YASNY

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 03:21 AM) Yasny, Last year was not 2005. Nor did it involve the 2005 Pods. He didn't spark anything last year, period. I quite aware of that. Thank you.

Damn! I missed it. Oh well, wait till next year.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 26, 2006 -> 01:11 PM) That's a nice theory but the reality is your leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to leadoff once a game. Pods got way too much credit for his contribution to the 2005 White Sox. He scored a very pedestrian 85 runs. He actually was a better offensive player in 2006 save for the batting average and a few more ks. He drove in more, he scored more, he slugged better, and everyone agrees he wasn't very good in 2006. Yet, a leadoff hitter is gaurenteed to hit in front of the middle of the order 3 to 5 times a game. So, that 'once a game' has a great big hole in it, in my opinion. QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 26, 2006 -> 12:30 PM) And tell me, YASNY, what exactly Podsednik sparked? Oh, right, a 9th place (in the AL) offense. I would never, ever want a future Sox to copy ANYTHING from that 2005 offense (except the power. power = goodzzzz). Because...? 'Cause Ozzie said/thinks so? Because Ozuna has always been there to do a nice job against left-handed pitchers. Look -- I'm not saying that KW and co. should go about the rest of the offseason with the thinking that, "hey, we already have our leadoff hitter". What I'm saying is that the Sox shouldn't "force" a leadoff hitter on the team just for the hell of it. If it ends up that way, that you come up with a real "leadoff hitter" (one of the slap hitting joys like the one we've had the past two years), then so beit. I'm saying that, if the Sox end up with say, Jose Guillen out in LF, ie a guy who isn't an ideal top-of-the-order hitter, they shouldn't back themselves into a corner and say, "Oh, s***, now we gotta get Furcal or Vizquel or Rollins or else we won't have a real leadoff man!" That's not a smart way to go about things. And before anyone brings up the name, no, Jerry Owens is not a good option. Dude's going to be a 4th OFer... He has absolutely no power, and his OBP is too batting average reliant. I seem to recall that we won an amazing amount of 1 run games in '05. Pods manufacturing runs while building that huge lead in the first half certainly contributed to that. You keep focusing on the 9th place in AL offense and I'll keep focusing on 1st place in the AL Central and a WS Championship. Your "because Ozzie said so" remark does not deserve to be dignified with a reply.

I know I probably overvalue Crede, but a good 3B is hard to find. After Ventura left as FA, the Sox had this huge void at third until Crede came into his own. Hell, the Mets and Cubs went decades looking for a decent 3B.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 25, 2006 -> 12:45 PM) No, it's the other way around. Leadoff hitter isn't a position. We have one on the roster right now. He's our 2nd-baseman. Whether or not our manager is too thick headed to put him there is another thing. LOLerz. Yeah, Pods was sooooo great in 2005, leading our offense to what, 9th in the AL in runs scored? I can't think of any other position play on the 2006 White Sox who was as useless as Pods was last season. Outside of one month, the guy couldn't hit. His defense wasn't great, and he got picked off and thrown out way too much. And as DA said, what's to say he won't be hurt next year? He got hurt in '05, and came into '06 recovering from surgery. Yeah, speed never slumps... it just gets hurt and costs your team runs through stubborn-ness. That's the epitome of intelligent baseball analysis. C'mon, you're better than that. While leadoff hitter is not a defensive postion, it is a position in the lineup. There are two sides to the game, offensive and defensive. You position your players in the field ... 1 thru 9 ... to prevent runs as best possible. You also position your players in the lineup ... 1 thru 9 ... to score runs as ofter as possible. As for Iguchi batting leadoff, he's never done so that I'm aware of, yet you think Ozzie is thickheaded because he doesn't play your hunch that Iguchi would be a good leadoff hitter. My hunch is that he'd be batting out of position. What Pods did in '05 with his very solid 1st half was spark this team to what proved to an insurmountable lead that allowed the to reach the playoffs, which in turn allowed them to bring home the trophy.

