ptatc

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 5, 2011 -> 11:00 PM) Well I no longer considered B-Mac a prospect at the point of that trade. But I can give you that. My point was Wite, for some reason unknown, thinks we'd have viable replacements if a player or two went down in-season. I challenged him to give some examples. Why not? He had a heck of a run in August and Sept. to help the sox make the playoffs. There were many people really angry, on this board and in the papers, that KW traded away a pitcher who has some success at the MLB level for a few guys who hadn't. How about Bobby Jenks and Gordon Beckham?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 5, 2011 -> 07:35 PM) Has there ever been one legitimate link to Bagwell and PEDs? Other than the fact he was big and strong? I honestly don't remember. i think it's kind of like the Magglio PED connection. There is no sure link but everyone in baseball pretty much knows they did. There is enough talk and enough people talking about it to cast a large doubt in the minds of the voters. Plus there is the type of injuries in his injury plagued history that lends itself to PED use.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Jan 5, 2011 -> 06:34 PM) It's not the DH. It's the speculation that Bagwell used PED's. Frank was the best pure hitter of the 90's. And plus HOF voters like garbage terms like "feared" which Frank surely was. That being said I think Bagwell should be in the HOF. Personally I don't need the self righteousness of the voters concerning PED's. I might go with Bonds as the best. Prior to the steroid use he still could do everything with the bat. It would be a toss up between the two IMO.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Jan 5, 2011 -> 01:44 PM) I'm happy for Blylevin, but Morris was every bit his superior, IMO I disagree but that game 7 WS game against the Braves was one of the best ever seen.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 4, 2011 -> 07:54 PM) This is just a random guess...Andrus, Young, Kinsler, Hamilton, Beltre, Cruz, Moreland, Torrealba, Bourbon. That lineup is beyond sick. Not to mention the defensive excellence that will be on display. I don't think Young, Beltre, Andrus and Kinsler can co-exist in the same lineup. If Beltre does sign I'm not sure how they can manage unles they trade Young but that 16 mil price tag will make it tough.

QUOTE (Wanne @ Jan 4, 2011 -> 01:49 PM) like Balta and many said...you bet your butt he is. Whether that's good or bad remains to be seen...hopefully it doesn't make him go into psycho-mode because of it. Having said that...it seemed to work for Lovie Smith this year but Lovie and Ozzie about as far apart on the spectrum as you could possibly be. the part that scares me is that you know the Sox will hire a person who has not managed before or who has little MLB mangerial experience. That has always been the MO. I'm not sure who is out there that I would prefer over OZZie. Maybe this is what Joey is waiting for ala Rick Hahn and KW's jub.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 4, 2011 -> 08:45 AM) Its usually a year to heal, and then a year of getting back strength and accuracy it seems. the rehab is usually 8-9 months. But you're right, it takes many pitchers a while to regain the "feel" for pitches with the new tightened elbow. From my experience the more experienced pitchers take less time to regain this. I would guess that Nathan would get it back through spring training depending on how much they let him throw.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 2, 2011 -> 11:33 AM) I don't think anyone was really referring to the technical aspects of the accounting, other than ss2k, who is in agreement with you. The question seemed to be whether it was against any MLB rules to use profits from another corporation or organization to fund an MLB team. It's not. No it's not against the rules. You can invest whatever money you cn get your hands on. It's a business. The only difference is the anti-trsut exemption for business across state lines.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Jan 2, 2011 -> 11:43 AM) I did some more digging and pretty much came to this conclusion on my own. BTW, Reinsdorf owns 63% of the Bulls per wiki. i knew he owned more of the Bulls but I wasn't sure how much. I only spent a little time in the NBA and most of my freinds are in MLB and NFL.

