Balta1701

QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 11:19 AM) At 130 games he would be at the same as last season. I always wonder which time reference is best when discussing these types of issues. Purely from a health issue and rest, not a performance issue, is once a week rest better than every couple weeks taking two or three straight off? I don't know. Plus, and I do not want to jinx him, but I'd pencil him in for at least one 15 day stretch on the DL. Purely from a performance issue, a day or two off a week would clearly be better than 2 or 3 straight weeks off. In fact, him playing 120 games but allowing us to fix the days he takes off would be significantly more useful than him playing 135 but missing 25 due to injury, because with injury, we can not take advantage of his splits. The best way to use Jim Thome is to maximize his number of at bats against right handed pitching. Every time he sits a game with a right handed starter, we lose. Against lefties, he is basically an average hitter. Against Righties, he's as good as anyone else in the game. The formula is right there; sit him extra against lefties if it helps him stay healthy against righties.

I think that in part, you are a wise man. I have long felt it made an immense amount of sense to pencil in Jim Thome for an extra day off a week on a day when there is a LHP starting. However, I disagree with your argument on one point; I do not think the best candidates for a platoon with Thome are the 3rd base guys. If this team is interested in spending money and getting an OF, then there is no reason to put Josh Fields anywhere but 3rd base, and with a guy his age, every bit of playing time he gets is going to help him improve. In addition, Joe Crede still costs us $5 million next season. IMO, the best way to set things up is to do exactly as you say, give Big Jim an extra day off against a LHP every week, but use that DH slot to keep your other guys refreshed. Specifically, I'm thinking about a big RH bat who struggled with leg injuries last year: JD. For this to work, we need a RH hitting backup OF, but I think that moving JD to DH for a day a week will help keep his legs healthier than last year and keep his bat in the lineup more, and I am more concerned about the health of JD for our offense than I am with the performance of Crede/Fields.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 09:27 AM) Quite a shame that Scotty only found the courage to not go along with the lies after he spent all that time parroting them to the press and the nation. Link Scottie's book got the press it wanted by releasing the most damning quote without putting the context in there. He's still just as loyal as ever, and they played the media like a violin.

Those who know more about the banking system may disagree, but I found this to be a useful summary of the banking shenanigoats that have helped exacerbate the lending mess over the past couple years. At least this author suggests that there's reason for the SEC to take a look, since a lot of this keeping risk off the books stuff sounds really Enron-ish.

Well, just another OF on the market as a backup plan.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 10:09 AM) I am calling this the Boulder Down a Hill primaries. Basically, if Hillary's boulder tops over the edge in Iowa (aka she wins Iowa) there is no way to stop a boulder rolling down a steep hill. however, if Obama wins Iowa... well, that boulder hasn't tipped over the edge yet and can be redirected or stopped. If Hillary wins either Iowa or NH, it's all over. If Obama/Edwards win both of them, it's all over, and winning Iowa is the first step towards removing Hillary's NH lead. If none of said things happen, it becomes a free for all before Super Tuesday.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 10:02 AM) Edwar Ramirez, Ian Kennedy, and Melky Cabrera for Jenks? What do you guys think? That Ramirez person put up dominant numbers in AAA last year...but he was also 26 years old, and should have been doing so just from his age. He doesn't thrill me as vastly more than a throw in, but for the other 2 I might be open to it. Those are 2 pieces that we could potentially use as the building blocks for swapping for another Cabrera.

Hey, they're finally catching on to the mess they've created, about 3-4 years too late!

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 09:25 AM) I didn't suggest that. But suggesting that the only possibility a deal with the Yanks should get done would be if we got Phil Hughes back is utterly retarded. Fine. Name something else the Yankees have that should interest me? I really don't want Cano. Yes he'd be an upgrade from Richar, but he's already got a couple years of service time on him and until we see what Danny can actually do, we don't know how big of an upgrade. Cabrera would be a nice player, but he's no where near as valuable to me as Bobby. Beyond that, why would I want a guy like Damon, who doesn't even want to come here anyway. Beyond that, you have 3 groups; the really highly paid guys that the Yankees would scoff at (Jeter, Posada, Rivera, ARod, etc.), the guys who are overpaid who we'd be crazy to take (Giambi, Abreu, etc.), and their young guys. For Jenks, I might consider Kennedy and Tabata if Hughes wasn't involved, but still I see little reason for either side to think about that, esp. since Tabata IIRC is getting over an injury. Out of what the Yankees have, if they're not willing to part with Hughes, then I see little reason to even start the discussion. It's about that simple. If they want our most valuable piece, then they ought to be returning something of incredibly high value as well.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 09:20 AM) This is hilarious. Seriously then. What reason do I have to trade him if that's not the level of player I'm getting? Melky Cabrera for Bobby Jenks? Are you kidding?

