Princess Dye

QUOTE(Princess Dye @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) like chicken and the egg though. What was Jon Garland if not for his run support? And now we miss him. One of those guys can be a Jon with the support he got in good yrs. and no not this kind

QUOTE(iamshack @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 01:14 PM) But this season is going to come down to our starting pitching, and the rest is mostly just nitpicking. like chicken and the egg though. What was Jon Garland if not for his run support? And now we miss him. One of those guys can be a Jon with the support he got in good yrs.

This is really excellent

To me, all signs point to yes. 1) Richar's MLB on base pct has been higher than Uribe's was in both 2006 and 07. As soon as Richar's healthy, that spot is his. Only way that's not true is if Alexei is Soriano right out of the gate or something. 2) He's absolutely the kind of guy who could have another strong month at the plate, be dealt, and the fans wouldnt miss him at all. Would blame the org at all. Reason being, of course, that we've seen this before from him.

QUOTE(Big Hurtin @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 12:05 PM) That's something that keeps getting said, but I don't believe it. Hopefully they'll hit, making the point moot. There's no reason to believe Uribe wont have a short leash. Especially considering Richar and what he has done already in his career. Uribe's OBP the last two years has been lower than Richar's last year. Also (and this doesnt target your specific post at all).... people who decry the farm system being decimated should appreciate the possibilities of Uribe and Crede being showcased and being exchanged for prospects. Dumping them from the onset does nothing unless you really think the guys behind them are way way way better in the present.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 11:56 AM) and i can understand that. i just don't see fields being "ruined" by playing a month or two in triple-A. if he is the player many think he can be, he'll be back and he'll be fine. if playing for another month or two in the minors ruins him, he probably wasn't going to be that good anyway. I too am of the camp that doesnt see Fields' progress being automatically hurt by having to go down there. Right now, we have a strong defensive 3b, which the staff needs. Offense from either 3b is still a wild card. Additionally, the only way he's not up here in a few months is if we're a really good team.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 11:52 AM) Ramirez has impressed, and should get regular at bats, not be a backup. If Uribe was an Ozzie favorite, that'd be something to worry about. But there's no doubt that if Ramirez picks up where he left off in ST, he'll get all the at bats he wants. Richar also will get every opportunity he wants, if the position is still up in the air when he returns.

I think people are just really upset about Fields. Honestly, the possibility that Crede is headed out in a trade in one month still looms. It's not that much to lose sleep over.

To all the pessimists This is no different from most other years. If you dont have top of the line players, you need a lot to lock into place. It's not the NBA, where everything can lock into place and your team still isnt going anywhere. We COULD have a 2005. It's at least possible. For us and a lot of teams in our boat. OBP is improved, but we need the back of the rotation starters to make a leap, and some position player will have to shock us. As far as the farm system, it's hard to say we gave it all away when we were slamming how little there was to begin with. Either way, it's going to need to be built over time. Fortunately we have guys like Swisher, Fields who are (in different ways) cheap for several more years and (in different ways) young.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 11:31 AM) Most likely. He'll do a better job of getting on base and driving himself in than Owens will while Anderson is busy providing significantly better defense in CF. If we had a great pitching staff, things might be a little different, but I have a feeling at least two of the 3-4-5 will need all they help they can get defensively. Swisher against LHP is a pretty darn good OBP guy... but against RHP it's less...and that's also where he hits the HRs. Gotta have him lower in the lineup in that circumstance. I personally want Owens in there against RHP, but I'd probably even take Ozuna over Swisher (as leadoff) b/c of those facts

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 11:15 AM) Anderson had near-record level defense in CF in his rookie year and put together a solid month or two at the plate. There's no question in my mind that Anderson making a big jump offensively to go along with his GG-caliber defense gives you the best outcome. BTW, just going off of ST stats, Anderson looks more ready to make that jump. is Swisher your leadoff hitter vs. RHP?

