this includes Joe Cowley).

QUOTE(TLAK @ Jul 11, 2007 -> 07:18 AM) Unusual for a team 13 games back, the White Sox can still control their own destiny because the schedule is back loaded with AL-Central teams in the second half. Team - Games Remaining - Games Back Tigers - 14 - 13 Indians - 12 - 12 Twins - 6 - 5 Royals - 10 - (2) What usually kills a late season surge is the other guys keep winning too. It is certainly improbable given the injuries and struggles to date, but if the White Sox do go on a hot streak it will be at the right time to give the teams ahead of them the loses they need to make up ground. Just something to keep an eye on. In the 24 games before the All-Star Break (starting with the Pittsburgh series in June), the Sox went 12-12. The only team played in that stretch above .500 was the Twins, and the rest of the teams stunk. So the Sox' fate is definitely in their own hands with 26 games to play combined against the two top teams in the AL Central, but they just missed a huge chance to make up some ground and be within 10 games. Not impossible, but seems unlikely, to say the least.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jul 9, 2007 -> 05:24 AM) He might not have received as much valuable as possible in that deal, but he certainly didn't lose it. I don't know how much more KW could have gotten for Freddy. I'm sure his drop in velocity was no secret around baseball. I also saw came across this story again and found it funny, particularly the first few paragraphs: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2689303

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jul 6, 2007 -> 12:04 AM) Buehrle wants to stay in Chicago. That's the reason for the full no trade clause. He will not accept a limited NTC. If there is any leverage in this deal at all, it's towards Buehrle's side. He's already given up a year and $19 mill in salary for the Sox; he will not give up any more. It's absolutely up to KW right now to either crack and give the full no trade clause, or for him to trade him while receiving less value. It's really what makes this situation completely ridiculous. Buehrle is the one making concessions here -- if you assume he could get 5 years for $16 million per year, which is a fair assumption looking at the deals of last offseason, that means 5 years for $80 million total, meaning he loses out on TWENTY-FOUR MILLION DOLLARS in this deal. So all he wants for this sacrifice is to know that he'll be here for the four years of his discount contract. "But oh no, if we give him the no-trade clause, we'll have to give EVERYBODY one."

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jul 5, 2007 -> 12:31 PM) rebuildings take time, they just don't happen over night... Why rebuild, though? I think of what the Sox need to do as retooling, because they aren't far away from being a top AL team right now. Certain aspects, or mainly the bullpen, need to be rebuilt, and the offense could use a little life, but there's no reason to embark on a three- to four-year rebuilding process. The reason the Marlins did it was because they don't want to pay guys like Beckett, Lowell, Delgado, Pudge or even Burnett. I think the assumption was that they were gutting the team, keeping the two marquee players (Willis and Carbrera) and moving to Vegas, but I don't know how much truth there is to that.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jul 4, 2007 -> 04:05 PM) only won 78 games? With the team they had, 78 games was a ton. I don't care if it was the NL, 78 wins for a 15 million practically all rookie team was amazing. Don't get me wrong, 78 wins was incredible and accomplishing much more than that team should have, which is why Joe Girardi won Manager of the Year. But look at it this way: the Sox have a .444 winning percentage right now, which amounts to a 71-72 win season -- not far off from the Marlins' 78. Then, like I said before, factor in that the NL Wild Card team had 88 wins (compared to 95 in the AL), just about every NL team was in the mix in the final month... The Marlins' 78 wins was impressive, but I wouldn't want to see it done again, at least not on the South Side. It seems 80 wins would be the best-case scenario with a team like that.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 5, 2007 -> 12:14 AM) To me its related to his DL trip, and his back issues of last year. He was a pretty dominant pitcher in the first 2 months of last year. In fact, he was striking out people silly throwing 95 to 97 at times just filthy. Then his sciatica/back acted up. He went on the DL. When he came back, he started to throw side arm a lot. Now two things will happen with a pitcher with back issues, either they fail to follow through due to the pain and leave the ball up a lot, or they try and compensate by dropping down. Now this comment about his age, just doesnt hold water. He is old, but he was old last year in the first 2 months. Throughout his career he has had 94-95 mph fastballs and a filthy fork. When he came up with the Yanks, he was afraid to throw the 95 mph fastball, which seemed to boggle everyones mind. He got forkball happy. Now he is throwing a sub 90 fastball, this year I have seen him anywhere from 90-91 and I have seen him every so often pop it in at 94. The last pitcher we had to have such a drop, was Freddy who had some labrum wear. So to me its either, he has a shoulder/arm issue which is a bad problem because of passing a physical for a trade. Or his back is still causing him issues and he cant drop and drive. There has been a linkage before in major league baseball to leg issues or secondary injuries causing pitchers to change their mechanics to compensate creating arm and shoulder problems. Its starting to smell like Freddy fastball from last year. Bingo, kind of. Any conversation involving Jose's decline should have a mention of that back injury. He was 9-0 before the All-Star break last year with a 3.38 ERA. After the break (and the injury), he went 4-9 with a 5.40 ERA. And through the first half this year, he's 5-10 with a 5.19 ERA.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jul 4, 2007 -> 01:05 PM) It worked pretty good for the Marlins didn't it?... but then again, we wouldn't have Joe Giardi. Well they only won 78 games last year. Girardi was manager of the year because the Marlins team payroll was as low as it gets and they were in the mix in the final month. But then you have to remember the NL Wild Card winner had 88 wins.

