Balta1701

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Feb 16, 2012 -> 08:49 AM) Didn't you see what he said? The money spent on Rios, Dunn, and Peavy doesn't count. The Sox need to shell out another $80 million or so. Mark Buehrle + Ozzie Guillen.

QUOTE (Brian @ Feb 16, 2012 -> 08:12 AM) Guess it would be better for all if he just fizzled away instead of continuing to play well and getting NY to a 2nd round. Well, when you're talking to a bunch of people who aren't knick fans...yeah.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Feb 16, 2012 -> 12:02 AM) Facts ... • Sox have added Fukodome (sp). • Rios is one of the highest paid players in Sox history and has started in the big leagues for several years now. He's known as a regular. • A new season is starting making last year's stats mean nothing regarding Rios. • Any manager will give a highly regarded, well paid veteran like Rios several weeks/months to prove himself, at least until the weather has been warm for a month or so • Fuko will play. • DeAza is still young and unknown. • Viciedo is the new blood that needs to play every day. Conclusion • Fuko will play ... at the expense of DeAza, not Rios. How can u argue with this? Why would any manager not let Rios play at least until July 1 when he's had a chance to play in warm weather? In my eyes the guy who gets screwed is my new favorite, DeAza. You know, I co uldn't help but laugh when I saw this, because one of my first reactions to this signing was..."If we still had the same manager as last year, that'd be it for Viciedo's playing time."

If you go through that chart you can make similar cases about other teams, it turns out. The Phillies, for example, sit at spot #24. However, people have been marveling at the Phillies system and the things it has produced over the past 5 years...but instead of holding on to guys, they've made an effort to win now by trading away virtually everything home-grown not named Cole Hamels. Their number may change a bit this year with Brown taking an OF spot, but the fact is, they've been unwilling to put up with the opportunity cost associated with developing talent when they have a team that can win the world series with an extra part or two. Conversely up at the top you've got Boston, but you've also got great examples with Boston of the potential cost of holding on to guys...their bust last year happened despite huge production from Ellsbury and Pedroia...and it happened in part because a number of the other guys they held...Buchholz, Lester, Jed Lowrie, Daniel Bard...didn't have the kind of season that they were hoping, either because of injury or because of struggles. Similar story for the Braves. Tons of prospects, even gave a ton to Texas, but the key guys they held onto for last year, Heyward, Hanson, simply broke down and couldn't win things for them.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 06:19 PM) Great points. I have no reply. I'm posting your comment on FG to see if the author will reply. Keep in mind I was specifically noting your statement that the Sox hadn't "Prioritized player development" if you're going to post that elsewhere.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 05:41 PM) You're absolutely right, that there's more going on than this shows. I think the idea though, is that the most efficient way to get a good team is to develop and utilize cost-controlled talent, because veteran trades and free agents are so much more expensive. We're experiencing the downside of this now, which is that when things go south with our talent (as they will go with every team from time to time) our bloated payroll leave sus with little flexibility to right the ship, so we have no choice but to soldier on, potentially mired in our mess for a long time, micuh like the Astros and Cubs of the last five years or so. If we'd prioritized player development, however, we'd be able to rely on arb and pre-arb guys more heavily, allowing us the flexibility to either sign guys to fill holes and right the ship or dump the expensive underperformers for cheap guys that will be upgrades, which equates to a much much quicker turnaround. I just went through and totaled up the WAR, as of this year, for Brandon McCarthy, Chris Young, Daniel Hudson, Gio Gonzalez, Ryan Sweeney, and Clayton Richard...6 players that the Sox have traded away. I came up with over 47 fWAR within those 6 players, and there's probably another kid or two the Sox have traded away since 2002 I'm forgetting. If one were to add that to the 12 that the Sox have, that would put the Sox in the upper 1/2 of the league. But that's not how the Sox have operated. The Sox have instead traded away those guys to go after this quality of player: The Sox got 15 fWAR out of Gavin Floyd, 16 fWAR out of John Danks, and 15 fWAR out of Javier Vazquez. That of course doesn't even count the big fWAR steal that was Alexei Ramirez. And then there's 8 fWAR from Carlos Quentin, who was also obtained by trading away prospects. Yes, there is a downside, but there is a downside to trying to hold onto prospects whenever possible as well. Some guys take time to develop (Gordon Beckham). Some guys develop and then break down, when instead you could have traded them for a guy who wouldn't break down (Brandon McCarthy for John Danks, for example). Yes, the Sox have been weaker in the draft than they should have been. But the statement that the Sox are not prioritizing player development simply isn't supported here...the Sox just identify their value in a different way.