QUOTE(Kenny Hates Prospects @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 10:43 AM) Boston has pitching. Crisp sucks but has a better arm than Owens. Boston also plays in theme park for a stadium. They ahve many advantages, but mainly it's their awesome pitching staff that enables them to get away with garbage like Crisp and Julio Lugo. Owens has no shot at stopping a runner from advancing 2nd to 3rd or from 3rd to home unless he's basically standing face-to-face with the cut-off man. He might as well run the damn ball to the cut off man. Swisher is better than Owens. Quentin is better than Owens. If you want OBP then you could make the argument that since Swisher is a better CF and a better hitter than Owens, he should be in CF with Quentin in LF. As far as having a fast guy at the top of the lineup, we don't have that type of team. Look at our projected lineup 1-9 with their career OBP: Owens CF .324 Cabrera SS .321 Thome DH .409 Konerko 1B .353 Dye RF .337 Swisher LF .361 Pierzynski C .328 Crede 3B .305 Uribe 2B .295 It's still the same thing. It's a slow lineup full of a bunch of hackers and pseudo grinders aka bad players. One fast guy who doesn't know how to take a walk and can't play CF isn't going to help anything. That is still an all-or-nothing lineup, and when you add some s***ty starting pitching, it spells disaster. I'd rather see the most talent in the starting lineup possible, forget the grinders, and if guys like Anderson, Quentin, Ramirez, Richar, etc. can't get it done then that means you go find another talented player and put him in there instead. The Sox are trying to make Owens, who isn't a true lead-off man and never will be, into the true lead-off man they never acquired during the offseason. Owens' ST isnt doing anything for you? He's a guy who has been getting better offensively the more he plays at this level. If he's already a speed demon, why not give that a look? Especially when the other options are Quentin and Anderson... 25 yr olds that havent done much at the MLB level ever. I mean, with them, you're content to project favorably.... but for some reason not with Owens who has actually put together some consistently good consecutive weeks at the MLB level. Let me ask it this way: what gets us closer to championship level.... Owens playing his absolute best and making a big jump in offensive ability this year, or Anderson doing the same? Not who would be the better player, but which as best fit for the team gives the team the highest ceiling. I personally feel that the absolute best from Anderson this year still puts us in the familiar position of having the 345 bashers coming up with no one on second.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 10:23 AM) Personally, I would much rather have Swisher lead off than bat 6th. Why not have the high OBP guy bat before the guys who drive in the runs than after them? I don't care if he doesn't steal, he can hit himself to second or homer much more often than Owens will. Maybe if Owens was a premiere guy it could be an issue, but September and spring training aside, he's been below mediocre. The long man in the White Sox bullpen is going to be more important than usual if this team is any good this season due to the fact that the rotation isn't filled with innings eaters and the bullpen is stocked with 1 inning guys. 2 or 3 short outings by the starters in a 6 or 7 game stretch can really tax the bullpen if there is no one who can go 3 or 4 inning in it. I don't want Masset on the team, but if Wasserman can't give you those innings, the Sox are pretty much stuck with him. But Swisher against righties? OBP not that much more impressive than Owens' career OBP... so when you factor in the steals, i want to see if Jerry can make a leap this year offensively. The way I see it, if it doesnt work out in a few months, we'll likely know we're out of it...and you're going to see Fields up and see the other OFs get playing time. If Owens does make a leap this year, the team can be very good. It depends I guess whether you value being the most complete team possible right now, or more focusing on developing guys foremost. EDIT: also against righties you want Swisher's power to be unleashed, since that's who he hits HRs off. I can see having him leadoff against lefties and sitting Owens, however. That's when he has OBP up and power down.

