Milkman delivers

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2011 -> 06:13 PM) So then you don't want Pierre released based on what he has done so far this year? That plays into it, obviously. We need to make the correct personnel moves in order to win as a team. We're not too good with those, though. We usually seem to hold onto crappier players for whatever reason to the detriment of the team as a whole. The end result is that the team usually falters.

I went back and skimmed through the original McCarthy/Danks trade thread. It didn't seem as bad as people are making it out to be. People were rightfully confused and many said that the team wouldn't do well in 2007 and that Ozzie's personal bias against McCarthy must have played a role in the trade. There were a few people that were overly angry, but I would put them well in the minority.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ May 15, 2011 -> 03:09 PM) It doesn't tell me anything. I remember people b****ing about the Danks/McCarthy trade and wanting to crucify KW. I'm sure the people from that thread are still holding to their belief that it was an awful trade. Oh wait. It's easy to play arm chair GM and have revisionist history at the same time. I don't recall there being too much complaining about the Danks/McCarthy deal. Perhaps you're the one revising history.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ May 15, 2011 -> 03:05 PM) I hate these types of statements, jabs, or whatever you want to call this crap. It's what Tex does. Apparently it's alright for him to goad large numbers of posters and it's not an issue.

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ May 15, 2011 -> 02:39 PM) They raped us so bad that the following off-season they tried to trade him and couldn't find a taker. But you clearly admit Swisher had a bad year with us, and yet you expect KW to get something of value in return? Swisher is a pain in the ass to have as a teammate. The dude never shuts up. I also find it funny that the "proven player" only seems ok when it's used against KW or Ozzie. It wasn't acceptable when I argued this team would hit when they were slumping because practically the whole team is a group of proven players, but it works for Swisher? Who really hasn't been much better since leaving here. I'm not saying that was a good trade overall, but the only player who I really miss in that deal will end up being Carter. I could make half my starts in Oakland and put up the numbers Gio is. You can have that Ryan Sweeney garbage too. LOL

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2011 -> 01:43 PM) I'm arguing that the new "history" argument is garbage. There are plenty of players on this very team that have a history of performance too, but no one seems to care about that. You're arguing personal statistics. I'm saying the individual stats don't matter because the end result is almost always the same for the team as a whole.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ May 15, 2011 -> 10:23 AM) When I criticize KW, it's not because I think I am smarter baseball-wise, because obviously I don't believe that. My criticism manifests itself because he is a lousy general manager relative to others in his business. Some facts since he took over: Record: 866-795 (.521%) Playoff appearances: 2/10 years Salary rankings: 2011: 5/30 (1st in division) 2010: 7/30 (2nd in division, Detroit) 2009: 12/30 (2nd in division, Detroit) 2008: 5/30 (2nd in division, Detroit) 2007: 5/30 (1st in division) 2006: 4/30 (1st in division) 2005: 13/30 (1st in division) 2004: 15/30 (1st in division) 2003: 22/30 (2nd in division, Minnesota) 2002: 18/30 (2nd in division, Cleveland) 2001: 14/30 (2nd in division, Cleveland) So we have won TWO DIVISIONS in 10 years with the highest payroll in the division 50% of the time and the second highest in the division the other 50% of the time. We are not smarter than KW, we just realize that there are plenty of baseball people smarter than KW yet somehow we are stuck with him for eternity it feels. The AL Central for most of the 2000s has been one of the worst divisions in baseball coupling horrid teams (Royals every year, Tigers early 2000s, Indians late 2000s) with incredibly miniscule payrolls (pretty much everyone besides us and the Tigers who only recently boosted up their payroll). Given these immense advantages, we still have been to the playoffs only twice under his reign. Any GM would get flack for his paltry success rate, but add in the lack of strong competition for most his tenure, it makes those two division titles look trivial. And one last point, for any GM you would rather have teams that made the playoffs year in and year out than a flash-in-the-pan World Series title year. Yes, the glory may be awesome that one year, but making the playoffs year in and year out is a sign of a great organization. Reading this, I thought I might've written it myself while I was drunk last night Bravo!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 14, 2011 -> 05:43 PM) And don't forget it is a history that is the nuevo reason people keep using for wanting to fire everyone... Yeah, I'm not sure what you're even arguing here. The team historically underachieves, especially in the Ozzie/KW era. This happens despite the good talent that is brought in. We all know that this wouldn't be the first time the Sox, as the most talented team in the division, don't win the title.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 14, 2011 -> 05:00 PM) All you do is cry about people getting on you because of your pessimistic attitude. So what are you doing now? Getting on others for their optimistic attitude. I'm looking at the last 5 years of track records for a lot of these guys, and those numbers suggest a major correction is coming. I'm excited to watch it happen. I'm not getting on anybody. That's what she said. But seriously, I'm looking at the last 10 years of this team's track record.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 14, 2011 -> 04:45 PM) Now that is kind of ironic after your stance on Hawk and Wimpy. I think the scenarios are a bit different.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 14, 2011 -> 03:06 PM) It has nothing to do with "bounce in their step." They're simply playing better baseball. And it's not surprising. This isn't a 65-70 win team. Consistency, save 2005, has always been the major issue during the Ozzie/KW era. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see this team get back to .500 only to revert back to their earlier struggles. That's actually what I expect. And you are right about the consistency part.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:39 PM) I'd guess video game That could be cool.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 14, 2011 -> 02:40 PM) Running on the field is beyond stupid, and if you are entertained and cheer people doing that, you're right there with them. C'mon, that wasn't entertaining? Nobody is going to argue that it's not stupid, but it's still worth a laugh. I can't imagine what it would be like to constantly be on one's high horse. I'm guessing it's not any fun.

