YASNY

QUOTE(bmags @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 11:19 AM) but it wasn't the O's it was Ramon Hernandez who said he didn't want to be traded Who's going to pay Hernandez's salary?

QUOTE(bmags @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 11:16 AM) yeah, averaging 107 rbis a year sucks! i think we should stop wasting time on this pipe dream, he doesn't even want to be traded I think the O's are spinning things that way to get more for him. I think he wants out and will be traded before opening day.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 08:14 AM) Sure Lawrence... Nope. It's Larry.

I just watched this DVD for the first time ... Paid $19.99 plus s&h ... money well spent

From the Fort Worth Star Telegram: So they have been talking.

IF we stand pat, we don't repeat. I believe that as much as I believe my name is Larry.

QUOTE(LDF @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 01:11 PM) a great point. but i would like to fleecing side a little more than getting fleece ourselves. that being said, i guess i have to serrle for us winning the series. All in all, I can't see where we have been getting fleeced. We have given up unproven players for proven players with some risk involved. Will Thome be healthy? Will Vazquez regain his form? Maybe, maybe not. Will Yound and gio be starts 5 years from now? Same answer as above.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 01:29 AM) It's not even the board so much as it's the guy/guys working it. It's updated about every 1.5 innings, and every game is updated at the same time. They also fail to change pitchers a lot, which led me and my friends to think Morris was throwing in the 11th inning in LA once. It's downright pathetic. This sounds like a job for Brooks Boyer. Edit: Not running the board, just fixing the problems.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2005 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:44 PM) Stop it, Yasny. You're making too much sense. Don't ya hate it when that happens?

What's more risky, standing pat or trying to improve the team? It's conjecture, either way. Look back at 2005. How many times did we miss the opposing team's top starter? It seemed to happen all the time. I know at period, we saw the Twins for two series in a 10 day (or so) period and never saw Santana. We caught the Angels without Vlad in the lineup. Etc. Cleveland was on a helluva roll until a flyball was lost in the sun. Playoffs: Graffanino let's a ground ball roll through his legs. AJ reaches first on what some believe was a phantom dropped 3rd strike. Dye gets awarded 1B as HB on a foul ball and Konerko hits a slam. We used only 6 starting pitchers over the course of 174 games. We had a waiver claimed AA pitcher step in as our closer. Over the course of the year, we had 3 guys designated as our closer, yet still won. We signed a catcher that was well known as a clubhouse cancer and not considered a "good guy" by Sox players who became an integral part of the team. I think there was just a little bit of luck involved. I wouldn't feel too confident going into 2006 counting on the same type of luck.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:46 PM) Fair enough. I just see it a lot when you got the so called 5 tool player being discussed. Okay. Let me rephrase. I only recall seeing it once in regard to Chris Young. That's why I thought it appropriate to throw into this discussion.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:30 PM) Is it just me or does it seem like that Eric Davis comparison gets thrown around a lot? I only recall seeing once. That's why I thought it appropriate to throw into this discussion.

If Crede had a healthy back and a reasonable agent, I say keep him. But the reality is that he has a bad back and a, well, less than reasonable agent. If his back goes out, he produces nothing. If he can stay healthy, we lose him to free agency. What's the point in keeping him?

I have heard him compared, supposedly by scouts and front office people around baseball, to Eric Davis.

If you have a 6 man rotation, your best pitcher goes every 6th game not every 5th. I think what you'll see, if Garland isn't traded, is BMac being used as a bridge to setup-closer guys in order to keep the starters innings down for the 1st couple of months. Eventually, Garland will be traded and BMac moved into the rotation.

I wish I could locate a post I made about 2 years ago. I said that the pendulum was beginning to swing back to the middle and the TribCo would help push it along. This WSC has just accelerated the process.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:32 AM) f***, let's make it Rolentalk.com Crede+Garland for Rolen and a spec. One bad back for another.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:23 AM) As did this one – at least about the terms served. As for issuing two coins, I didn't know that was the plan before reading the article. Ok. I'll cop to that. But at the you made the post, I was aware there'd be two coins.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:21 AM) I'll buy them. Then I'll trade Francouer, Hudson, and Andruw Jones to the White Sox for a bag of peanuts. Marte's already been traded.

QUOTE(lightthematch @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:22 AM) so loyalty goes where exactly? Ask Jon Garland.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:42 AM) Dumber?!? How many Soxtalkers honestly knew Cleveland served two nonconsecutive terms, and how many knew the plan was to mint two separate Cleveland coins in note of that? Love that film, btw. This one did.

QUOTE(LDF @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:05 AM) and with that, i totally agree with what you are saying. i have no problem trading these prospects, if they were the final piece of the puzzle to build or in this case keep the sox on top. lets not trade all of our prospects, what do have left when 3 yrs down the road. i love the trades b/c kw was agressive and address sox needs to keep us on top. all i said and asked, did we give up too much. when was the last time the sox made a trade and we were the winners of the trade. let not include this offseason. Ok. we won't include this offseason. however, we will include this most recent post season. So many have panned every trade KW has made, saying we "overpaid" on each and every one of them. I see one thing ... RESULTS. That tells me so many don't have a clue. I rest my case.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:58 AM) Is there any chance El Duque flunks his physical and the Garland trade talk becomes moot? I hope not.

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:52 AM) Okay, let's say that the Sox get to the ALCS minimum with Garland in 2006 (You don't know if they will win, or win the World Series). You can either have Garland in 2006 and get nothing for him and watch him walk, or you get any two reasonable prospects you want right now. Which do you choose? With a rotation of Buehrle, Contreras, Garcia, Vazquez and McCarthy I'll take my chances.

QUOTE(kevin57 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:51 AM) While I disagree with the thread, I do empathize with it. Yes, baseball is a business and yes, the Sox are preparing for the long-haul, but this thread does harken back to when players and fans "bonded," so it was loyalty that would be given to the guys would brought your city the trophy. I admire that sentiment. It is also--sadly perhaps--out of date. Free agency was the first nail in that coffin. I don't begrudge players getting what they can, but that certainly lessened that "lifetime" relationship between fans and players. Remnants of that philosophy still abide. For instance, Ozzie shocked much of the managerial world when he did not hesitate to sit a guy when he was slumping. Look at the manager on the North Side. He's of the ol' school. However, badly 'your' guy is doing, keep him in there. He's your guy! I lived through a lot those years before free agancy and while the reserve clause was in effect. I don't recall any parades in downtown Chicago.