QUOTE(Kenny Hates Prospects @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 10:08 AM) No matter how you slice it, Owens is not a CF. Anderson is, so Anderson is better. Even if Anderson never gets another hit in the majors in his life, he's still better than Owens who is a LF. Quentin and Swisher are corner OF's. They are better than Owens. Owens doesn't belong in CF over Anderson since he can't play CF, and he doesn't belong in left over Quentin or Swisher because he sucks it hard in comparison. Owens = 4th OF. It's not that I hate Owens or anything, it's that he has no arm, no power, no plate discipline, he has nothing in his game whatsoever that says he is a starting caliber player. He just has speed, which just like any other tool in the game, if it isn't complimented by other abilities it is worthless unless coming off the bench. At least his competition has enough talent to where if those guys turn out they can be above average regulars. Owens at best is another Podsednik, and even that is a huge if considering Pods at least has some kind of plate discipline and showed a little bit of power with Milwaukee. When you say Owens can't play CF, you're talking mainly about his arm? Coco Crisp has a weak arm and his team wasnt totally killed by that. Again when you talk about leadoff hitters, imagine Owens...even with a .340 OBP. Yet, he's standing on second a lot of the time for our big bashers. Owens' fielding problems cant be considered so serious that we totally take away that potential leadoff guy. I mean, do we really want another year of having the sluggers up there with no one to drive in? Fault the Sox for trying to win this year, but part of that is making sure every piece locks in place, like in '05. We need a leadoff hitter to lock in place, and we need the 3-4-5 to not be awful. It may be faulty logic to try to win now, but taking a shot at Owens making a big leap is part of that logic.

QUOTE(Kenny Hates Prospects @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 09:46 AM) -Fields is cheaper and better than Crede both now and in the future, yet Crede is starting. -Phillips is cheaper and better than Hall both now and probably in the short-term future at least, yet Hall is the back-up. -Ramirez is cheaper and better than Uribe both now and in the future, yet Uribe is starting. -Quentin is just as cheap as Owens and is better both now and in the future, yet Owens is ahead of him on the depth chart. -Anderson is just as cheap as Owens and is better both now and in the future, yet Owens is ahead of him on the depth chart. -Richar is cheaper and better than Uribe both now and in the future, but because of his injury he cannot make the team. That's fine. But... -Bourgeois is also cheaper than Uribe, he also gives better AB's than Uribe, and while his defense is a drop-off from Juan, his speed and versatility off the bench make him more of a long-term benefit than Uribe. Do we really know any of this? Too long a list for the kind of sample sizes we're looking at to base all this on. Especially Quentin and Anderson... are you looking at their major league numbers in real games at all? Owens' numbers in said games matter at all?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 09:34 AM) You have options for a leadoff hitter. Swisher, Cabrera, Ozuna vs. LHP. You need someone in the bullpen that can go 3 or 4 innings even if it isn't a very effective 3 or 4 innings, especially with the back end of the current rotation. A true long reliever is more important than a true leadoff hitter? I doubt that's your intended point, but it kinda comes off that way. The three guys you mention aren't stealing any bases. Now, Owens... if he can have even a .350 OBP, he's going to have a way better chance of taking second regularly than any of those guys. He doesnt have to have an amazing OBP to make us significantly better than a three inning reliever would. Also keep in mind that moving Cabrera and Swisher up to leadoff takes them out of what they do best as well.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 26, 2008 -> 09:00 AM) If BA and Carlos get out to fast starts and Jerry is still on the DL, I dont think you will see him much this season. Both of those guys have the ability to be 100 percent better players, and if they do that, Jerry is in Charlotte. yr argument for keeping Masset is that no one else around fills his role. Who fills Owens' role as leadoff hitter? again, you could slot someone in. But to me it's a bigger detriment to slot someone else in here. Swisher vs. LHP is a .348 OBP last yr, he hit .250.... career #s lower i'm confident Owens will get a long look when healthy to provide something better than that vs. righties. even if the other young OFs start strong.

