heirdog

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 05:40 PM) Actually, Gload plays corner OF as well. He even played 3 games there in 2005 (2 in RF, one in LF) with the Sox. He is a solid defender at 1B or in the OF, with the exception of a weak arm. Between Borch and Gload, unless Gload has an outstanding spring and Borch falls apart, I think it will be Borch at the 4th slot. We already have 3 guys who can play 1B pretty well, and Borch has more power and can play CF in a pinch. Gload, though, is a much more disciplined hitter. We'll have to see. It's the battle of the last chances for these two former fast-movers in the organization - one gets on the roster, the other is probably done in the organization (traded or released). Don't write off Gload just yet! Gload is a fast mover in this organization? I know he got some PT at the end of 2004 but I hardly call him an organizational favorite. Also, he is like 30 years old so I think he was a late bloomer if anything. I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Gload's OF defense. He is not fast and he has a weak arm so what else is left? He can catch the ball when he is under it???? Sounds like a prototypical "hide me in left field every so often" type guy.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 12:25 PM) I think the Sox like Munoz over Reynoso, but aren't really thrilled with either guy from what I have read. To me the spot is wide open to the point where a non-roster guy with a great spring has a shot as much as anyone else does. Also right now I think Bajenaru is in the drivers seat for the last RHP spot if we go with 12 pitchers, which is a possibility after the WBC for at least a month or two IMO. As long as its not Kevin Walker, I am fine with it. I think our 25th spot will be dictated by injuries...Hermanson's back, Crede's back, Thome's back/elbow Ozuna (IF and pinch runner), Mackowiak (super utility), Widger (back-up catcher) are locks and then I think it will be Borchard (4th OF). If we carry a 14th position player, it will be the injury necessity...Pedro Lopez (SS/2B). Gload only plays first and Mackowiak can easily play 1B and both hit lefty so Gload is as good as gone unless he has a Pablo-like spring and bats .550

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 06:34 PM) Anderson will do fine.. That is all. Agreed.

QUOTE(S720 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 10:00 AM) but after hearing that Garland has a no-trade clause on the first year of his extension contract, I just don't know what Kenny is thinking. This is the key to that statement. Garland can be traded after next season when he is actually expensive at $10 mill and then $12 mill. This year we will have him at an affordable $7 mill. If he pitches well and we are going for a 3-peat, keep him. If not, then we can still get a lot for a 27-year-old with potential (look at the vazquez deal and while he may have better stuff, he was older). I could see Contreras being signed for 2 yrs, $22 mill with a club and player option in year 3. The club's buyout would be around $6 mill, similar to Frank's, or a salary of $13 mill in yr 3. If he continues to pitch like an ace, its a bargain. His trade value will always be high if we tank and he is an "ace." If not, we only have him for only 2 years. I just think that Ozzie and KW are weary of counting on a young BMac on a world series team. If we were an average team, BMac would be in there but right now, everyone wants to repeat and lock up the best pitching to do so. I don't think the Count is going anywhere, certainly not for Abreu. While he would be a solid #2 hitter and make our line-up incredible, in essence you are trading Contreras for BMac in your rotation. Duque for Vaz was great but not Contreras for an unproven BMac. BAnderson is a solid defensive OF and we don't expect anything out of him at the plate (probably batting 9th) so I don't think we trade our 2nd half and playoff ace for an expensive player at a position where we need defense above all (and don't tell me about moving Pods to CF :headshake ). If anything, I am a little worried about our pen with an up-and-down Politte, a bad back Hermy, a young Jenks who could become Billy Koch and a bunch of youngsters with only Cotts looking like a young stud reliever.