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Jan 1, 2011 -> 02:47 PM) More bad injury news for the Sox farm system. The word Friday at the University of Louisville basketball game was that Thomas Royse, the Sox third-round pick in the 2010 draft, will miss the 2011 season. Royse, the best pitcher in the Big East last season at Louisville, had Tommy John surgery on his right elbow several weeks ago. Pretty sure he was shut down last summer when he pitched at Great Falls. Mitchell, Phegley, Royse ... the hits just keep on coming. TJ surgery is usually 8-9 months of rehab. If he had the surgery 2 months ago say, October he should pitch again toward the end of this season to get his arm going again and get ready for 2012.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 2, 2011 -> 10:26 AM) The Bulls' financial success since the Jordan era might be a reason why we're getting so much money this off-season. After all, Jerry is the majority owner of both teams and he can do whatever he wants with the money he makes. JR is not the majority owner of the sox. He owns very little of the team, I believe it is still under 15%. However, he is voted as Chairman of the board so he runs the team for the investors. He onws more of the Bulls b ut I'm not sure of the percentage. Again, he is the Chairman of the board of the Bulls which is why he runs the team. Each investor can do what he wants with the money, if it's approved by the board. Each of cannot just say "here is extra money go ahead and use it." It would need to be approved. Some investors may not agree to it based on individual politics within the investor group. I doubt it would happen but all decision need to go through the Board just like any other company. The groups for the two teams are separate and they cannot just move money from one to the other. They are different companies and one comapny cannot give another company money without board approval.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 31, 2010 -> 09:37 AM) So you blame Bobby for not performing last year? Ozzie, who knew all of Bobby's problems about drinking and marital issues, was the one that kept trotting him out to fail. Why would the locker room be mad at Bobby? Ozzie is the one that set him up for failure. The only way to help Bobby with personal problems was to try to make a positive work environment. Ozzie tried to do this. I don't fault Ozzie. I have a number of problems with things Ozzie does but trying to take care of his players isn't one of them. You can't help someone by making the life more miserable.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 09:57 PM) Maybe we should wait and see what actually occurs with the first 7 picks, (Tim Beckham, Pedro Alvarez, Eric Hosmer, Brian Matusz, Buster Posey, Kyle Skipworth, and Yonder Alonso) before we praise the White Sox for their ability to develop polished college players. Besides T. Beckham and Skipworth, you think the White Sox wouldn't like to have the other 5 players over Beckham? I'm not saying Beckham is a bad player or that I don't like his game going forward. The seven clubs before the White Sox mostly picked guys who had higher ceilings (albeit more risk and development time). The White Sox love drafting polished college players. Fine, whatever. My whole argument stemmed from this idea that farm system rankings should take into account the players who are on the big club now when really the best way to measure how well a team develops players is how many damn titles they win, and if Beckham and Sale are your crowing achievements as to why the farm system should get more credit, then we really need to rethink some things. And I thought I made it clear why Sale wasn't picked earlier, because teams didn't think he would eventually start. My whole point was that you want to praise a team for developing a pen arm. 29 other teams can do so as well. Just once I want to see this team draft a player on upside and actually develop said player. Jared Mitchell is my only hope currently... Would Morel qualify here? He was developed in the system and while I've always thought highly of him, many haven't.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 04:16 PM) I never said I wanted Ozzie gone. But we're approaching a point in which I could come to that conclusion. And as to your second point, they could come out and say they fired him because his son is a loud mouth and cannot keep White Sox business private. There really is nothing Ozzie could do about it. i agree with this. As I've said before, if this is what happened Ozzie, should be in some trouble, but not fired yet. The problem with firing him for this is proving the source was Ozzie. If what rock said is true (and I don't doubt him) that Oney and Jenks were friends and went out together alot, there is sufficient enough doubt that only source could have been Ozzie.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 04:10 PM) This is a non-issue. There are no legal ramifications. They can fire Ozzie for whatever the hell they want. All they have to do is pay out the term of his contract. Again, it's true as long as they don't come out and say that they a terminating his contract due to what something his son did.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 04:05 PM) Oh yes it is. Let's get something straight...companies build cases against employees they want fired all the time. Yes, they usually do not just fire an employee with a sterling record at the workplace, but they can certainly document every misstep that that employee makes until they have enough ammunition to fire the employee. In the case of Guillen, first of all, they don't have to build a case, because the White Sox are a private organization. Illinois is not a right to work state, and so the really don't even have to fire Ozzie for cause. They are not accountable to any stockholders and they really only need to worry about their reputation amongst the players, the fans, and major league baseball. Finally, there are already so many other reasons they can fire Ozzie, they really don't even need to use this particular one. They can fire Ozzie Guillen today and say there are philosophical differences. They were going to trade him to the f***ing Marlins, for Christ's sakes... This is true. They could fire Ozzie for phiolosophical differences or any number of things HE said or did. If the Sox came out and said the are firing him for things his son said, you can bet there would be legal and contractual issues. The critical point here is that you want Ozzie gone, the Sox don't.