QUOTE(knightni @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 10:35 PM) It's pretty fun to call a guy "princess" and he can't get mad at you. Who said I'm a guy?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 06:55 PM) Once again, you are ignoring the main point. McD isnt a long reliever, nor has he proven to have the ability. In case you want to keep posting this nonsense, he is the proof: MacDougal career stats Pitch 1-15 2.76 ERA 1.34 WHIP Pitch 16-30 6.64 ERA 1.87 WHIP Pitch 31-45 19.50 ERA 1.33 WHIP He then has a grand total of 8 innings pitching beyond pitch 45, and the last time he went that far was 2001, before several injuries. HES NOT A LONG RELIEVER. And I am not arguing that Masset should be there, but right now he's our only option for someone who can go 3+ innings in relief, he doesnt do it very well, but at least he has the ability. Right now we have specialists on the roster, nobody between McD, Wass, Jenks, Dotel, Line, Logan should go more than 1 maybe 2 innings. A strong argument against MacDougal, a guy who has been successful in the league, but is not a setup guy right now..... versus Masset who has had no success against, well, anyone. MacDougal bad in third inning...but Masset bad in..all innings, from what ive seen. Even with your stats that youve just looked up, I'll take that over Masset. You say "he has the ability." Ability to do what? Again, point to what Masset has done in this game. If anything, your line of argument would point to Tomo Ohka being in there over any of these guys. He's the one who had a spring, and has a history of starting. I dont know if he makes my team, but I know Masset doesnt.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 05:39 PM) Ugh, read a post before you quote it. One is a long reliever, the other is situational, do I have to sell you a clue? I fully understand your point, and I addressed it in a post prior to yours. Looks like you're the one who hasnt been reading. In truth, you're the one who disregarded my point about what determines whether you keep a 25 yr old. It's not high ceiling. People who want Masset think ceiling, for some reason. I cant think what else the reason might be. If you'd actually read the thread, you'd see that I think MacDougal should be in our thinking for long relief. And be better at it than Masset, who has done nothing at the MLB level. If you want someone to go 3 innings and continue having horrendous pitching ability throughout those innings--- yes, scamper towards that at full speed.

QUOTE(TitoMB345 @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 04:35 PM) He's better than Crede. And thats the ONLY thing that matters. defensively?

RE: Fields.... QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 03:05 PM) Unreal. Shame on KW and Ozzie. What a terrible message this sends to our young players (who aren't particularly fond of Ozzie in the first place). Crede's a great fielder. If there's no trade, he's gonna play. Fields would have had to KO him this spring and didnt. Fault them for their overall logic of winning now, fine. But this is in line with it.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 25, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) That makes about zero sense, but ok. What about it makes no sense? Do you actually think that Masset has shown more reliability as a pro than Wasserman? Granted the sample size is not huge for either, but Wasserman, career ERA 2.74 Masset, career ERA 7.09 And compare their ST reliability as well. It's similar, actually. So, again, since you didnt understand: if we're not talking about 23 yr olds, then play the one that has had success. Not difficult to see who has done more as a pro. That's all my point was. Now if you want to list other reasons why Wasserman is a bad fit, by all means. But if you're 'win now,' then go with the guy in his mid-twenties who has contributed to more winning baseball than the other.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 10:47 PM) So if you want an older guy, why talk about his age? simple. Wasserman is older and has shown consistent ability to do something. Get righties. Masset is about as old and yet we're still waiting for any kind of reliability.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Mar 24, 2008 -> 06:16 PM) If Wasserman could go 3 or 4 innings, Masset would be either picked up by another team or a Charlotte Knight. The problem is the Sox have 3 starters capable of being on the ropes in the 3rd or 4th or 5th inning and a bullpen loaded with 1 inning guys. They need someone who can go 3 or 4 in the bullpen, and right now Masset is that guy even though they probably won't be quality innings and his propencity for not wanting to throw strikes will make vendors around the league very happy. any other long relief candidates? I'd be fine with seeing MacDougal in that role til he proves he's a setup guy again.