Balta1701

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 02:08 PM) As you may well know, most countries dont have a dollar bill. Typically, the smallest denomination is $5. So, it makes me wonder if the US will slowly get us off the $1 bill and onto the $! coin. The U.S. has been trying to do that for years (sacajawea dollars, susan b anthony dollars, etc.) Simply because it's a lot cheaper to produce the coin than it is to produce the bill. Thus far though, they just haven't caught on no matter how hard the government has tried.

Jon Garland is an incredible pitcher. I don't want to dump him. Given infinite salary...He'd be the #2 guy I would resign to a contract extension, right behind MB. However, if Jon Garland cannot be kept, right now through a trade he can obtain us some incredibly valuable pieces - think about what Beane got for Hudson and Mulder. If we lose him as a Free Agent, we will get draft picks. However, right now, if we find a trading partner, he can get us potentially top-tier, All-star talent. Compared with losing Garland for draft picks, that is a much better option. If we could resign Garland at a fair price right now...do it. If he'll sign for what Burnett got, Hell I'd do that too. But I think he would expect more, given his performance last year, and I doubt he'd resign now without wanting to first test the FA market to see what he could get, a-la Konerko. We took a big risk in potentially losing Konerko for draft picks. We can't take that risk with every one of these guys. We have to get something for them.

According to several sources, Johnny Damon received a phone call from Joe Torre yesterday. No terms or offers yet, but it is rumored that the Boss may get involved in this one. The Dodgers have also spoken with Damon. Otherwise, it's also being reported that the Yankees have in fact made an offer on Nomar to be their 1b next year.

I am so bloody sick of people suggesting we need more outfielders. WE HAVE TOO MANY OUTFIELDERS ALREADY! That's why Young and Rowand were tradeable.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 10:28 AM) Chris Young was most definately in the future plans. As of yesterday he was on pace to be our starting CF in '07. Now it'll just have to be Anderson. Let's hope he's up to the challenge.

QUOTE(WinninUgly @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 10:00 AM) I don't know if this has been posted, but it looks like the D-Backs will pay $8 million: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/20...s-vazquez_x.htm That is excellent news. That may very well mean that we can resign either Contreras or Garland with ease now, and thus have 5 guaranteed starters for 2 years (and hopefully more, if KW does what he should and caves in to every single demand by Cy Buehrle)

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 09:41 AM) Borchard was not the 5th pick overall. The Sox haven't had a top ten pick since ... who? Thomas? Fernandez? Borchard would have been a top-5 pick but he fell because other teams didn't want to pay his signing bonus.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 09:10 AM) From espn BA chat (outside of here) Deege (Champaign): Aaron, who do you see starting in center for the White Sox next season between Jerry Owens and Brian Anderson? SportsNation Aaron Fitt: I'm as big a Jerry Owens fan as you'll find, and his year at Birmingham in 2005 was very encouraging, particularly after he skipped a level. But that job will belong to Anderson next year -- at least until Chris Young takes it away in 2007 or '08. Chris Young is a legitimate stud in waiting -- he's got all the tools and tremendous makeup to boot. Owens probably profiles as a solid fourth OF. Owens is potentially the best of those 3, I agree. Which is why this deal went down. It probably doesn't go down without the best guy we have. The thing I keep coming back to is this...Anderson, Owens, Sweeney, Young. That's 4 outfielders. We can only keep 3, especially if Konerko and Thome bogart the DH slot. 1 of them had to go. Is this organziation still extremely high on Sweeney? I've heard some people mention Ordonez's name when discussing his development.