Rick Morrissey's column today makes a good point. Buehrle is a special case and could net $16-17 million per year on the open market. And if somebody comes to the conclusion that he's more reliable than Zito, just without a Cy Young... Look, the Sox wouldn't be opening Pandora's box by giving Buehrle a no-trade clause, and the roster wouldn't have 15 guys with no-trade clauses by 2009. If you can't give a no-trade clause to a guy who's pitched 200+ innings for six straight years, who can you give one to?

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jul 3, 2007 -> 01:09 PM) Oh, I would take it far. Not as far as the Marlins, but pretty far. I dreamt something up like this a couple days ago (I'll work out the trades on another day). CF, Jacoby Ellsbury SS, Yunel Escobar DH, Jim Thome 1B, Paul Konerko RF, Geoff Jenkins C, Jarrod Saltalamacchia 3B, Josh Fields LF, Ryan Sweeney 2B, Danny Richar I love these ridiculous chocked-full-of-prospects lineups that people float out there that would A. never happen, and B. not be nearly as good as people think they would. As for how far I'd take the firesale, I'd trade Dye, Iguchi and Contreras, then stop it there. If I were KW and Ozzie would be unwilling to give Brian Anderson another shot, I'd trade him, too.

QUOTE(BainesHOF @ Jul 4, 2007 -> 08:10 AM) Logan's ignorance is nothing to celebrate. Sure it is. It's unbelievably entertaining. That his first answer was "I don't read books," that he said he thinks Iguchi would taste like sushi...good stuff.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 10:40 PM) And why do people make fun of the cubs for relying on Prior and Wood. People before the season where placing bets in the ST threads about how long Pods and Erstad would be healthy. How many groin surgeries, or other injuries before he is an often injured player. He is a speed guy, that has had 4 groin surgeries. Thanks for 05, they should trade him this offseason. There it is. We all saw how well it worked in 2005, and then in the second half last season he hit .241 and scored just 23 and we fell out of the race. But when guys have injuries like this, and were the key to your success (and a World Series) in the past, it's hard to say, "Thanks for 2005, good luck in your future endeavors." You have visions of the same success you had before when he was healthy. And I'm sure Oakland fans weren't terribly distraught to see Jermaine Dye go after missing 31 games in 2002, nearly 100 in 2003 and 25 in 2004. But he helped us to a World Series and had an MVP-caliber season a year ago.

QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 06:25 PM) why don't you f'n enlighten me then - what deal was on the table for JD that Kenny said no to? Dye for Abreu?

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 07:44 PM) The Sox are probably going into re-build mode with or without Jenks on the team. A few have already brought it up, but what do you need a All-Star closer for if you have nothing to close out? Jenks obviously won't have any sort of Buehrle type value, but his value is very high to a playoff team in need to a stopper. It's too bad Detroit and Cleveland are both in the division. There are also health concerns. Every Spring it seems Bobby shows up bigger and bigger to camp, only to cut weight in March and early April. The Sox have lucked out of late, but the weight, the hip, and the pin in his elbow all are serious concerns. With all that said, you only trade Jenks if you get a package that you can't say no to, but with the way this team is headed, Jenks shouldn't be untouchable. Even with the way the Sox have played of late...all season...he's still on track for 40+ saves. He's 22 of 24 so far in save situations. So here's an embarrassing thought: With Billy Koch circa 2003 in the closer's role, we're in the cellar of the AL Central. Closers aren't that easy to find.

This is fantastic. Kudos for posting the article. Like I said: quality stuff.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 07:07 PM) I thought our offense was good in Tampa. It stunk in KC. Today's game was typical. Nobody could get a clutch hit. Lucky that Garland knows how to field his position. He slowed down that sure base hit up the middle that woulda tied the game. Great road trip in terms of results. I wish Thome would start hitting some bombs. Paulie had some good games on the trip. This may get me flamed but Podsednik's injury could really be key. We play better when he's in the lineup. Then let me be the first to flame. Duh.

After 10 years of catching, A.J. tries out as a pitcher.

Let me be the first. WTF OZZIE WHY AREN'T YOU PUTTING IN JENKS?!?!? GEEZ JENKS SHOULD BE IN NOT THORNTON OZZIE YOU SHOULD BE FIRED! continue.

I'd be very hesitant to deal Buehrle. He's as dependable as it gets -- his career numbers barely change from year to year. He's had two subpar seasons (2006 and 2003), and his first half of 2006 wasn't that bad (4.02 ERA). And unlike Barry Zito, Buehrle's control has been a constant, a problem that always gets Zito into trouble. You don't know what you're getting when trading Buehrle. You could get the next Grady Sizemore, or you could get the next Jeremy Reed. With Buehrle, you know you're getting 200+ innings and a sub-4.00 ERA (for the most part).

I'll be checking whitesox.com, mlb.com and espn.com even more frequently now. Before I was doing it to see if any Sox have been traded. I'm seriously against trading Buehrle for prospects. Obviously you don't know what you're going to get from unproven players, and Buehrle's had a subpar season (2003) and a poor second half (2006) in seven full seasons in the majors.