Balta1701

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 05:03 PM) They don't really say if the threats were from people who were pissed that she put a stay on part of the law, or if they were pissed that she only dod half of what they wanted? I keep reading stories about people still protesting and holding sit-in's, etc since in thier eyes it wasn't enough of a ruling. Other posters here, please raise your hand if you think it's even a remote possibility that she's getting threats for not going far enough.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 05:00 PM) But..... dig a little deeper. Historically, August is his best month.... By a longshot. And if you look a little deeper than that...that is produced by him having good Augusts in 2007 and 2008. He did not repeat a good August in 2009; July was better than August for him last year. So, he's had 2 good augusts and 1 bad august. His August numbers are just his best month because he's been flat out bad in every other month...and particularly bad in September.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:59 PM) Hopefully the Sox arent just trading on past stats, but instead on future potential. I mean Gavin Floyd "sucked" but hes done allright. Matt "sucked" but with a little work turned it around. Loaiza, Contreras, etc. etc. You can work with some one who has dominant stuff. Each person you cite there was under team control for at least a half year longer than Jackson. Gavin Floyd is of course the ultimate example of how much it can help your roster when you develop a young pitcher.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:56 PM) Hudson reminds me of B-Mac. A guy that was beloved by this board, but who I never was a fan of. I could be very wrong, but Hudson just was meh to me. Ive always loved Jackson's stuff, its just a matter of whether or not he can harness it. Almost every time id take the guy with more dominant stuff. The 8mil is the only reason we are getting Jackson this cheap. Serious question...what does Jackson throw that is more dominant than Hudson? Hudson was touching 94-95 in his starts, Jackson goes 96-97 right? Fastball, slider, changeup for each of them? I've already seen Hudson throw a few legit "this is a very good pitch" changeups. Hudson doesn't yet have the slider, can you give other differences?

QUOTE (TitoMB @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:54 PM) Call me a gambler, but I'd rather see how Hudson does since it wouldn't be hard to do what Jackson has done. The only thing that would convince me to like this deal is learning that Jackson is one of those guys Cooper explicitly wanted.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:52 PM) I thought it was you who put his xFIP and FIP up at sub-5? Maybe not. Anyway, I was referring to his brief period of greatness as the first half of last year. A half-season ain't chump change, it's definitely enough to firmly declare that he has the ability to succeed. He also had some phenomenal periods in TB. I think our pitching coach is superior to either of those two guys, and I think there's a decent chance that he succeeds with us. Yes, it's still a chance, and that's what makes it a gamble. But it's a gamble I think could pay huge dividends if it succeeds. Much bigger dividends than keeping Hudson in our system. I'll put it this way: you have Coop in a room with one young player. Would you rather have him sit down with the guy with great stuff and mediocre command or mediocre stuff and great command? You can't make a middle-of-the-road arm a great arm. You can make crap control good control sometimes. I keep saying this and it's especially noteworthy since you're already allowing advanced stats in your post...his first half last year was the definition of an anomaly. He put up a great first half last year with a .249 BABIP. His BABIP in the 2nd half matched his career mark of .316, and he put up an associated ERA over 5.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:51 PM) unless he pitches well in his 10 or whatever starts with the Sox In that case, other teams will be wondering why the Sox would put the guy back on the market after a few good outings.

I will say this...this trade has produced 2 very odd groupings of people who agree/disagree with it.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:47 PM) Next year the Sox could trade Jackson. Hes still young and has talent. That is why im not so concerned about the impact of the salary next year. BUT...if the Sox trade Jackson...what are the odds that they'll be able to deal him for an MLB ready back of the rotation minimum salary young starting pitcher? Clearing that salary doesn't help much if we can't get a cheap starter to put in his place; we'd still have to go out and buy on the FA market. I'd say they're ridiculously low. Jackson could come out and dominate for us and I'd still doubt that anyone would give that up for Jackson. You want to be the team that trades for a guy that has been traded/dumped by 4 teams since the 2008 offseason?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) None, cause he ain't playing. You're seriously underestimating Mark Kotsay.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:42 PM) I'm sure it's been brought up (I don't have time to read ~65 pages of stuff), but Jax was good (great, even) as recently as last year. There are a billion reasons a young pitcher can regress that don't include him being bad. I'm amazed that people view his CEILING as a 4th or 5th starter when he has pitched like a #2 not long ago. Jax was not Good nor great last year. Edwin Jackson put up a spectacular set of numbers in the first half of last season based on putting up a .249 BABIP. His BABIP, as we always say it does, regressed towards his career mean of .315 in the 2nd half. In the first half of last season he put up an ERA around 2.5, in the 2nd half he put up an ERA of 5.07. Edwin Jackson's terrible 2nd half was key to the Twins taking the division from the Tigers last year. Hell, he was on the mound for Game 162 and the White Sox shelled him. He's putting up an ERA >5 this season in the National League for a reason. And it's not because of his BABIP.

