YASNY

As Bob Hope used to say ... Thanks for the memories.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 31, 2012 -> 12:04 AM) And neither is it Ozzie's fault. But you bet your sweet ass it's KW's fault. Oh please elaborate on this.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 28, 2012 -> 11:33 AM) I think I see what YASNY was getting at. I mean if you were mass-producing a robot that was designed after a player to be a leadoff hitter, you wouldn't model it after De Aza but he showed he's good enough to be one, or earn the chance at least. That's a fair assesment of what I was thinking. I don't believe I thought of manufacturing robots, but it works.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 28, 2012 -> 12:03 AM) That's a totally unfair comparison, it's like saying Jerry Rice is an ideal WR or Michael Jordan is an ideal shooting guard. Who wouldn't love a Rickey Henderson on their team, lol. But there was only one, ever It wasn't a comparison. Henderson was the ideal. That defines what ideal is in this thread. That's all.

To answer the question in the thread title title, no. Rickey Henderson was the ideal lead off hitter. However De Aza did a good job last year and may be the best option we have. Lillibridge's 2011 ... was a fluke or did it all come together for him? I don't know, but we will find out in 2012.

News Flash: Ozzie Guillen is no longer a White Sox. He's a Marlin. Let it go already.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 23, 2012 -> 12:59 PM) http://www.southsideasylum.com/2012/01/tra...-sun-times.html NotHawk translates his answers. That's some funny ... ummm ... stuff.

QUOTE (The Baconator @ Jan 22, 2012 -> 06:35 PM) A couple buddies and I are looking to make a Trade Kenny t-shirt using the Trader Joe's logo. Looking to replace the food/bottle with something else. My suggestions were the Chicago skyline or something like a white flag in the center where the bottle is. Anyone else have any other thoughts what we could use on there? Ozzie

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 21, 2012 -> 11:00 PM) Sounds good to me. I'm not going to get all over Robin cause a.) I don't think the manager matters much; if we have a bad team his decisions are really going to look back just cause the players failed him. b.) everybody says he's a good baseball man and good person. I really hope several of the Sox overachieve. Last season it looked like it was a chore for those guys to go to the ballpark everyday with some exceptions (Paulie, AJ, Mark, dare I say Pierre, CQ). You've sure spent a lot of time your soapbox defending someone that doesn't matter much.

I'm not an active Soxtalk poster much these days, but I used to be quite involved. I was an Ozzie backer for a long time, but even I knew that Ozzie as manager of the Sox had run it's course and it was time for both to move on. I was personally glad Ozzie "quit" with 2 games left because I knew that he'd not return. Ozzie was a big part of this organization as a player and a manager for many years, and I will always be grateful he was. However, his ship has sailed and I'm glad he was aboard.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 12, 2012 -> 01:37 PM) I think the thread count for the recent KW "inquisition" was a bit more ridiculous. That was just hilarious.

I see the thread title and then see that it is 8 pages long. My reaction is WTF?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 11, 2012 -> 02:57 PM) And there's this little issue of a lot of the talent in our system (outside of starting pitching) having nowhere to go...outside of the catching position, we COULD be set at every position for at least 2012 and 2013. It's the "where would they play?" argument. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Having guys play in AA or AAA for two years is exactly how the old Yankees of the 50's and 60's used to do it. Yes, I understand the sign-ability issues once you establish a pattern like that, but then again, you have to be smart in your approach. Fast tracking is not always the best for the player, eg Beckham. Sale, by being in the pen for a year and a half might be beneficial to him. He's learned on the major league level instead of the minors. Similar to Buerhle his first year. But there is no guarentee that letting them get a couple of years of AAA experience will work out, either.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 11, 2012 -> 02:33 PM) You can be the back-up plan, lol. You're like the Rick Hahn in this situation. To tell the truth, I'm 42 and have never had a child or intentionally set about to have sex with the purpose of getting a woman pregnant, so it's making me a bit nervous that I have to perform "under pressure," and I don't think the odds of getting pregnant from just 1-2 times could be much more than 20-30%. The really funny thing is that I just talked to my ex in the Philippines and she doesn't want to get married but she now also wants to have a baby with me in 2013, haha. So I'm going from babyless to Philander Rodman (Dennis' dad) in the span of one week. Knock on wood/crosses fingers. No pressure. Just hit hit it once a week until 'mission accomplished'. Many men have been in worse predicaments.