I'm not sure I care as much about McCarthy's "Development" as I do about the fact that I think he can win a ton of games for us next year.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:40 AM) So what you're saying. Balta, is everything being equal, just hand the Cy Young award to Mr. BMAC next year if he's going to be the best on our staff? Let me put it this way...based on what I saw from him in 2005, there's no reason why he can't earn it if he stays healthy. When I watched him pitch at the end of the year, he was the best pitcher on our staff including Contreras. The only guy who I saw be any more dominant than BM in those games was MB in those couple 1 hour 50 minute games earlier in the season. I think he can win the Cy Young award based solely on what i saw last year, if he can stay consistent, yes. Will he? Well, let's just say I hope so. I think he will win one with us, or he'll finish up 2nd to Mark. He is that good. Even if he has some difficult games next year...the one thing I do want is to make sure he is in the starting rotation, so he gets enough innings to keep working things out.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:36 AM) Agree on that. Those are contradictory. I realize that. I suppose this means Garland--could it be someone else?--is heading out, making room for McCarthy. I'm just sitting here worried about organizational depth, the bullpen, and moving what appears to be the center-fielder of the future. I'm done on the matter, I've said my piece. Finals to study for. I understand where you're coming for, and I will say this...if BMac were to be traded, I would respond exactly as you are responding now, (unless we got Pujols). I've also worried for a little while about the fact that it really looks like we had 4 promising outfielders coming up. Young, Anderson, Owens, Sweeney. One of those 4 was probably going to have to go. Right now, Young's value is probably as high as it's going to be in the minor leagues. KW turned him into Cash to allow us to keep running at the big leagues. Is he a hard one to give up? Yeah. Very hard. But hopefully KW and Cooper know what they're doing with Vazquez. If they could find the Vazquez who pitched against us to start 2004....ouch. Garland or Contreras have to be heading out, whichever one won't resign. It just doesn't make sense to me to keep someone as good as BMac sitting out in the bullpen where he'll only pitch 60 innings at the most.

You know, just off the top of my head...the Angels are in need of another starting pitcher, they have a ton of nearly-ready MLB quality prospects/players and a very solid bullpen, they'd have the money to resign Jon if they wanted to, and they're in SoCal. The Dodgers are in the same boat, they're just not as good. I wonder if KW would deal with the team we beat in the ALCS.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:30 AM) -You completely f***-up McCarthy's situation. That kid was absolutely ready for that fifth-starter's role this year and I can say that without a shaddow of a doubt. What the hell is going to happen there? Are you telling me you are going to stick Brandon in the bullpen for 2006, waiting for an injury? -It appears Jon Garland, a guy who would probably leave after this season, whom CAN BE REPLACED IN 2006 FREE AGENCT, is on his way out along with Chris Young, the Golden Boy and CF of the future. These 2 points are directly contradictory. If Jon Garland is on his way out, it doesn't screw up McCarthy in any way, shape, or form. Rather, it may in fact improve things for BMac, because Garland can still be turned into something valuable. I will say this though...and once again...if Brandon McCarthy is not in the starting rotation in April, I cannot be held responsible for my actions.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:26 AM) Garland is another bad example... He worked out of the pen too. Its hard to say Neal struggled as a starter with as few starts as he had. Give the kid a real chance before calling him a failed starter. The Sox have talked in the past about starting kids out in the pen to give them good match ups to build their confidence and pitches. This should come as no surprise. If Brandon McCarthy has problems with confidence, he just needs to go watch those games against Boston and Texas again. Several times over.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:25 AM) And he only has 1 that he throws great. His fastball is too straight and there's not enough power behind it. His changeup stinks, but it's a way to keep hitters off-balance. He'll work nicely the first time he faces teams, but the 2nd time around, it'll be alot harder. Now if he were to develop a cutter or a slider, then he would be much better off. Let's not forget the games he was rocked or the games in which he should've gotten rocked(Detroit last year) He was not rocked in those games because he was missing a pitch, he was rocked in those games because he was throwing only fastball/curveball. With just those 2 pitches, BMac is beatable. But that changeup is the pitch that makes everything else work. It's like Santana from the right hand side. It just makes people look like idiots. No one has been able to pick it up at all, and combined with the curve ball it just dominates people. When he wasn't throwing that pitch, he was getting beat. Late in the year he started throwing it more, and suddenly no one could hit him. I like the idea of him getting another pitch, just to throw a few times per game, just to keep people even more honest. And most people still think he'll add a few MPH to his fastball as his frame fills out.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 08:21 AM) McCarthy already has three pitches. He doesn't need to develop anymore. And here's the idea about McCarthy in the bullpen--it won't be because management doesn't believe he's "fully ready," but rather, because of the possibility of injury many here are alluding to. How the hell could you conclude he's not ready after the manner in which he ended the season? You give your kidney McCarthy isn't the best starter next year, and I'll give my kidney if Garland is even pitching in a White Sox uniform. McCarthy was supposedly working on another pitch this offseason (I believe it was a 2 seamer?) according to reports here a few months ago.

