heirdog

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jun 26, 2007 -> 11:28 AM) Yes it was a joke. Cub scouts as in "boy scouts". Probably should have actually used boy scouts instead. Oh, I thought they were more advanced scouts because they were holding signs that said "We blow."

Give em Buehrle, BA and Broadway and we'll take Crawford and a B-level pitching prospect.

Is it fair to say that Chris Young is better that BA, Sweeney and Owens at this point? Also, if it took Chris Young to get the trade done, then the comparison should be Vasquez + one of the 3 guys above vs. El Duque and Chris Young in the rotation and line-up respectively and I think I would take the Vasquez and one of the guys above. The unfortunate part is that we don't get one of the 3 above consistently, we get Terrero, Gonzalez, Erstad and Mackowiak.

Maybe KW traded Fields after that 4th inning? I could see KW pulling a fast one on all of us and trading the power arms and prospects to get some big time players and take another shot...he thought he could win now and build for the future but decides that he would like to take a shot and make a second half come back like the Twins have done a couple of times in the past few years.

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 3, 2007 -> 09:52 AM) Did we become a home run team to win games or sell tickets? We became a home run team when Greg "Looping Swing" Walker became the hitting coach. A home run is nice and I don't mind seeing 30+ from the 3-5 guys like Kong, Thome and Dye but it makes we wonder if we value the 20+ (or 30) we get from Uribe, Crede et al too much. How many more hits could they get if they just slapped the ball into the outfield for a hit instead of taking a big cut. And maybe Brian Anderson would still be here if he did so. Case in point the Detroit game on ESPN. When Detroits bullpen is falling apart and after Zumaya has walked in 2 runs and we have bases loaded and BA up...after Jones throws 2 straight balls, on the next pitch Anderson takes a cut that nearly brings him out of his shoes and of course he misses. 1) Take a pitch until they throw a strike or 2) Get the pitch you like and make solid contact to keep the inning going with a single that scores 2 runs, especially when you are in a slump.

QUOTE(caulfield12 @ May 2, 2007 -> 08:52 PM) There are some key differences... 1) We don't have two nearly automatic wins in our rotation with the potency of Santana and Liriano 2) There are three teams for the White Sox to contend with, not two 3) Our bullpen already has more blown saves leading to losses (3) than the Twins had all last year 4) Fields hasn't played LF for more than two weeks 5) There's no obvious "villain" like Tony Batista to release in order to send a message 6) Gardenhire's a slightly better manager than Guillen 1) We don't have 3 automatic losses either. It all evens out as the 1&2 punch after Liriano came on may have been better for the Twins but the 3-5 for the Sox is better (2 sub 3 ERAs currently and a tough luck 0-4 rookie). At the end, all games count the same whether an Ace is pitching or a AA call-up so we actually have a better chance of winning more games than the Twins. 2) Last year at this time, it was not a 3 team race yet...Cleveland was right in the thick of it. 3) How many wins did we have this year off the other team's bullpen blowing a save (I bet we are even or plus in that category). This is a meaningless stat. We have a solid bullpen just like the Twins did last year. 4) Get an adequate LF (right now, one that can hit preferrably) so whether its Fields or anyone else, it doesn't really matter. 5) B.A. was the scapegoat that was sent down! Message: "Hit 2-17 and play only sparingly and we will ship you out!" 6) What has Gardenhire won? Not that I disagree but as subjective as that comment is, its really not pertinent in the grand scheme of things. We have a slightly better GM so we can rectify matters more quickly than they could (see: if Guillen can't right the ship...)

Question: If BA was sent down at the end of spring training as opposed to breaking the season with the big club would that have been the last game he played with the organization?

Hey, I saw this great thread but I don't have time to read through all the posts, can someone please summarize? Discuss.

Ken Williams demonstrates his brilliance once again and uses the media as a negotiation ploy. By stating that these "will let us match" and "they want to stay," he is basically creating the perception that chasing after Sox FAs is fruitless as the Sox have the opportunity to match any offer. He has basically announced that these guys are in effect "restricted FAs" (like in the NBA). Of course, if another team really wants one of these guys, they will go after them but if there are even other players they like close to as much, they may spend more of their time and energy trying to get a contract with them as opposed to our guys.

I will be most worried if Garland gets off to a slow start. He historically (last couple of seasons) starts strong, hits a lull and then finishes pretty strong so it will be interesting to see how he starts given that he is now pitching in the 2nd slot of the rotation as opposed to the back-end. Buehrle has always been fairly consistent in terms of results at the end of the year and never had electric stuff so I think he will do fine this year (some unbelievable games, some where he gets rocked and some in between...yeah not too consistent but in the end he regresses to the mean or just above it). Contreras has to stay healthy, which I think he can do to the tune of 180-200 innings and Vasquez is the wild card. With an improved bullpen, maybe some 5 inning outings will get him 18 wins...so he avoids that dreaded third time around a line-up. Danks is the question mark...I have a good feeling about him and think he will end up doing pretty well. Floyd et al in AAA will be insurance for an injury to one of the older guys in my opinion.

I keep reading in the sports columns that if Toby Hall isn't ready to go for the opener, this makes Eddie Perez likelier to get the last spot (in addition to Wiki or Gustavo as the back-up catcher) since he can play 1B. Konerko is not going to need many days off and if you want to give him one, do it during the interleague and let Thome play 1B or move the 6'5" Jermaine Dye there and let BA handle right. I think I would much rather have BA on the roster and playing all three outfield slots, then have Ozuna and Mackowiak as the only OF back-ups (especially given Erstad and Pods' histories with injury).

94 Win division by 2 over cleveland (92 wins). Minny 3rd (87) and Detroit 4th (82). Only Sox make playoffs from central Boston wins east (98 wins) and Yanks finish 2nd (95). Angels win west (88).