QUOTE (thomas_35 @ Jan 11, 2012 -> 01:52 PM) and can you really trust a writer who has STANK in their last name? We once had a manager that had STANK in his last name.

Why are the Cubs even part of this conversation? They are irrelevent.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 10, 2012 -> 10:19 AM) I think this is right on. People keep wanting to put the Sox into one of two camps: a complete crash-down rebuild that takes five years and may never work, or go sign a whole bunch of expensive players and compete in 2012. KW is doing neither - he is retooling for 2013, and I think he's got the right idea, given the parameters he has to work within (payroll, attendance, talent in minors, tradeable vs untradeable major leaguers, contract lengths, etc.). Agreed. We do not need to back up the truck. We have enough talent to build around with youthful talent. Hopefully some of our disappointments will rebound somewhat this year and make the team at least competitve.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jan 10, 2012 -> 10:11 AM) It does for draft position, which will become highly important with the new CBA rules. Using that line of thoiught, then last place is the goal.

Last place, 4th, 3rd ... does it really matter?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 2, 2011 -> 07:49 AM) What the f*** are talking about? Juan Pierre's .262 BA tells you he is a below average contact hitter and that advanced stats and scouting are necessary to tell the whole story. Even a basic stat like SLG will tell you that is one of the emptiest batting averages in baseball. Add in his .321 OBP and a roughly 50% CS rate and we can quickly conclude that Juan Pierre is one of the worst hitters in baseball. Whether you DFA is if you think he can get significantly better, both offensively and defensively fairly soon, and that comes down to scouting. IMO, he looks like he's lost a step, which can be the beginning of the end for a speed based player. I think most scouts would agree and I seriously doubt any team would trade anything of value for him, be it talent or finacial considerations. Regardless, batting average tells you nothing about Juan Pierre but to investigate further. I read Greg's remark as it should have had "but he still should be" at the end and that it was so obvious he didn't need to elaborate further. I could be wrong, but that's how I took it. ETA: I see that I was wrong. Oh well.

As I read this thread, I just have one thing to say .... Jason, stick by your guns.

As a long time poster who has taken several extended stays away from the board because of the hyperbole, I applaud Jason on this. In fact, it's been long overdue.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 20, 2011 -> 09:13 AM) I know Santo isn't the most popular guy in these parts, but when you consider the era he played in, Ron should be in the HOF. I have backed Santo's election for years. I don't care what uniform he wore, the guy was damn good.

QUOTE (whtsoxfan @ Jun 22, 2011 -> 10:43 AM) They're now TIED in the loss column and all the twinkies need is 1 "WIN" to be ahead of us. All I'm saying is they are our biggest concern in the division... As always.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 20, 2011 -> 01:43 PM) If you are using a term that describes an entire group of people as an insult, then yes, you are insulting an entire group of people. It is no different than using gay, f**, n*****, or anything else that falls into that category. Yes many people might use those terms as an insult. That doesn't lessen the effect of being considered some lesser person if you are in that group, because someone has decided that your term of description infers that you are somehow less than everyone else. It was very interesting to me that you worded this the way you did. I seem to recall, several years ago, objecting to the use of a term that is "insulting to an entire group of people" right here on Soxtalk. I was pretty much b****-slapped into silence by a whole bunch of people. Yet, from time I still see the word used in the same derogatory here and there are never any objections to it. For the record, I agree with you here. I have recently seen a very effective commercial on TV ... The show a black man saying "It is not acceptable to call me a N*****", followed by a Hispanic man saying "It is not acceptable calling me a S***" and a Jewish man same sentence but with K***, etc .... ended with a young girl saying "It is not acceptable to call me a retard" ... and yes I used the actual word to make the point.