ptatc

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 12:31 PM) Let me clarify my point: If Ozzie doesn't like you, you basically don't have a fair shake, I hate to say it but it's the truth. A lot of these players that Ozzie seemingly doesn't like are young players as he obviously has 0 patience. Brian and Brandon rubbed Ozzie the wrong way and one is in Texas while the other has basically been given up on after what...400 ab's? Ridiculous. I agree but isn't this pretty much true for most manager's and coaches. If they don't like your work habits, attitude, tlaent or whatever you aren't going to play. This isn't only Ozzie. He seems to give most players a shot before he goes this route. It's up to the player to change what the manager perceives as " the problem." The problem I would have is if Ozzie doesn't communicate to the player what the problem is. But he seems to do that even if people don't always agree with the method. He is the manager, they are the players. Until he is no longer the manager they need to do what he thinks is best.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 10:57 AM) They weren't established veterans with years of service, but they were in fact the established starters at their respective positions. They didn't have to win the job. So because Ozzie didn't come to the Sox his first year as a manager, and dump the third basemen the team had been grooming and the shortstop they acquired, is your argument that he likes young players??? I'm not on either side in this "young player" arguement, but this is kind of a stretch. My only arugment is Brian should be the starting CF. I can give a s*** if he is young old or whatever. I don't know Ozzies reasons so I won't pretend to, but if BA is in the minors this season...our D is in trouble. Weren't alot of people trying to trade Crede because he just wouldn't hit enough? Alot of people were also skeptical that Uribe could be an everyday player because of his wold and inconsistent offense. Also with Garland while having logged MLB innings was trying to be pushed out because he could make it past the 5 or 6th inning under Manuel. Guillen stuck with these guy when alot of people wanted to run them out of town. We have short memories here if people don't remember this. These players were succeessful because Guillen stuck with them for whatever reason. These players were not rookies but were all young unproven players when Guillen took over.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 03:57 PM) Ian, The only issue that I have with Mack in center today, is that you have 2 kids fighting for a job and you want to give them the best opportunity for success. Having someone play a position that they are not comfortable at with 2 contact pitchers on the mound is not the best for success. Its not a big deal in the long run, but you just want to evaluate it with the best light. Maybe Ozzie wants to see how mentally tough the pitchers are to pitch over mistakes made by fielders. Sometimes this can be a good mark for a pitchers. Do they hang their head? Do they glare at the feilder. Do they fall apart and give up a big inning>