QUOTE(S720 @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:13 PM) Folks, Somehow I have a feelings that this signing is the prelude to a huge trade with the O's - Garland & Uribe for Tejada & prospects. Now that Garland is signed for 3 years for a measly $29 mil, Kenny just doubled up or even tripled Garland's trading value. What an exciting offseason! One thing is certain, with Kenny at the helm, there can never be tranquility. I think it will be Garland and mid-level prospect for Bedard and Jorge Julio. KW wanted two prospects for Garland and Baltimore balked when KW insisted on Bedard instead of the two prospects, especially since JG would be a FA at the end of next year. Now, with JG signed to an affordable 3-year deal with a low '06 number, I think KW goes back and asks for Bedard (an even more affordable contract with great stuff and lefty to boot) and another set-up man/closer-type in Julio. In order to get Julio too, we might have to add in a mid-level prospect. I hope its Tejada but I think it will be a smaller deal.

Could it be that Ben is not being utilized properly? I mean the guy is very talented and everyone has thought so for a long time (All American, NCAA Champion, 3rd pick, Sixth Man) and now all of a sudden, he sucks. The guy single handedly won us many games last year...games we had no business winning. I think that far outweighs games that he may have lost for us...not sure if there were that many because as soon as he messed up slightly, Skiles would pull him. I think Skiles is the problem with Ben Gordon. He doesn't give him the freedom. Iverson gets steals with his quickness and other than that, he is just strictly an offensive player. Ben should be used similarly. The guy is like Iverson with less slashing and a better shot. Quit spotting him up and running him off screens like he is Reggie Miller, put the ball in his hands and let him create. I agree though we need some bigs to get some pressure off our only legitimate scorer (Deng and Hinrich are close but not quite elite in this regard)...Gordon. Curry, while the stats were weak for a big man, commanded a double team that would open up the perimeter. Now the only people opponents leave open are duhon and nocioni and they are thriving but Deng and Gordon get constant attention. Draft Aldrige or Andrea Bagnani with the first of the two picks and get another big if possible with the other. I don't want any part of Morrison...a classic college over-achiever. In the current NBA, you have to be all of that and have some athleticism (see Kirk Hinrich) as smarts and old-school fundamentals will only get you so far unless you are 7 feet (see Tim Duncan...but he has some athleticism too). Gordon is not the savior but he is a legitimate scorer that is clutch...not very easy to find in the NBA. But I hate the way Skiles handles him so I hope Ben is traded if the Bulls intend on misusing him because I would love to see him achieve his full potential.

Either get the best value now or hang on to him for the whole year. If he struggles, his value will be down mid-year. If he lights it up, why would you trade him? Especially to a contender who will likely be the one asking about him mid-season.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:16 PM) Kolb is a Boras client and the reason the Brewers couldn't strike a deal with him is because he wanted too much money. He will not be coming to the White Sox. Oh. Never mind then.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:29 PM) Bradford, T. Miller and Fogg intrigue me. byrnes as a backup outfielder would be nice, but probably too pricey I've got a feeling Borchard is going to be one of the backup outfielders because KW likes him, we've still got 5 million invested in him and he has some pop. And most importantly, both are from Stanford.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:10 PM) Kolbs mental toughness and closing ability flew out the window on the trip down to Atlanta last year. Maybe Coop could figure him out. Maybe he is Billy Koch redux. True. He struggled in Atlanta but he did a little better in the set up role after Reitsma and then Farnsworth became the closers. But look at how many closers struggled last year (Looper, Foulke, etc.) and there will be more this year (Jenks?) so it doesn't hurt to have a bullpen of set-up men that also have closed in the past instead of trying to break someone into the role. Also, Politte struggled after showing promise as a closer in Toronto and has been a solid set-up man. I think Kolb is definitely worth a look.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:09 PM) That should be in green There is history here as well with young, high pick pitching prospects (i.e. Jason Grilli) being given a chance to compete in spring training. I think the way someone has operated in the past is a very telling indicator for how they will operate in the future. So with KW's history of taking chances on supposed can't miss pitching prospects, you never know.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:02 PM) There are a couple of interesting names on there. Bradford and Trever Miller are obvious possibilities, I also like Jamal Strong. I don't know what Alex Escobar's story is (another injury?) but remember KW liked him before. They could use some minor league OF depth and insurance in case someone is injured. If KW picks up Alex Escobar, then the Everett/Alomar-type jokes will start about how he continually picks up Escobar and then trades him for bona fide prospects. :headshake I think Dan Kolb would be a nice addition, especially if Hermy is slow to recover from his back. I think Hermy and Politte are solid set-up men but Politte has been inconsistent over the years so if he struggles, we have Kolb who has also closed games in the past. This is the type of reliever that KW went after last year (ones that had closing experience...a sign of mental toughness?) so I could see him calling Kolb's agent.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:39 AM) Joey Cora is the manager, didn't know that. It says the Sox are not happy he left the season early. Has this been posted anywhere and if so where? Any reasoning? This was in the Trib. There is a slightly longer thread (about 5 posts) in the palehose talk. He left when he was put on the 40-man in order to rest and prepare for Spring Training. Cora saw this as an extended spring training but Owens probably just needed to rest for awhile after a long season in the minors and then this league, and then spring training and another season.