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 09:09 AM) Bobby Jenks is not worth Robinson Cano straight up. End of story. If they want Jenks, then Philip Hughes is involved (assuming that Joba is actually untouchable). We have no good reason to trade him unless that is the level of haul coming back to us.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 07:41 AM) If Obama gets Iowa, and finishes a close second in NH, it will get interesting in a hurry. If Mr. Obama wins Iowa...just watch what happens in NH. Iowa decides everything.

QUOTE(That funky motion @ Nov 21, 2007 -> 08:52 AM) Girardi was on the fan today saying the want to make Joba a starter, thats were Jenks would come in. All the rumors in NY are that Melky would be in the deal. Fine. Then they better be including that Hughes kid as well.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 09:46 PM) I hope we don't regret it when we lose Fernando Hernandez in the rule 5, but besides that I like the news in this thread. Well, the question will be...does anyone want to keep him on their roster for the full season?

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 09:05 PM) I don't think JJ Putz, Jonathan Papelbon or Joe Nathan are going anywhere so you don't to worry about the best closer in the AL getting dealt any time soon. Well, Nathan is a FA next offseason...so I certainly wouldn't rule it out.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 08:14 PM) I Love Rock and Roll - Joan Jett Love Boat Captain - Pearl Jam

QUOTE(BearSox @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 07:58 PM) according to Cabrera, Richar is going to be special... http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/artic...sp&c_id=cws Glad he's speaking highly of Danny. I think the kid's going to be good also. It'll be good to stick another MI next to him for a year, and might keep the team from doing something silly like considering Richar to be a platoon guy.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 07:42 PM) You are probably right, but I don't know why we couldn't pay him a bit more and tell him he could be a back end of the bullpen guy for the Sox as well. Not a closer, but if he produces, he'd get a ton of innings and if he's good, maybe a WS ring. Not to mention Iguchi loved it in Chicago, etc. If he were to spend a year or two closing for the Indians, compared with being a setup man for us...if he succeeds at that job then he hits FA at 35 or so looking for the kind of contract Rivera just got, as opposed to the one that Linebrink will get. That's probably $20-$30 million of motivation just for being a 9th inning guy instead of an 8th inning guy.

QUOTE(PAUL KONERKO 14 @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 07:48 PM) idk why we would give away our pen if that is what we need most. Because if they were stupid enough to give us Hughes or Joba...then we may as well go out and just buy Cordero because we'll suddenly be nice and loaded.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 07:23 PM) Joba or Hughes plus Damon and its a deal. And I'd even say we could cover Damon's contract in that one.

Just looking around and seeing the Blue Jays trading for Scutaro...Uribe would actually be a significant upgrade at SS for them too. Their starter is journeyman/backup John McDonald, who has a career OPS under .600, but is supposedly decent with the glove.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 06:17 PM) I think that's pretty astute -- IIRC all of Aardsma/Sisco/Masset are out of options, aren't they? There's no way all 3 will be in the Sox pen. I'd be surprised if more than 1 is. And Armstrong on the 40 is mystifying unless Lucy is going to be traded (but really, who'd want him?). At least it won't be a boring offseason. Out of those, I'm almost certain that the only one out of options is Masset. Aardsma wasn't drafted until 2003, while Masset I think went in like 01, so Aardsma should have a bit more on him. And I think we came to the conclusion a while ago that Sisco had 1 more option remaining.

I think Rob Neyer has sort of an interesting point. Last year, Ryan Howard won the NL MVP despite Pujols's team making the playoffs, because, at least in the HR and RBI columns, Howard put up better numbers. This year, Jimmy Rollins won the NL MVP despite several other players putting up better numbers in HR, RBI, OPS, etc., because his team wound up making the playoffs. A little consistency people?

QUOTE(beck72 @ Nov 20, 2007 -> 03:23 PM) I'm glad you can remember some obscure thread from 2 yrs ago. As far as "getting it" [which I'd love for you to find that quote as that doesn't sound like me--I'm more like "to each his own"], I understand the low OBP concerns. Yet hitting .290 consistently does count for something. I have a question for you--Does a .270 hitter with a .350 OBP have the same value as a .290 hitter with a .330 OBP? That depends a lot on slugging and on other factors, such as the people around him. For example...if a guy like Pierre, with a low OBP, was hitting on a team like the White Sox...he'd be hitting in front of Konerko, Thome, Dye, Fields, etc. Big power. That would cost you runs. This team would be an offensive dynamo with a .400 OBP guy, and every point of OBP you lose, you lose runs. Therefore, on the Sox, I'll take the OBP, and expect maybe speed makes up a bit for the slugging. On the other side, for a different team, one built like say the Dodgers last year, where power is at a premium, and the guys hitting behind your guy aren't going to club 40 home runs, then even if your guy is getting on base, it's not always helping, and those extra hits can turn into extra runs by knocking in a few more men himself.

So, wait, Bourgeois is not on the 40 man so he's rule 5 eligibile...and now the 40 man is full so it's impossible for us to sign anyone without dropping a player first?