Link

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:30 PM) The Sox usually dont take on this much salary. They must feel that Jackson is a huge improvement over Hudson. The 8mil being irrelevant is in terms of valuing the trade for this year. In the overall scope the money matters, but when you are looking at the trade exclusively for this season, the money for next year isnt relevant. Really? I feel like the Sox take on this much salary all the time in trades. They did it twice last year, Peavy and Rios make a hell of a lot more than this guy.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:21 PM) There must be a temporary gap btw Hudson and Jackson? I wonder if they might not send Lillibridge down for 10 days to clear that roster spot.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:23 PM) 2) they really love Jackson enough that they are very certain that they can make him produce significantly better than Hudson. The only way I buy this deal is if Cooper's been saying the same thing about Jackson that he was saying about Thornton and 10 minutes in the bullpen turns him into a vastly better pitcher.

QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:20 PM) Since I'm too lazy to go figure it out, my bigger question is this: How in gods name did Edwin Jackson scale up to a 8.5mil payday in 2011 after seeing what he has done career-wise?? He put up a .279 BABIP last year, .249 in the first half of the season, and as such, combined with Comerica being a difficult hitter's park, he went 7-4 with a 2.52 ERA in the first half of 2009. Sure it's an extreme statistical anomaly, but when a guy who throws 96 does that, he gets his arbitration years bought out pretty readily no matter how much he stinks in the 2nd half.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:20 PM) talk about irrelevant. I doubt the Dodgers regret losing him at all. I suppose you are going to tell us next that he beat Randy Johnson in his first start so he must be better than him too. Well doc, right now he probably is better than Randy Johnson.

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) Okay this is bugging me. Doesn't someone have to come off the active roster if Harrell is getting called up? I believe you're 100% correct.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) Anyways for all the love Hudson is getting, people seem to forget that Jackson was basically untouchable in the Dodger farm system and was considered one of the top future pitchers in all of baseball not to long ago. And now he's been traded/dumped by 3 teams in less than 2 years.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:12 PM) The more likely scenario is that Hudson could not get the White Sox anything better than Jackson. Then the White Sox shouldn't have moved Hudson. If you think other teams are undervaluing your players, you don't move them.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 04:05 PM) I don't understand this. Lilly was an above-average pitcher in Toronto and Oakland before his numbers were inflated by playing for the Cubs. He's a lot safer than Jackson and we won't owe him $8.35M next year. Ted Lilly has one of the worst groundball-flyball ratios in the game of baseball right now, and he doesn't get a lot of outs by strikeouts. US Cellular field right now is by far the most home-run friendly ballpark in baseball; beating even Yankee stadium. You put Lilly in the Cell and he's likely to lead the league in HR given up for the next couple months.

QUOTE (scenario @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 03:59 PM) I think Jackson is more Floyd-like than Javy-like. Javy had great control. But no nads. Jackson has power-stuff but has trouble harnessing it. So we're going to talk about pitchers who are big game pitchers. Let's say that Jackson's pitching for a team, let's call them the "Tigers". Let's say that he gets the ball for game 162, against a team called the "White Sox". Let's also say this is a huge game, like "the Tigers win this game and they win the Central, they lose and the Twins can tie them and force game 163" huge. Which of these things would he do if he were a big game pitcher: Pitch 8 innings of 1 run ball Pitch 5 innings and give up 8 runs. Now that you've answered which you think he'd do...which did he do last year?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 03:55 PM) He really wanted to hug Bobby Jenks, but unfortunately, he realized that most Soxtalk users were right when they said Jenks was fat. Dude, I'm angry about this deal too, but this post serves zero purpose other than to insult Jenks. We don't want that.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 03:55 PM) Except for Jackson would be the equivalent of Floyd in the deal. A guy with exceptional stuff who people have soured on. Im not a huge Hudson fan. No, Jackson would be the Garcia. Guy with a nearly $10 million contract on the books for next season who is struggling and who can't get his ERA down under 5.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 30, 2010 -> 03:50 PM) Well if we trade Jackson in a Dunn deal, our rotation is really s*** now. Really bad. So we need to get a pitcher back along with a slugger. So I thought Lilly and Lee would be the key. I don't wanna see Torres on the mound the next two months. I guess the guy we are pitching tonight could be the savior, however. Maybe he's a bulldog like somebody said. Ted Lilly's about the one pitcher we could add that would piss me off more than Jackson. Lee would be a legitimate upgrade, Lilly would, IMO, be the biggest possible downgrade we could make this season, because he'd be a howitzer in the Cell. (Someone said howitzer!) If you could give me Lee over Kotsay, ok, that's at least a legit upgrade...but my jaw will drop when Ozzie stops giving Kotsay at-bats.