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 09:48 AM) Well history does show us that comedians are rarely "funny" in real life, and are often the most tragic of people. Lou Costello and Bud Abbott had more than their fare share of demons (I believe it was Bud that was reknowned for his HUGE Porn collection), as have almost all of the big guys. Chris Farley was an absolutely funny guy in college. I used to go out drinking with him. He was a great guy. I heard the drugs and such changed him when he hit it big but I really enjoyed hanging arounmd with th guy.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 9, 2007 -> 10:40 AM) Well of course. People are still under the false premise that a .350 OBP guy who goes 50 for 65 in steals is better than a .370 OBP guy (which Erstad isn't obviously, but i'm making a seperate debate) who goes 18 for 20 in steals, when in reality guy #2 is much better. Many people still believe it because it has a valid point. Statistically in the Bill James element it doesn't. But what it does take into effect is the pitcher's mind set. Players with speed on first base bother pitchers. MB commented on this earlier in the spring. During one of his first outings there were people on base and he said it was distracting him and making him work harder. This is the advantage. It won't show in stats so you won't agree but if a pitcher needs to work harder it will effect them later in the game. The player who steals may not score more often but I believe it effects the pitcher and is an advantage over the game and over a season. QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 9, 2007 -> 10:58 AM) Personally, I believe dealing Logan is a mistake. He has shown immense talent in the minors and could be a fixture in our bullpen for many years. If Williams is intent on trading several AAA players (Rogowski/Tracey), why not search for a similar to situation to ours where a player (CF) is blocked? If it doesn't work out, who cares? I'd rather take this risk than preventing Anderson from playing another season because Rowand is back. And everyone here knows Rowand will be given ALL the time to hit out of slumps. I agree. Although, I've been impressed so far with Phillips. I think he may make a decent back of the rotation guy or a reliever. I think adds to the potential depth of the lefty pitcher pool for the bullpen if nothing else.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 12:46 PM) http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/news/...12steroids.html I was really high on Valido when we drafted him, and thought for sure we had drafted our future SS. But the steroid case, and subsequent injury have turned me completely off of him. Would be great to see him come back with an assumed steroid free good year and retake his place as our best infield prospect. I guess I want to see him prove that he can play without help. He's still young enough to turn it around. I would not let the steriods issue cloud your view of him. It is very common to get positive tests from over the counter supplements. This is why you get second chances. The kids in the minors take something that their buddy said helped them to get an advantage with weight lifting or something. Even though you warn them not to take anything that isn't on the MLB cleared list, they do it anyway. If his performance does't improve, that's a different story. Give him another chance.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Mar 8, 2007 -> 01:00 PM) I like the idea of having three starting vets and a couple of kids that we develop, I just like Mark in there more than Vaz. Hopefully we'll find a way to get Mark done, but I don't think so. Your basic premise is correct. I would rather have MB than JV. But there is no way MB will sign for anything less than double the value of that deal. That would be about 5/14mil or so. He''ll get it but I would not lock a pitcher up for that long. It's a good deal for the flexibility in the pitching staff as others have stated. We keep him as a veteran innings eater if the kids have problems. If the kids do well, it's an easily tradable contract.

QUOTE(FlaCWS @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 07:58 PM) Maybe I'm totally blind but I haven't seen Owens' name in the box score the past couple of games. I ask because Anderson continues to hit like crap and, while I'll probably get slammed for this, I truly believe Owens is the better long-term solution in CF. I realize Anderson has only had one year and now a spring, and I'm not totally ready to give up on him, but I am just not that impressed. Yes he's a great glove but he's been a total liability at the plate. Owens looks like a guy who could hit for a good average by slapping the ball around and getting a bunch of hits on his speed alone. Besides that, he could be a leadoff hitter and basestealing threat a la Podsednick in '05 - and as a bonus could mean we don't have to rely on Scotty anymore (letting Erstad keep the seat warm for Sweeney in '08). Even if we want to put Erstad in CF and Jerry in LF, I'd love to see him win the roster spot over Brian. Thoughts? (ducks)... Nooooo. Not a guy with speed. Speed is useless. Ozzie will mismanage him. He'll only play because Ozzie loves speed!!!!!