QUOTE (danman31 @ May 14, 2011 -> 02:40 PM) Really? That's a totally different scenario. You're comparing a team that was 2 years removed from 93 wins to a team this year that's mostly devoid of pitching talent and is somehow pitching well. I'd be surprised if the Indians finish over .500. False.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 14, 2011 -> 02:36 PM) They have a different bounce in their step right now. I think it got so bad that they said the hell with it, let's have some fun and see what happens. And now we are seeing the results of the talent taking over. Getting the bullpen settled into their roles is starting to produce results, and the bats are starting to heat up a bit. I'd be surprised to not see a sustained run of .550-600 baseball over the next few months. Really? You'd be surprised to not see a run like that? They played about 6 weeks of bad baseball before that. I dunno. I just don't get the optimism of some people.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:13 PM) As of early May, Disney has trademarked the term "Seal Team 6." Who would you rather have landing inside your compound. The actual Seal Team 6, or an angry group of Disney's lawyers? Does that mean a movie? I just have a hard time seeing a good movie in that vein coming from Disney.

f*** that, I hope he gets away. That was impressive. It reminded me of a normal escape in Assassin's Creed.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:17 PM) Agreed. So why are we caring about the one that affects whether or not we win in games where we're down by 7 runs? As I said, every single motherf***ing games matters right now. Every single inning pitched matters when you're down like the White Sox are and you need to mount a very serious comeback because of the incredible hole you've dug yourself into.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:15 PM) They are the same. You're basing it on 10 IP. LOL you really believe those circumstances are the same? You're not an idiot, so I don't believe that to be the case.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:14 PM) Let's not act like Pena/Gray and Pierre/Viciedo are even remotely similar circumstances. Pierre/Viciedo is actually more important, as it effects every single game.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 14, 2011 -> 01:08 PM) And moving forward Tony Pena is a better option than Jeff Gray. Lillibridge is having a better season than Dunn. Why shouldn't he be in RF batting 3rd and Quentin DHing? Now you're comparing the careers of Peña and Dunn, as if they're similar. Peña has been crap for quite some time, but he's been less crappy than Gray. But this year, Gray was noticeably outperforming him. Dunn is a consistent league leader in HR's and OBP. Let's not act like Dunn/Lillibridge and Peña/Gray are even remotely similar circumstances.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 14, 2011 -> 12:55 PM) Its not a straw man argument. Its common sense. It would be like if the Sox needed to get rid of a position player Dunn wouldn't be sent packing even though he's been far worse this year than almost everyone else. Its what is projected. Pena did some nice things at some point during each of his White Sox seasons. Moving forward, he's a much better bet to perform decently than Jeff Gray. If anything, the small-minded thinking is "hey this guy did pretty good in garbage time he needs to be kept" or the "a message has to be sent" garbage. I don't now how anyone can come to the conclusion that without a doubt Jeff Gray is a better pitcher than Tony Pena. So moving forward, who would help the team more between Pierre and Viciedo?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 12:18 PM) Wait, Jeff Gray is a 21 year old prospect in AAA? Or are both 29 year old ish journeymen relievers with similar ceilings? You really think that the difference between Gray and Pena as the last guy out of the bullpen over the course of a full season is several wins? No, it's about two guys who have been better this season getting the shaft to the detriment of the team. And it doesn't have to be a difference of several wins. If you haven't noticed, we're a pretty s***ty team according to our record. We have absolutely no room for error, so we must put our very best options out there.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 14, 2011 -> 12:02 PM) To be fair, if you look at the career numbers, Pena has been marginally better in his career, if not for the first month of this season. I'm sure that Pierre's career numbers are better than Viciedo's, too. The problem is that that change will never happen. We'll allow Pierre to flounder at the top of the lineup the entire year while getting the most at-bats on the team. This will also be great if we lose the division by a couple of games.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 14, 2011 -> 11:56 AM) Yeah that's a stretch as is using the word ace in the same sentence as John Danks. And yes I know he used the qualifier "almost". Saying that the chances of them winning the division are around 25% is a stretch, but I can accept that. Adding in the "-50%" is what made me do a double take.