I just read back several pages and I think it was pretty obvious that people didn't know how much money AZ was sending along in this deal, so here's my best guess: The fact that the Commish's office has to approve means that at least $1 million is exchanging hands. At least that's some sort of bracket.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 06:53 AM) It is ironic that you went from saying that starting in the pen would hinder Bmacs development, straight to talking about Buehrle as the number one starter. For those who do not remember, MB got broke into the Sox, out of the bullpen as a long reliever... It seemed to workout OK for him. Buehrle only did that for 1 season. This would be the 2nd season of playing around with BMac between the bullpen, starting at AAA, and starting in the big leagues. I still want Bmac in the rotation. I think he could very well be the best pitcher in that rotation even next year.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:54 PM) Who's next after they miss out on Jones? Does anyone else acutally want Jones? Burnitz could be next....

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:44 PM) For some idiotic reason the Angels did not offer Molina arbitration so he's gone. Ok, now that was moronic.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:34 PM) Because nobody has signed with them? Vlad had a bad ALCS. Anderson had a down year. Colon was hurt in the ALCS. At worst, they will be just as good as last season. I would not overlook the Angel just because we beat them in 5 games in the playoffs. They still have to be the team to beat. Mark it down on your calendar. As of 12/13/05 you have the A's, I'll take the Angels. Barring some assinine trade by either team, I have you locked in. That aside, my point in calling them bottom feeders was not to imply that the A's will suck as much as it implies they are acquiring some less than desirable person, ie Milton Bradley. The test for me is that I would not want him in the Sox club house. However, I think he could have been a great new cancer in the Cub's dugout. The Angels have definately regressed...as of right now. They have a worse catcher (Jose Molina instead of Bengie Molina), still a gaping hole with not even a warm body @ DH, they've lost 2 starting pitchers and only have Ervin Santana available to replace them. On the other hand...this is a situation which could turn around very fast. I'm thinking mroe and more that Molina may well wind up accepting arbitration and end up with the Angels for another year, since the Mets already have a catcher and they were the ones that this year's catcher crop was holding out for. Furthermore, they still have Dallas McPherson @ 3rd base, and he was starting to show signs of big-league promise last year before he was hurt. They also have youth available to fill holes. For all we know Finley or Anderson could have a better season next year if they're healthy. And then of course, they're still the big variable...the trade request from Manny. Don't count the Angels out as regressing yet. They have a ton of young talent, including pitching talent that they could pull into the big leagues, they have tons of people they could trade, and they have a ton of money to spend.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:09 PM) Good point, the Sox still own his rights for two years after the contract is up. In other words I don't think Contreras is going anywhere... kiss Jon Garland good bye. Whoa, wait a second, are we sure about this? Just googling for lists of 2006 Free Agents they do have the name of Contreras on there.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 03:51 PM) Eric Moulds is probably going to be released from what I just heard on ESPN. Ok, now Mularkey and Tom Donahoe are starting to worry/infuriate me. Win some damn ballgames first, then worry about releasing trouble makers.

Man, thank God it's only a building, for a moment I thought you were referring to the universe imploding.

This'll cheer ya up.