ptatc

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 16, 2010 -> 05:55 PM) I wasn't factoring in salary. Obviously, it's less than realistic, but hypothetically speaking i don't think Damon mitigates any other moves being made. When a team is near their reported budget limit, the salary is the first thing you need to consider. Signing Damon would put them over their budget and would prevent anything else from happening. KW wants that flexibility so that after the team plays for awhile, he can fill whatever weaknesses pop up.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Feb 16, 2010 -> 03:52 PM) Except for the fact that it's probably his last chance to land a semi-lucrative multi-year deal (he'll be 36 in June) and it's a guaranteed $14M. If Damon were to suffer a major injury this summer (like a torn ACL), he might not be able to play again until he's 38. I don't see why he didn't take the (alleged) 2/14 offer from the Yankees. ^^^ If Damon could stand taking a trip to the Bronx every day, driving into Detroit for two years isn't the worst thing in the world. I'm sure it's because Boras advised him that he could get more. This is also why this process is being extended. Boras is trying to save face by getting a similar offer elsewhere. Lopez already dropped Boras because he made him salary promises that he couldn't keep by overvaluing him. Now Lopez is just trying to get a job.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 16, 2010 -> 01:12 PM) There's a BIG if if if in your equation. Putz. Because I'm sure not very many people feel comfortable right now with Pena, Linebrink and there's a pretty high amount of trepidation about Jenks as well. Williams? The long man. We have the POTENTIAL to be a great bullpen but more likely we'll be average. Second, it would have been impossible NOT to improve the defense, no matter what moves were made. I'm not sure that we can determine what we have with Jones in terms of his defense until Spring Training comes around and we see what his playing condition is... i agree they are if's. however, I think they are good gambles. The bullpen may not be great but i think with everything you said it will be better than last year. I also agree with your assessment of the defense and it will be an improvement over last year.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 16, 2010 -> 11:39 AM) It's not semantics, it's fact. (Almost) Every trade that's ever been made has been made with the idea of improving the team towards the future. A lot of teams make deals down the stretch, and a lot of teams make huge deals to insure the future of a team. KW doesn't get a free pass for having made the Peavy and Rios moves, he get's a thank you from the fanbase and then the mandate to improve the team around these pieces. Two moves, big or small, does not an offseason make. it is semantics because what is the difference if he makes the team better in July or if he makes the team better in November. The only answer is the time frame. Those moves make the team better. KW is not getting a free pass on where the team is still weak. Hitting. He should get credit for improving the team's pitching and defense. if you still want to talk timeframes he still improved the team's pitching in the offseason with Putz and improved the bench and defense with Jones, and Vizquel. Hitting is still the team's weakness. With the budget the sox have it is near impossible to have an outstanding team in all three areas of pitching, defense and hitting. KW chose to go with a very good pitching staff, an average but improved defense and the weakness in the area of hitting. If I had to choose which order to spend the money i would do the same. Since the sox knew they were going to be weakest in hitting they are going with a "create a run" theory on offense instead of power. Will it work? I have no idea and it is a weakness. But given the choice I personally would focus on pitching as well.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 16, 2010 -> 10:58 AM) We're paying Mark Kotsay as much money as the Twins are paying Jim Thome. A guy that would have solved these problems, and rid me of my concerns. 1.5 million bucks, that's all that it would have cost. That's chump change in the pocket of Mr. Reinsdorf. If 1.5 million bucks proves to be the difference between us winning the divison, and us failing to do so. I am going to be furious. We need this Damon signing like crazy. Your point of saying Peavy and Rios pick ups don't count for the offseason is just semantics. They were acquired late in the season and make this team better than last year's team. So, they weren't technically acquired after all teams stopped playing games. They still help to make this team better than last year's team. Especially in the areas of pitching and defense which is the focus this year. the Thome arguement is getting old. The only thing he brings is power. His strikeouts killed scoring opportunities and his high number of walks didn't alow for consistent scoring opportunities because it took three hits for him to score. The DH only arguement is valid. But Thome wasn't the answer. The "Reinsdorf's money" has also been rehashed many times. There is a budget whether you like it or not. They cannot go over budget now and have no flexibility for injuries at the trading deadline. If an injury occurs there isn't alot of help in the minors. KW needs a little flexibility in case a player other than an OF gets hurt because this is the only place Damon could help. Damon's salary may be in the budget but maybe not. There are other factors to look at other than the immediate concern.