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Nov 25, 2006 -> 10:44 AM) There is literally no debate - I want any other player - major or minor league - who is capable of playing left field next year and taking pitches. Podsednik is worse than any other major leaguers and a good deal of minor leaguers playing his position, taking pitches, and being a baseball player in general. Why do people thinki that anyone except for Roberts, Figgins, Crawford and a couple of others would be unacceptable. s***, give me ANYONE. ANYONE but Podsednik. I'd take a one-legged Frank Thomas in the one-hole and take my chances in the field. Who is with me? ANYONE BUT PODSEDNIK. I'm certainly not jumping on that bandwagon.

The problem is not in finding a superior left fielder. It's in finding a superior leadoff hitter.

I don't claim to have any insight onto what actually happened, but I am convinced that Oswald was not a 'lone assisin'.

Good thread guys. Lots of quality points made by people on both sides of this issue, but it's an issue that maybe shouldn't have 'sides' because this is not a black or white type thing. There is a lot of gray area here, with a lot of things that have to taken into consideration. First, Pods left a lot, I mean A LOT, to be desired in the lead off spot last year. Yet, we do know what he is capable of from the first half of '05. It was stated earlier that it was obvious he's been injured and/or not totally rehabbed since the middle of '05. I agree with this. Pods in '06 was the same Pods we saw in the latter half of '05. Now, lets take into consideration the recent FA signings for lead off hitters. Pierre and Matthews were both drastically overpaid for what they bring to the table. That tells you two things. Leadoff hitters are hard to find and a valuable asset. Next, let's take a look at some of the names put forth as a possible replacement at the top of the line up. We've had suggestions ranging from AA non-prospects to grizzled old veterans. Of the names thrown out there, I see two that I would consider to have a chance to be a significant upgrade. Crawford and Furcal. Leaving Ichiro out because he's as untouchable as they come. Crawford and Furcal might be pried away from their prospective teams, but either would be a longshot and at what cost talent wise? Figgins? Maybe he's an upgrade, but how much of one? Roberts? He's the last man standing in the free agent leadoff sweepstakes. He's decent, but at his age the only question is 'When will he lose it?' Lofton? That didn't work out so well the last time around. With our current organizational roster, we have two guys that could possibly be decent at leadoff in Pods and Owens. Owens is unknown and Pods is very questionable. Pods does have chance to rebound to the player he was in early '05. He will have had the full offseason to rehab and should come to ST at 100% healthwise. What this all comes down to is that I don't see reasonable alternative when you consider the cost factors and/or risk factors when you look at what is out there. It very well may be our best bet is to gamble on Scott, with Owens as a backup plan.

Looking at the topics list for this forum, there was this topic followed by "Deep Fried Turkey". Just seemed to be a natural connection there.

Alfonso Soriano!

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 09:38 AM) I can't imagine Jerry will sign Mark for over 4 years...unless there are some option years in there. I think we need to see how he bounces back this year. If he can go back to the Buehrle of old, then yes, break the bank for an left handed innings eater that plays to the defense. If he has another year like '06, then offer him a contract a bit better than Garland and Contreras, but for 3 years. If he has a worse year...offer him the same contract as Garland and Contreras. Maybe tack on some incentives. I think '07 is going to go a LOOONG way in what we do with Mark. Barry Zito's contract is going to be the measuring stick for Mark's next contract. Their careers have been comparable to this point, short of the Cy Young award Zito won.

This op-ed was from an extreme right-wing point of view. It comparatively contrasts with that Churchill dude from Colorado calling the 9-11 victims 'little Eichmans".