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 06:51 PM) How exactly did Williams use all available information before trading for Floyd? Because, when I look at his minor league numbers, I don't see anything of value. I completely agree that using everything -- from statistics to scouting -- should be considered for player evaluation. However, when one of those options seem to portray Floyd as an enigma; now you're counting on your scouts to notice something that nearly everything quantifiable suggests doesn't exist. There should be some level of agreement between the two factions. Such as the scouts noticing Floyd has a great arm, and the numbers -- at some point in his past -- indicating as much. Sure, such a risk is acceptable when signing someone to one year deal; but it shouldn't be when attempting to collect the largest cache of talent for a departing starter. No doubt it was 'gutsy' acquiring Floyd when perhaps an additional arm, or another player more projectable, could have been included. I've said before, I believe if Fabio Castro were included in the deal Philadelphia would have approved it. His upside is, at the least, equal to Floyd. At worst, he replaces Logan in our bullpen. If Floyd is unable to win the 5th starters position this spring, that'll be enough evidence to prove acquiring him was a mistake. I'm almost certain that Williams' plan after the Garcia deal didn't revolve around Floyd pitching in AAA, perhaps replacing an injured/ineffecitve starter in 2007, only to ultimately be in the bullpen for his White Sox career. This is where I could see him heading if his spring training doesn't end well. I think the target of that deal was Gio. People still seem to think KW went after Floyd and Gio got thrown in. I think it was the other way around. So for the secondary pitcher in the deal it is worth the chance. Yes, Floyd is closer to contributing but is not the best pitcher in the deal. There is no way I take Fabio Castro. He will be nothing more than a decent middle reliever. He have plenty of options for relief in that role. He went for a starter with unrealized talent. Could be big could be a bust. This is type of player many people think we should draft. Big talent/big risk. He is 24,he was worth the risk. Even if he is in AAA for awhile, the payoff could be worth it.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 7, 2007 -> 12:06 PM) This is my belief -- he's refering to the methods used to evaluate players. By suggesting he does things differently, he's refering to scouting more than statistical data. Why else would Floyd be on this ballclub, afterall? KW has stated this before. While he looks at the stats he believe more in what he and his MLB scouts see. He his evaluations aren't driven by pure statistical data. He brought this up in regards to Iguchi when they signed him. The comments were (paraphasing here) "We were worried about signing him because nobody saw him live. We thought we saw enough on video to think it is a good signing." This is one reason I like KW. Use all of the information available. Don't get caught up in only one aspect of evaluation. He isn't always right, nobody is. But he also make gutsy moves which you need to do to win. It's awfully difficult to win being conservative.

QUOTE(dasox24 @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 09:17 PM) Wow, you have no idea how happy you made me just now to see a thread entitled "Draft Plans/Needs." I absolutely love the MLB Draft. I guess it's probably b/c I'm such a "minor league" guy, and the draft is what restocks the system. As for this years draft, look for a change in philosophy regarding drafting pitchers. I think you'll see us take guys that have great stuff, but need some work. The past few years we've taken some solid pitchers like Broadway and McCulloch, but passed on the guys with the great arms. The positions mentioned above (C, middle IF) are extremely thin, but you won't see us draft for need. You draft best available player. Now, if the best available player at our spot is a Catcher or SS or 2B, then that would be fantastic. But, don't be surprised to see us take an OF or 3B, which while they aren't needs for the big league club, there are so many spots in the minors that you can find a great player playing time. Hell, whoever we draft will probably be used in a trade at some point anyway, lol... As for specific players, I have no idea about anyone that will be in this year's draft since it's only the start of baseball season. However, as June approaches, you'll be seeing plenty of stuff on BA.com and MLB.com I agree. I think the Sox got burned with guys like Jason Stumm. High schoolers with great arms but who wear out in pro ball. This made them gun shy. It will be interesting to see. They have upper level pitching depth with the newly acquired arms so I wouldn't be surprised to see them take some chances with High risk/high reward players.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Mar 6, 2007 -> 05:11 PM) How does his love afair with Vaz cost us bmac. I understand the Young part, because he was traded for him. But bmac. As much as Javy frustrated me with his 6th inning crap last year, this is an awsome signing. The frustrating thing, is he would completely own a team, and then would unravel. The talent is obviously there, he just needs to either keep his mechanics in check past the 5th inning, or his mind in check as far as focus. If he can learn either of those two he can be a steal. This is the same concern many people had with Garland. People wanted him traded because he couldn't go deep in games. May be the Sox figure they can help JV with this also. For the price and length of contract, it is a great deal for the sox. I know most stat heads, believe wins are useless for pitcher's stats but I go back to my usual point. Until the league put the teams with the best stats in the playoffs wins are still the most important thing in baseball. Wins may not tell you how well the pitcher is pitching but it can tell you how valuable they are to the team.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 01:24 PM) I'm not sure who's supposed to pitch today but since they played a B game this morning and this game is on the road I'm sure it will be a good amount of youngsters. I'm pretty sick today which means I'm just kind of laying around feeling sorry for myself, I'll give some updates as the game goes on. Now that I think about it this is probably the Brewers broadcast so anyone in the Chicago Land area that can pick up 620 AM on their radio should be able to listen to the Sox today. It's always fun listening to Bob Uecker. I love listening to Uecker. When I was in college we would go to Brewer games and bring signs that said. "Ueckers pukers we're not leavin til we're heavin!!!" He would say on the radio that the pukers were in the stands today. Those were the days, I think!!!!