QUOTE (SI1020 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 10:22 PM) Sorry but I would have to disagree. I have no doubt that many players in the past used "greenies" and other similar pick me ups. The problem with amphetamines is although they can give an energy boost over the short term, in the long haul they have devastating affects in the manner opposite of what they're intended to do. One of the saddest sites of my long ago youth was a burnt out speed freak. Gaunt, pale, paranoid and unhealthy. The strength and stamina long gone. Greenies will not help you bulk up, increase your skull size. Anyone taking them gets a short term edge at best. Comparing greenies to steroids is like comparing a popgun to a bazooka. I understand what you're saying and it's true as far the steriods. However, once the end of July hits and players especially older players begin to wear down the "leaded" coffee begins to really flow. Baseball is really an endurance game and as Yogi Berra would say 90% of the game is half mental. Look at players who really wore down at the end of the season such as Dye. This is becoming more commonplace due to the lack of greenies. Of course, the banning of steroids is making a huge difference but only for a select group of players. The greenies is making a difference in everyone's performance. The game is becoming a younger players game again.

QUOTE (jphat007 @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 09:42 PM) How do we know they are negotiating with Boras? Heyman is a good reporter but we don't know that he was right on this. More likely Boras was leaking that to get the Tigers to bid against themselves. ANd it seems to be working if 2 yr/14 mil is true. More likely KW gave Boras an offer and said take it or leave it. This latest report is Boras trying to get the Tigers to up thier offer to either get the Tigers to bid against themselves or see if KW blinks.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 22, 2010 -> 10:57 AM) I think you see this far too narrowly. Yes, Teahen fills a gap. But he also improves the infield NOW, which is key. And he's also a bet that KW is willing to make, that he MIGHT turn into the player his potential seemed to dictate. If he does, then you have a good problem. If not, Morel and maybe Viciedo are behind him. Basically, KW did what he always seems to do - gave himself options. The other aspect is that if Morel does come to the Sox while Teahen is here, Teahen has the versatility to be a utility guy for the IF and OF. So either way Teahen is a good type of player to have both now and for the next few years.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 15, 2010 -> 01:12 PM) Welcome aboard! As ye be a Tiger fan, this'd be your colors. Anyway, yes, Prior and Wood blew out their arms, but neither had near the workload he had last year. He pitched a Buehrlesque amount of innings last year, but he's a different type of pitcher. Buehrle is built to be a workhorse, since he doesn't throw hard at all. Verlander tops 100 more than anyone else, and he pitched a lot of innings. I should rephrase what I said earlier, he won't pitch as badly as he did in 2008, but he won't pitch as well as he did last year. I'd peg him for something like 3.75 ERA, 16 wins. I wouldn't be shocked if he did better though. This has no bearing on the workload. When MB throws 90, he is working just as hard as Verlander when he throws 100. If two people are sprinting in a race just because one guy lost doesn't mean he wasn't working as hard he just isn't as fast. Just because he can't throw as hard doesn't mean he isn't working just as hard if not harder. Now if you want to compare mechanics and which motion is more efficient that's a different discussion. The workload in the previous can have a major effect. This is where you need to worry about a drop off. Some handle it better than others.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 07:34 PM) See Kevin Orie, Bobby Hill, Gary Scott, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Shawon Dunston, Rich Hill, Angel Guzman, etc. Some of those guys turned out to be "decent" major leaguers like Dunston, but nothing close to their hype. As for Viciedo, we'd all rather see him at 3B because of his arm strength, but if his range/mobility are lacking, he has to be moved to 1B/DH or corner outfield. We've already invested the signing bonus into him, so let's just be patient and wait things out instead of jumping off the bandwagon. Alexei Ramirez was 26 and a "seasoned" veteran when he came to us, those comparisons of Viciedo making an instant impact (he got more money than Ramirez, who basically was a ROY type player) because they were both Cuban (not to mention our success with Contreras in 05/06) led us to see this signing with rose-colored glasses. Many of us were guilty of thinking he could make an impact as early as 2009, while others were being a lot more realistic. And the expectations for Ramirez when he came to us were very low, kind of a super-sub/utility guy in the mold of Ramon Santiago or Jose Oquendo with a "plus" arm but reed-like physique who would struggle to hold down the last spot on the roster or be in AAA. By the way, Keith Law is an a s s. I'm going to get tired of reading that we have the worst farm system in baseball when it's the opinion of ONE writer. I think that 18-24 is a lot more indicative of the actual level of talent in our system. The only difference from this year to last year is Gordon Beckham being removed from the list. That doesn't account for falling 10 spots when we had a very solid draft last year. Mitchell and Flowers, theoretically, have the ability to be All-Stars at their positions. Hudson is seen by many as one of the top 25-40 prospects in baseball, while some don't even rank him in the Top 100. Then you have Viciedo and Jordan Danks, both of those guys have God-given natural ability that can't be coached or taught. Neither of them may make a HUGE impact, but you can't begin to compare the state of our minor league system with 2-3 years ago when it was Josh Fields, Jerry Owens, Ehren Wasserman and Angel/Andy Gonzalez at the tops of the depth chart. And Trayce Thompson has as much upside (and downside) as any prospect in the low minors today. Sure there are doubts about Morel or Viciedo or CJ Retherford, but we're not close to being the worst farm system in baseball...no matter what Keith Law's personal vendetta against the Sox and/or KW happens to be. I don't think you can count Walton and Smith as part of the Cubs overhype machiene as Walton won rookie of the year and Smith was second. However, neither turned out to have much of a career.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 06:13 PM) A.J. Pierzynski = the Polish Prince, Dennis the Menace (my personal fav. for him) Dennis the menace will always be George Brett. As big a Sox fan that I am He is one of my all time favorites. "Million dollar" Floyd Bannister