Personally, if I'm on a plane and a group of middle-easterns are behaving in a way that attracts my attention to it, I'm gonna have something to say about. Political correctness be damned.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 01:17 AM) Collusion probably isn't the right word, but my vocabulary isn't deep enough to come up with the correct term right now. There was discussion, and somehow Morneau emerged from the primary as the democratic candidate for '06 MVP. Jeter, it was decided, would represent the republicans. Santana, the oddball, was the green party's representative. The voting should have looked much more like a presedential race without primaries. Lots of differing top horses. There was legitimate arguments for numerous candidates, yet 2 dominated the list. I'm quite interested in why this happened. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

Discussion among sportswriters happens. But collusion in something as unimportant as this? It doesn't seem to be worth the effort to me. Maybe Morneau gets a bonus that he promised to share with the voters. Follow the money! That must be it.

You guys are kidding right? An AL MVP ballot box stuffing conspiracy? Okay then.

Good read. Thanks for posting.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Nov 20, 2006 -> 05:28 PM) Where did this quote come from? In the Phil Rogers chat for BA it mentions Honel had an elbow surgery but it was not a Tommy John ligament transplant surgery. Sox Mailbag

As long as there are people around (us oldsters) that remember we forced our young men to go to Viet Nam to fight, but not to win, then the draft will never come back. Once we are gone, who knows what will happen. I still hate Lyndon Baines f***ing Johnson!

Hey all you young Soxtalkers, Charlie Rangel Wants You!!! I wonder why we are hearing about this on Nov 20 as opposed to Oct 20. Hmmmm.

Eh. I enjoy Hawk's homerism. I don't consider it a negative.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 04:48 AM) Kenny's comments made me think...don't get too excited Sox fans...the Angels aren't going to make that deal straight up. I read the blurb 3 times before I posted it. I want to make sure I wasn't misreading it. It didn't make a whole lot of sense from the Angels standpoint, but sometimes GM's get enormed with a guy and undervalue another. So, I put it out there as it was written.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) One interesting thing to note... A top Japanese lefty reliever is going to be posted real soon... Good point. The Cubs have been mentioned often with him, but KW just might be flying under the radar here.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) Sorry, I'm at work and just got back from a meeting. Is the speculatoin that we would get Santana and Figgins for Garica? If so where the heck do a sign. I'd run all the way home screaming like a little girl if this were to happen. If not, is it something like the Sox throwing in a Fields or Anderson (or both cause I could accept both) for the deal to happen? Both Fields and Anderson fill serious needs for the Angels. Its not even close, Figgins is exponentially better than Pods. Pods is garbage in the field and has no idea to handle the bat and has lost his best asset (a legit basestealer). Figgins on the other hand is young, coming off a down year (yes I know) but can bunt and handle a bat (is also a switch hitter) and if you give him one position he will be the premiere left fielder in baseball or an above average centerfielder who WILL GET BETTER. Not to mention he's an elite base stealer, definately one of the three best in the game. Its an absolute no brainer to acquire Figgins if we have the chance. Garcia/Fields/Anderson for Figgins/Santana. The rumor is that the Angels offered a package that includes Santana for Garcia. The Figgens talk is just a tangent. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:58 PM) Sorry, I'm at work and just got back from a meeting. Is the speculatoin that we would get Santana and Figgins for Garica? If so where the heck do a sign. I'd run all the way home screaming like a little girl if this were to happen. If not, is it something like the Sox throwing in a Fields or Anderson (or both cause I could accept both) for the deal to happen? Both Fields and Anderson fill serious needs for the Angels. Its not even close, Figgins is exponentially better than Pods. Pods is garbage in the field and has no idea to handle the bat and has lost his best asset (a legit basestealer). Figgins on the other hand is young, coming off a down year (yes I know) but can bunt and handle a bat (is also a switch hitter) and if you give him one position he will be the premiere left fielder in baseball or an above average centerfielder who WILL GET BETTER. Not to mention he's an elite base stealer, definately one of the three best in the game. Its an absolute no brainer to acquire Figgins if we have the chance. Garcia/Fields/Anderson for Figgins/Santana. You've seen more of Figgens than I have. But, I just haven't been all that impressed with him.