The same reasonRobin Ventura went from 21 to 23 after his rookie year......the rookie year sucked.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 05:39 PM) So you pick out individual moments? Who are you kidding? That makes absolutely no sense. I could pick out a more "situations" from other players who "blew" more games than BMac. It had to do with why they were negative with McCarthy not coddling him and always being positive What does this have to do with blame? Ozzie is being a dumbass, AGAIN, and I'm calling him on it. That's your right but I don't blame Ozzie for replying to McCarthy bashing Ozzie's team. Ozzie shouldn't defend his team I guess. ----------------------- McCarthy handles his Score interview with 100% class. After starting the whole mess by bashing the Sox, clubhouse and players.[ I don't hold it against Ozzie for defending his players/b] B-Mac People would rip Ozzie and Kenny for choosing the high road, for choosing not to air "dirty" laundry (although in this case, it seems the dirty laundry is coming from the manager's mouth)? Those people are idiots.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 05:37 PM) You mean that greedy, selfish, worthless, washed up guy? Don't forget the ever popular "he always wanted to be a Cardinal anyway."

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 05:25 PM) This organization is a JOKE when players leave. Best player to ever don a White Sox uniform? Trash that asshole. Ironically enough, Guillen actaully didn't say a word there. The best young pitching prospect this team has drafted and developed since Mark Buehrle. Trash him. Why do they CONTINUALLY air the dirty laundry? "Brandon was a big part of our 2005 WS run, but we like the talent we're getting in return." Done. End of story. Guys ask about it? NO f***ING COMMENT. Then everyone will rip Ozzie or KW for not telling the truth or hiding everything from everybody. We want everyone to just tell the truth except when we don't like it.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 05:19 PM) Ozzie apparently (I didn't hear the interview) said that if McCarthy wasn't with the club last year we would've made the playoffs. There's no excuse for saying that. None at all. Putting it on one guy? That's a f***ing joke, you NEVER do that. And the hypocrisy is hilarious. Ozzie is the guy who continually trotted out Mackowiak in CF. Ozzie is the guy who continually trotted out Podsednik in LF, despite the fact that there were at least FOUR beter starting options. Next year at SoxFest, someone needs to ask him where the Sox would've been had McCarthy not been on the 2005 roster. This is so f***ing ridiculous. I'm embarrassed by his stupid ass comments. It's great how things get taken. Ozzie was commenting on how McCarthy said the Sox were negative and had a negative clubhouse. Ozzie's reply was that he didn't get to know most of the team and that maybe it's hard to be very positive whyen he was pitching like crap. He could think of 5 situations where McCarthy blew games. If he hadn't blown those maybe we make the playoffs. granted he shouldn't lay it out there like that but McCarthystarted it all with bashing the Sox as being a negative team and too boring and Married. McCarthy is a smart guy it wouldn't surprise me if he bashed the Sox knowing how Ozzie would react. It's interesting how everyone enjoys busting on Ozzie but refuse to lay any blame on the players. If players suck Ozzie put them in a bad position. If the players do well, they did it despite Ozzie. He had abslutely nothing to do with showing confidence in them to run them out there to prove it.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 04:52 PM) That would be ridiculous, if true. Teaching a young player a lesson rather than attempting to win? When Anderson wasn't producing, I could understand benching him if it appeared his social life was becoming a distraction. But when someone begins to turn themselves around, as Brian did in the second half, the level of seriousness shouldn't matter. I disagree. If off the field stuff was causing his poor performance on the field he should be benched. I don't care how much he was starting to improve, if the off the field stuff continued. Ozzie has a duty to find out what his players are made of and to make sure they can be counted on in games. He has shown this by putting many young or unproven players in tough game situations to see how they handle it, even if it may cost the Sox a game. If he felt BA was doing more harm then good I have no problem with it. The Sox as an organization have a responsibility to continue to be good not drop off the face of the Earth. Being short sighted to win every game at the expense progessive thinking is why clubs like the scrubbies are mired in defeat.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 2, 2007 -> 04:17 PM) If information comes out concerning McCarthy's attitude, and our management's displeasure with it, it makes me wonder about future young talent on this ballclub. Will we be patient with a potential superstar if he doesn't get along with our manager, or other teammates? How would we have handled Delmon Yountg throwing a bat at an umpire? I'm not willing to believe Williams traded Brandon because of his attitude alone, but you have to imagine it factored in. If you listen to his comments I don't think he is referring to attitude as a whole. It's pretty much an indictment of McCarthy and Anderson partying too much. The Sox, Guillen included think that these two weren't serious enough about the game. This must be the reason that BA was being becnched last year even when it seemed he was improving on the field. I for one have no problem with Ozzie saying what he did as because he felt that these guys were partying and it effected their play. Now if the partying truly effected the play or not it's impossible for us to know. But if your boss says stop partying and these two obviously didn't listen then you should be in the doghouse. I can't imagine that KW would have traded McCarthy just for this but when the Rangers came a callin for Garland as was first reported, I can picture KW saying "what about a younger cheaper McCarthy."