QUOTE (sunofgold @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 05:44 PM) Just wondering. Why not tear it all down and rebuild it. They would have about 18 months to complete it. Just work around the clock for 18 months. Then they could make it much better and then not worry about it again for a long time. Because the fact that it's historic wrigley field is literally that club's biggest asset. If they started from scratch, it would no longer be historic wrigley field, even if it's on the same spot and built to a similar design.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) Correct. This isn't controlling for development though, so we're talking about judging both drafting prowess and player development in total. With the exception of Hudson, I can't think of any significant instance where we essentially polished a player and then sent him off to be successful elsewhere. I would assume that the effects of half-polishing a player and receiving half-polished players would cancel each other out on a league-wide level. But for certain teams, say ones who consistently take the policy of trading away their best talent rather than spending the couple years it takes to develop them, it will put them at the bottom of lists like this one. No one's going to excuse the awful 2005-2006 first round picks, but once again, this buries KW based on a quirk of the statistic.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 04:34 PM) For anyone who has been on the "Sox have had a better system than the media gives them credit for, we just graduate our guys quickly" wagon: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/b...t-of-the-worst/ For those of you who don't want to click the link, the link shows a graph of total WAR from homegrown players drafted since 2002. The White Sox rank 29th of 30, with a grand total of 11.9 WAR. Before anyone brings up the "we haven't had enough high draft picks" argument, take note that the Red Sox rank first, with a total of 100.3 WAR. Let me guess, because they were traded away, the fact that the Sox drafted Daniel Hudson, Gio Gonzalez, Clayton Richard, Chris Young, etc., doesn't count.

QUOTE (YASNY @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 04:25 PM) I agree. My instinct is that Herm helps guys get back to being healthy but he doesn't control things like pitchers spring training conditioning/throwing schedules or their offday work schedules, or their throwing technique, all those I'd put under Coop.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 04:12 PM) Steve Rushin @SteveRushin Jeremy Lin remains second-best NBA player to wear LIN 17 on his back. #ChrisMullin I agree with this. Jeremy Lin is not yet a hall of famer.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 03:03 PM) Won't the Cubs have to do a remodel as the Angels and Royals did? Where there's ugly construction for a couple seasons but they do it while still playing games? Cubs can't afford to leave Wrigley for a full season like many of u stated, not for a mere remodel. The Cubs will pretty much have no choice but to do a remodel in the next few years, if for no other reason than to keep the structure safe. It won't be for long.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 02:48 PM) Probably due to less way to fall. Honestly from that chart it screams lack of investment, probably due to too many funds tied up in debt. Which is belied by the the fact that Portugal had the largest capital inflows of any country in Europe over the last decade after they joined the Eurozone. If anything, Portugal was actually overbuilt, substantially, by the end of the last expansion. Post 2008, you're entirely correct that there is an issue with lack of investment, because capital has switched directions and flowed out of the perceived to be riskier peripheral countries and poured into safer assets (like Treasuries and Germany's debt). This of course is not solved by shrinking Portugal's economy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) to me it looks like a country that has spent essentially the last decade lagging the rest of the continent, and is continuing to do so now. But also fell less hard than the rest of the continnet

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 02:20 PM) Its common courtesy and if its so damn common why not just tell me what the name of the case is so I can actually look it up and read it? Its kind of hard to make an informed argument when you dont even know the case the other side is referring to. And its not like Im asking him to cite it properly, Im just asking for the full name of the case to enlighten those of us who dont know what case that is. I googled the phrase "Supreme Court Lawrence" and had no trouble.

QUOTE (Cali @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 02:11 PM) That makes Martinez not going anywhere even more perplexing. Especially if he thought he'd take over sooner than 3 years... Did he actually turn down a position?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 01:44 PM) Before 2008. You see, it was "under control" then, but the way the economy was built, it was too high a level for being in a good economy. If it was 65% in a bad economy, that would have been fine. Portugal is not the United States. How exactly are you defining a "Good economy"?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:49 AM) What is being ignored here is that Portugal's path was going that way in the short term regardless. It is not as if the ecomony there was growing, then was stopped by this action. Why do you say that their economy was going that way regardless? Much like the rest of the continent, they had a huge slump in 2008-2009, but they had basically moved back to slow growth in 2010, just like much of the continent...then they began substantial budget cuts. And just like in the US, once a country has contracted that much, it ought to be quite hard to make it start contracting again, because there shouldn't be another shock to be delivered. Furthermore, they also had their debt under control, at 65% of GDP, before 2008.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 11:49 AM) Not having crushing debt in the future? But their debt has gotten more crushing?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:46 AM) If it's not an invasion of her privacy to lock her in a room and threaten her, what would you call it? False imprisonment? A way for Craig James to build support for his campaign?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:45 AM) It's hard to violate someone's privacy by disclosing public information. But if the person hasn't told their parents, then the information is still private at some level, wouldn't you agree?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:41 AM) I don't think they did the right thing, but I wouldn't call it an invasion of her privacy either, especially if there was actual evidence that she was "openly gay for several years." Why does that matter? If the person hasn't told their parents?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:42 AM) My directv recorded it. Maybe some other show jumped in front of your queue? Sometimes if you just set the individual episodes to record, the my receiver cancels records if the guide updates details on an episode. If you've got the whole series set to record it shouldn't matter, I don't think.

QUOTE (forrestg @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:33 AM) My thought is good obp ,draws walks, and if he could be a good #2 hitter we could have DeAza, Iguchi and with Paulie hitting 3rd we'd have righty lefty and our rbi man paulie hitting third to drive them in. I can assume he will be as good in the number 2 spot as Iguchi was when he batted there. Really, no you can't.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Feb 15, 2012 -> 10:12 AM) Not a good move for Jordan Danks. He didn't deserve to be in the bigs this year anyway. He wants up, he needs to earn it.