I see Fields at 3rd and ARod at SS with Crede gone and Uribe gone if they can resign Guch...if not, continue the shift and move Uribe to 2nd and let Iguchi go.

QUOTE(Wanne @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 11:33 PM) Pretty much. I was talking to a Ranger fan at a game this past week who was still livid about it. Feels like they were fed a crock of s*** in terms of McCarthy. All I said was.."yup". That was some great propaganda by Williams. I think Jon Daniels was just enamored with the 7+ innings of 2-hit ball that BMac put on Texas in the end of 2005.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 12:13 AM) The thing about all the young guys we traded for is that only Danks has a legitimate chance to be anything more than a 4th starter in his career. Can you really deduce that already? Its a crapshoot because on a team with unbelievable pitching ('90s Braves), your theory might hold true but on an average MLB staff, a lot of these guys could project higher. Yes, they are prospects but just like no one can be crowned a future ace right now, I don't think you can absolutely state the pessimistic view at this point either. Garland is a #2 for us now and you would have never thought he would have been better than a #4 or #5... 4 years ago.

No way. Is Rowand really an upgrade over Anderson or Erstad? I don't think so. It took Rowand awhile to get going in the majors and we've only given Anderson 1 year and Erstad (if he can stay healthy) is just plain better than Rowand. I don't know what we would do with Lieber...our 5th starter candidates look better than any of our 1st 4 starters in spring...granted its spring but that is all we have to go by right now and Lieber is not beating out any of those guys. But saving the most important reason for last...MMac and Thorton have to be untouchables right now, especially given Jenks' struggles. I know its spring but we face Cleveland and Minny in the first two series and the bullpen is going to be key. We have two good lefty pen guys (thornton and logan) and they are hard to come by so teams must pay a premium for them and established closer type guys like MMac so don't settle for the guys that a team wants to unload. KW ain't bitin' on any of these weak trades. QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 11:36 AM) Prior to Garcia getting hurt, a Phillies blog (Good Phight) speculated that a Lieber/Rowand for Fields/MacDougal/Mack trade might be a possibility. From a value for value standpint, that seems more realistic, but right now neither Lieber or MacDougal will be going anywhere I think. Fields/ MacDougal/ and Mack for Rowand and Lieber??? I think that is ridiculously favoring Philly. Rowand/ 1 year of Garcia/ Haigwood for Thome and Floyd is basically what we did with Philly over the past two years so why would we give up so much for Rowand and Lieber

Can't wait...this is the first time in awhile I am really excited about our prospects.

Boone Logan - Kelly Wunsch Ryan Sweeney - Garrett Anderson Casey Rogowski - John Kruk w/ less contact and more speed Gavin Floyd - James Baldwin Lance Broadway - Scott Ruffcorn

1) Fields 2) Danks 3) Sweeney 4) Gio 5) Haeger 6) Broadway 7) Russell 8) V.C. Carter 9) Cunningham 10) Valido 11) McCulloch

Hall and Cintron are locks. Erstad in my opinion is also a lock since he was a FA and signed here (as opposed to Florida) because its the midwest and closer to his family (and a potential championship team). If KW allows him to be cut, it would reflect badly on our mgmt and who knows what other free agents we could ever get (see Bulls circa 2000). Plus, he fits that grinder mentality. I think we will also keep Terrero and Ozuna because Ozzie loves them both...and they have a lot more speed then the next two guys. Perez (nice audition for other teams but he basically is a back-up 1B and we have a iron man there along with Thome who will need a few reps during interleague) and Mack (will be traded) are out. I'm not saying I agree with the moves, just what I think the Sox will do.

Whatever the criteria are, when you do the analysis and garbage GMs rise to the top, then you know either your criteria or your analyses are flawed. I think these types of ratings, especially ones that span across sports, should be done subjectively as the numbers don't always translate from sport to sport (1 win in football is much more important than 1 win in baseball). But if you are going to try and quantify the value, then you should always start with a hypothesis..."If Kevin McHale is the top GM, then I f***ed up." So after doing the analysis, the Forbes scientist can undeniably confirm that he f***ed up.

He's very long-winded and why does he keep mentioning Andrew Dice-Clay?

Good signing. Why would anyone let Pablo go? He has been nothing short of great for the role the White Sox have him playing. This is insurance for Pods and then I think Mackowiak is gone in a trade.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 16, 2007 -> 10:23 AM) Hahn. He is probably the one doing it, I think that was mentioned last year - Hahn deals with Boras. That was JR's way of trying to fix that particular problem. Actually, Dennis Gilbert (Special Asst to the Chairman), handles all negotiations with Boras. Gilbert is a former top agent and probably knows how to get down and speak at Boras' level so Reinsdorf brought him aboard in 2000 to help negotiate contracts, specifically with Boras.

QUOTE(Hideaway Lights @ Jan 8, 2007 -> 05:46 PM) So despite the fact that the rotation got significantly worse, and the lineup is fundamentally the same, and the bullpen may be improved but the jury's still out, you project a similar or higher win total than last year? Bewildering. Not really. In 2006, most people predicted 95-105 wins and they underperformed to the tune of 90 wins. So now even with a worse rotation (I don't agree that it is significantly worse by losing Garcia only), same line-up and theoretically better bullpen, I think predicting 87-92 wins is on the money. If they overindex, they could get 95-100 wins. If they underperform again, they could get 80-85 wins. The fulcrum number this year is 90 wins and it can swing up or down from there. Last year it was 95 wins and based off your assessment on the team's moves, it seems correct for it to swing down to 90. So in essence, you should agree with the 87-92 range.