YASNY

I'd go back to 1919, pick up Shoeless Joe and the other 7 and take them on a trip to 1921 or 1922.

Showalter is a Billy Martin wannabe. He gets good production for a year, maybe two, then the players shut it off after they get tired of his s***. And Martin was better.

So this guy has a career batting average of .000 at the Cell and you want to sign him? Are you nuts?

Ok. Here's my response: :puke

I don't want "just a decent team next year". We've had a "decent" team since 1991 or so. The Sox keep putting "decent" teams on the field but getting nowhere.

About a week or so ago, this idea of Gload being the starting 1b was broached and gave it a thumbs down. However, I have been thinking about this since and think it is potentially doable. Ok, to start, Ross Gload is not the hitter Konerko is. That's a given. If he was better than PK, he'd be starting now. So, you take a loss with a straight Gload for Konerko replacement. Duly noted and taken into consideration. To measure how much of a loss, just look at PK's impressive stats. Gload does give you somethings that Kong doesn't. Better defense for starters. It seems to be a generally accepted fact that Ross is better with the leather than Kong. You get some speed also. Or, more accurately, one less base clogger. What you also gain by trading Konerko is a combination of players and available cash. And when it comes down to it, this should be the deciding factor in this arguement. It depends on which players they get in a trade and which players they spend that money on. Do the combination of Gload plus these acquired players make the Sox a better team? It's not difficult to imagine a scenario to where this would be the case. So, do you trade Konerko and put Gload in as the starting firstbaseman? I don't know, but it certainly a scenario that should be considered and examined. Float Konerko's name out there and see what kind of offers you get. Any GM worth his salt should do at least this much.

Funny, but I didn't see a word about season ending injuries to the two best hitters on the team. I guess that wasn't a factor in the Sox collapse.

Willie Harris is a young player that is just now learning how to play the game at the major league level. He's been adequate defensively and his .265 is a mild but pleasant suprise. If we can turn the switch that makes him a bit more aggressive on the basepaths, and a natural improvement through experience and maturity, I see no reason why Willie can't be a quality ML second baseman. Even as soon as next year.

What qwerty is talking about is good, sound fundamental baseball. Sacrificing yourself to move a runner ... hitting behind a runner .. so on and so forth. The Sox suck in that area.

I'm a bit late here, but Happy Birthday. Note: My late son would have been 23 today (11th).

From what I remember, there were several of the Sox that had planned on taking a tour of the WTC. A couple of guys overslept and were late, therefore they hadn't left the hotel. As I said, I'm only going from memory here and my facts may be inaccurate to some extent. Also, Josh Paul, who was with the Sox at the time, lost a very close buddy that day.

Thank you. Looks like all this guy needs is to improve his eye and discipline. He has plenty of time to do both.

Kansas State, Nebraska, Michigan and Florida State all take it the chin.

Can someone give some info on Young? I'm not familiar with this guy. Position, age, tools, LH vs RH, etc?

I wouldn't be at all shocked to see Urbina in a Sox uni next year. I feel it would have happened this year if it weren't for the presence of Billy Koch.

What's your point here? How often does a closer face a pitcher in a save situation? Usually, he'd face the best available hitter on the bench instead.

Developing players at the major league level is not a good strategy. Though, you do have to give players some adjustment time once they reach the show. The main reason not to have that strategy is that you start the arbitration/free agency clock way too soon on these guys. Take Jon Garland for an example. He's 24 years old and already has 4 years or so of major league service time. Arbitration is already a factor with his salary and soon he'll be FA eligible. The Sox will have gone through these painful years, trying to groom this guy to be a top notch starter, and may lose him just as he gets there. Also, you have to take into consideration a players "prime" years. These usually occur between 27-32 years of age. Hell, because Garland was promoted so young, he may be in the prime of his career while pitching for the Dodgers, for example. If Garland were getting his first taste of the big leagues now, as a 24 year old September callup, he'd be with us till age 30, if the club chose to keep him. Another advantage of keeping guys in the minors is that they actually learn how to play the game properly before getting promoted to the majors. You take a career minor leaguer like Jamie Burke, age 33, and you can see this guy knows how to play baseball. Ross Gload is another example. He's paid his dues in the bushes and now is a valuable bench player for a major league team. Of course, Burke and Gload do not have the talent of some of the other bonus baby types, so they are peaking professionally right now. But, if you took your Andersons, Sweeneys and Fields and let them slowly work their way through the minor league system, theoretically, they'd be major league caliber baseball players the day the arbitration clock starts ticking. That is the way to get the most "bang for your buck", so to speak. The negative side of that strategy is that you get the reputation as a team the slowly promotes it's prospects, it makes these young guys who want a quick ticket to the bigs very hesitant to sign with you.

Grilli has done better than the previous #5 starters we've tried this year. Of course, that's not saying much. He seems to be getting a lot more love around here than Garland, which makes no sense. Everything is relative, I guess.

Ozzie has never classy and he's always been fiesty. He was a known quantity when he was hired. Nobody should be even mildly shocked by Guillen's response. Showalter comes across to me as a Napoleon wannabe. He puts his hand in his pocket instead of his vest or jacket. Let Ozzie crack on Showalter all he wants to. Showalter's a tool.

From Jayson Stark:

I'm sure you're right. But wouldn't it be great message for Sox fans to send. That is, JR, if you put a world champion team on the field the Cell would sell out.

I'd take Perez's away splits in the Cell next year. A 3.30 ERA will work for me.

For some reason, I find every word of the above post to be 100% conceivable. Even believable.

I have no problem with the kid being forced to "sit out two years" even "if he is safe now". There is a slight chance the kid might learn that certain innapropriate actions have their consequences. Earlier in the thread, someone used the phrase "it's just a pellet gun" or something to that effect. No. It's a weapon. What if someone stuck a pellet gun to someone's temple and fired it? However, to reference another point, a plastic butter knife is not a weapon. If the problem is the word "knife", call it a butter spreader or something. That's totally insane.

I had that, and more, coming. I'm sitting here, stuck at work, feeling half sick. Please take into consideration that I'm not quite myself tonight, and accept my apologies for that smart ass reply I made. It was uncalled for.