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 04:04 PM) i think ozzie should denounce what Oney said, not Oney. Im not asking the guy to say Oney isnt his son anymore, I just would like Ozzie to do something to the effect of releasing a statement saying he doesnt agree with Oneys decision to attack Jenks in that manner. I fully agree with this. He could even come out and say that he didn't get the info from him. He could say that Oney got the info from hanging out with Jenks.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) It would be a giant HR case for someone to be fire based on something another employee did regardless of their relation to said employee. We haven't even gotten into the legal ramifications if the Sox fired Ozzie based on the actions of his adult child not employed by the Sox.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:56 PM) It's not unreasonable at all. The White Sox didn't hire Oney because he was some genius in the video-editing room or something. They gave him a job as a favor to Ozzie. Every one of the privileges that Oney has been given are a result of the fact that his father is the manager of the Chicago White Sox. If you read back in the thread, I supported Ozzie's natural desire to share parts of his life with his family, and that includes his work experiences. I have no problem with him telling his family about his job. But when you've got a high-profile job, your family has to respect that, and not share that information with the press or really with many people at all. Not only has Oney done that, but he SEEKS out the press to share this information with others. He USES the fact that his father is in a high-profile position for his own gain. Obviously Ozzie can't force Oney to stop doing this, but what the Organization will eventually decide is that if Ozzie cannot stop his family members from sharing sensitive or private White Sox business with the press or with the public via Twitter, then it will sever all ties with the Guillen family. It will remove any chance of the Guillen family having this information from occurring. And it will do that by firing Ozzie Guillen. It is unreasonale to "denounce" you child. I also don't agree with the statement that he should share personal experiences from work with his family. Being in the medical field and working with professional and olympic athletes there is no way I would share what is going on with them personally. This is the only part Ozzie is resposible for but it is not a something he should be fired for, yet. If it continues to happen then I'll be on the band wagon. He cannot control his adult children but he can control what he tells them.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:49 PM) Well, you're the one that started with the football analogies... Well that's just too bad, Rock. If he can't control what his son says, then he should have never trusted him to bring him in the Clubhouse and be around White Sox business. He should be fired. Sorry, but that is how life works. That is not how life works. People don't get fired at work for something their adult children do. We've had employees children hired for summer help, the kids screw up and while they won't hire the employees children again, they don't hire the employee. the last time Oney made an ass of himself the sox fired him. I have not seen major ramifications from that episode.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:44 PM) Completely agree. Oney's family relationship to Ozzie isn't the issue. Ozzie giving Oney access to players and the clubhouse is. If Ozzie had hired Oney as a gofer and Oney pulled this crap, Ozzie would still be responsible for it. This is true except if the info came from the time from when he was employed by the sox, then they are still somewhat responsible. This would fall under the "organization does not share the same views as our employees and thus he was dismissed from the organiztion". Which by the way shows alot about what kind of idiot this kids is. The organization is pretty loyal to the employees.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:33 PM) See, now you're pointing out that they actually had to FIRE the manager's son. But you are shocked that anyone would now ask Ozzie to publicly denounce this same son? It's clear the kid is an absolute fool and Ozzie needs to completely separate his relationship with his son from his job with the White Sox. This is unreasonable. You do not have control over another person. You can ask them not to talk about things which I'm sure has been done. Since Oney is no longer employed by the Sox all the organization can do is to ask Ozzie not to talk about cetain things with his family. Ozzie may or not have given the info to Oney. If Oney got the info first hand then as his time with the Sox is further removed he will no longer have any info to pass along. Ozzie should state that he does not agree with what his so did but that Oney needs to stand alone because he is an adult (at least chronologically).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:22 PM) And why have Bobby and Oney been close? Because they met in Spirit Lake, Idaho? Did they play American Legion ball together? I met Bob Feller (RIP) in Spirit Lake Iowa but we wern't close.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 03:14 PM) When his tweets have the potential to complicate Ozzie's career then no he can't tweet whatever the hell he wants. I've spent some time at my father's workplace over the years and gotten to know his coworkers, if I starting sharing sensitive, personal information about his former coworkers he'd stomp my f***ing ass and I'd say we have a pretty close relationship. Oney's pampered lifestyle is direct result of his father's hard work and ability to hold a job in the game of baseball, why Oney would want to put that at risk is beyond me. I suppose it arises from that family's ridiculous machismo. Personally, I'll go with Oney being an idiot who didn't think before he acted.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 02:30 PM) Yeah, but he's been here his entire career, basically. That's a little different than someone who has no ties here and didn't win a championship here, with this manager. that person who wasn't here wouldn't have known about the distraction in the clubhouse either. It wasn't out there until PK talked about it. You can go around and around with this. It's still something far down the list of priorities when signing as a free agent. The Sox seem to sign a number of free agents. If someone is so weak minded that he won't sign here due to a soap opera distractions, which apparently are exclusive to Chicago, I'm not sure I want them. It's not like the instability from the Mets, LaRussa publically calling out Rasmus, or Giradi feuding with Steinbrenner just to name a few.