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 04:46 PM) I understand. The main problem I have with projections is that they generally hate pitchers that pitch to contact. It has been proven that pitchers can do just fine with pitching to contact. It's just unpredictable, and thus can't be factored in. Take Buehrle for instance...he's the absolute definition of a guy that pitches to contact, but he has fantastic command of his stuff, and has only had one terrible year in his entire career, and yet, year after year, projections predict he'll end up with an ERA in the 4.50 range. Another significant problem with most projection schemes is that use standard deviations and standard error of measures to predict regressions. These stats depend on there being a normal population bellcurve for the stats. We are dealing with the top persentile of baseball players not a normal population. So the predicting of "regression to the norm" or part of the way is not a valid statistical assumption.

How about Maggie Lawson from psych?

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Feb 13, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) " Good teams dictate the matchups, bad teams try to make them as favorable as they can." That strategy works in terms of facing a bullpen, but your starting lineup is based on who is starting against you. It is a reactionary concept. You can't force a matchup against your lineup. It's not ike the opposition has a "pinch pitcher" you are gonna force them into starting because of the card to took to the ump before first pitch. Shouldn't that really be "Good pitchers dictate matchups." Most of the time, in relation to who the hitter is anyway, that is the only variable worth considering. I can think of many times when a team has shuffled a pitching rotation to get the best matchup for a team going into an important series.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 01:51 AM) Henderson's (ages 20-29) numbers before returning to Oakland - .290/.399/.437/.836, 1286 H, 120 HR, 367 XBH, 701/875 SB/ATT, 135 OPS+ in 5930 PAs Henderson's (ages 30-44) numbers after returning to Oakland - .268/.404/.407/.810, 1600 H, 171 HR, 468 XBH, 612/760 SB/ATT, 122 OPS+ in 7416 PAs Is it possible he used? Sure, considering his line after leaving Oakland for a second (technically third, since he was traded for Toronto for half a season) time was .247/.388/.357/.745. Then again, he was 37 by the time he started going on his tour of the baseball nation. I would say it's much more likely and probable that he did use amphetamines before games. Everybody used amphetamines before games late in the seasons. I've always said banning these will make a bigger impact on baseball than steriods because everyone used them. The older players wear down much more by the end of the season.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 03:39 PM) Has anyone thought that Boras is in tight with Detroit and is actually using that to his advantage to play the Sox and get the Sox to pony up more. Detroit benefits because if it works, Boras gets the Sox to spend more dough or even walk away from the chase and Boras benefits because it either gets another team to jump in (Braves) or gets the Sox to maybe pay a bit more? nothing would surprise me with Boras. Any scenario is feasible.