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 07:09 AM) If its no big deal and alright to send him to the mound with, why was Herm called to the mound, and Jenks lifted after 10 pitches? The other problem with having him pitch with shoulder tightness is he will compensate and may put more stress on the screw in his elbow. The only way to get through "tightness" is to throw and loosen it up. No amount of stretching will totally take care of it. As a MLB pitcher when you throw you routinely put your shoulder through 160-200 degrees of external rotation. This is equivalent to while standing with your arm out to the side, rotate your arm backward so the thumb is pointing straight down to the ground. Most normal people can't do this. But this is the range pitcher's need. So throwing until the arm lossens up is the best way to do this. Rest is not the correct option to correct this. This doesn't need to and probably shouldn't be done in a game situation. They probably just wanted to test him out and will now have him throw on the side until it improves. As you saud earlier you don't want to add stress to other parts of the arm. A shoulder problem can easily add stress to the elbow or visa versa. I hope it's not an elbow problem which is causing the weird mechanics he is describing which is causing an alteration of shoulder motion.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 07:31 PM) I predict Bobby Jenks' right arm falls off sometime before the start of the 2009 season. I really don't think it can hold up for much longer, I hope I'm wrong but I really believe this to be the case. Especially with the screw in the elbow. With that type of stress you never know. That's part of the reason the Angels let him go.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 06:17 AM) Pretty much. Dogged him for not being able to play through a little pain and then it turned out Frank had a torn bicep muscle. Oh yeah, then,about a week later Wells went on the DL for the rest of the year, unable to play through a little pain apparently. Triceps, factually speaking

QUOTE(scenario @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 05:40 PM) So.... we won 90 games last year with the same questionable outfield, the same shortstop having a miserable year, and when almost our entire starting pitching staff had career worst years... But we're going to only going to win 72 this year.... because why... because we got rid of Freddy Garcia??? Since Freddy is gone obviously nobody will play any better. So you take 90 wins minus Freddy's 17 and subtract another for the horrible McCarthy trade and you get 72 wins. It makes perfect sense to me.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 02:48 PM) One question would be is how Buerhle's velocity progresses this spring. Last year he was in the low to mid 80s. 2 years ago he was 88-90 for the most part. That little bit of velocity is huge for Buerhle. If he sits at 83-85 he better have pinpoint control. He did, he found nearly every bat. It may be bad baseball but it's better than no baseball!!!!!!!