QUOTE (fathom @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 01:56 PM) It's amazing to me that some people are actually buying into the rotating DH philosophy. One could say that it's amazing that some people are stuck into the old-fashioned antiquated concept of the DH only player and are to closed minded to try something new. If you look at the Red Sox, they know no one will outhit the Yankees. No one has the kind of money to do that so they went the way of pitching and defense. Without PEDs and greenies older players will need more rest The sox have a right fielder who is always hurt. It makes sense to try to rest these players more. I don't know if this will work But I also realize that these lifetime baseball guys may have an idea that will work so I'm willing to give it a shot. While I started in professional baseball about the same time as KW, I certainly don't think I know more about the game and scouting then him. Also, my job certainly isn't riding on trying this, so it will be interesting to watch.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 01:45 PM) Also, laying down a bunt is not exploiting a matchup. If anything it avoids it. This is something I'm very interested in watching. Most people who have done weightlifting has heard of the research where you do 3 sets of 10 repetitions 2-3 times per week to increase strength This was the standard The problem with this is the research was done on the Olympics weightlifters in the 70's What was prevalent at the time? The first steriod boom. All of that research has been invalidated by new research. Olympic weightlifters now lift each body part now more than 2 sets of a max of 8 reps 1 time per week. All of the research by Bill James showing that bunting and stealing bases hurts your offense because the percentage that an extra base hit can score the player more effectively was also done during the steriod era of baseball. I'll be interested to see if this changes over the next few years with the possibility of hits and extra base hits decreasing Bill James research may also be invalidated. As stated before it looks like some teams including the white sox think so. Another thing just popped into my conspiracy oriented mind. I recall that during the last Owners/GM meetings wasn't there talk of getting rid of the DH? I wonder if JR and some of the other owners know that this is on the way and are building their teams to get ready for it?

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 12:22 PM) I think what he is trying to say is you can't include these guys as the starting DH. They would be occasional DH. If you count them in the rotation then you are putting a bad hitter at C (castro), 1b (kotsay) or RF (whoever the 4th OF is). None of those guys you would want to be your regular DH. So if you include the starting C, 1b or RF as your DH you are really counting them twice in the lineup. This is correct, however where are you going to find a really good hitter who wants part time play?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 11:23 AM) We have a glarding hole in our offense that Stevie Wonder could see. This is unacceptable to have a "maybe" in the most important offensive position on the team. I know you don't like the concept but sooner or later you're going to have to realize that the Sox are not going to have a single designated hitter this year. The Sox like the idea of resting some of the older or injury prone position players by playing them at DH. When Quentin, or Konerko need a break Jones and Kotsay will play the field in those respective positions. These replacements will improve the defense during these times. So, unless you can find a guy who can play first as part of the rotation, Kotsay will stay. Ozzie likes his bat against RHP. This player will also need to be ok with playing part time I'm not sure you can find that player

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 07:29 PM) It just seems to me kind of odd, the best Damon could do yesterday was a one year contract for $4 million with half of it deferred, and now today he's at over $14 million for 2 years. Something, somewhere doesn't add up. Either he doesn't have that particular offer on the table or Boras scammed someone into believing that another team had made a similar offer. I can't see 2 teams all of a sudden going that high. For one year and $7 million, maybe $8 million, yes, but not 2 years. Maybe the Sox are offering him 1 year at $5-6 million with some incentives. At least then if he gets paid, he's put up some numbers. Not when Boras is deceiving everyone involved. I'm sure all of the numbers you are hearing are made up by Boras and eventually one team, not the Sox, will believe them and sign the player for the imaginary number. This is what he is great at, getting teams to bid against themselves through any means possible.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 12:37 PM) http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/orber-moreno.shtml the name sounded familiar, now i know why. He was with Lansing when I was Kane County. He had a name similar to the failed Bears quarterback of about the same time. His name stuck so he must have done something to make a good impression. He had good control as I recall and the stuff was pretty good as well. Thanks for posting that because it was driving me nuts trying to remember where I knew the name from.

QUOTE (bmags @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 05:54 AM) Those didn't seem to be the worst super bowl commercials ever. It more just seemed like "10 super bowl commercials I remember and will create comments to try and fit my title" No kidding. Number 5 has Farrah Fawcett for the men and Namath for the women. It doesn't matter what it's about. Again, it has Farrah Fawcett in it, IT CANNOT BE BAD.

QUOTE (Brian @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 03:37 PM) I just never got into WInter Olympics, even as a kid. None of the sports interest me. I'll watch hockey this year, but nothing else. i was the same way until I got assigned to work the speed skating and figure skating teams a few years ago. My appreciation for the sport and athletes really changed. Now I'll even watch the figure skating with my wife (but complain about it the whole time to save face).

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 12:58 PM) Kubel played 58 games in the outfield last year, and that was when the Twins had Gomez too along with Young, Span, and Cuddyer. Delmon Young is a terrible defensive LFer - barely better than Kubel - and he is obviously much worse offensively than Jim Thome against right handed pitching. I still think Thome gets close to 100 games at DH next year, barring injury. You could be right but I don't think so.