This news came out a while ago (not the article but the fact that Owens left the league). He left when he was put on the 40-man roster in order to rest up and prepare for spring training. Cora and the Sox thought continuing to play in the league would best prepare him and kind of be an extended spring training look but Owens felt otherwise. He knows his body best and after a long season in the minors, I think he could use a little time off before returning for spring training. I don't think it will be a grudge held by the White Sox brass but you never know with Ozzie and KW.

Anyone have any idea why some teams make trades and then non-tender the players they receive? For example, Atlanta traded Dan Kolb to Milwaukee for Wes Obermueller and then both players were non-tendered. What is the benefit to each team?

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:44 AM) Again, conjecture being passed off as fact. However, in Bruce's defense, he's spot-on...of course Garland is going to be traded. I'm also happy to hear the Sox are not going the Blalock/Crede route and are looking to land a reliever and presumably some prospects. I'm sticking to my guns: Chad Billingsley, Jonathan Broxton/Edwin Jackson ...a deal surrounging two of those three players. Please stay away from Edwin Jackson, Kenny! I hate the converted OFs that are now pitchers. Broxton looks like Jon Adkins but hopefully he would pan out. Billingsley is a must to make the trade.

Championship game for me but have some decisions: QB (need 1): I had the worst luck with QB this year: Culpepper, Bulger and Leftwich all were my QBs at one point McNair vs. Miami (opponent has Drew Bennett) Garrard vs. Houston RB (need 1 to go with Cadillac) Moats vs. Arizona Edge vs. Seattle (limited carries for sure) Bettis vs. Cleveland Marion Barber vs. Carolina WR (need 1 to go with LFitz and Steve Smith) Derrick Mason vs. Minnesota Donte Stallworth vs. Detroit Defense (need 1) Patriots vs. NYJ Dolphins vs. Tenn Bucs vs. Atl Kicker (need 1) Vanderjagt vs. Seattle Akers vs. Arizona Rackers vs. Philly Tynes vs. San Diego The ones I am leaning towards are bolded. Any thoughts?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 20, 2005 -> 04:20 PM) It does look to me like the Rangers gave up quite a bit though. If the Rangers are willing to give up that much for Eaton and Otsuka, we should be able to get Josh Rupe (starter in '07), CJ Wilson (left out of the bullpen in '06) and Ian Kinsler (utility 2B/SS in '07 when we let Ozuna walk) for Jon Garland. Kinsler can take over for Tadahito in '08 or battle it out with Getz if he is ready.

The Sox brass has been tight-lipped about the trade until it is finalized. I think pulling Vazquez's name from the poll is just doubling back and remaining consistent with their stance. The editor probably approved the poll and then Boyer or someone got word of it later and told them to take Vazquez off until the deal is finalized. Just correcting an oversight...nothing more, nothing less. Now about El Duque passing his physicial, who knows if Arizona will see "the best MRI they've ever seen" like the Sox did last off-season. Its apparent that they want Young badly and also get a serviceable bullpen arm and a plug-in starter for at least half a season...all for a guy that doesn't want to be there so I think they want the trade just as bad as we do. If it doesn't go through, I will be fine with it and hopefully look back and say it was fortuitous that we did not lose Young (if he becomes a stud) like we could have with Contreras, Crede and Marte for Burnett and Lowell or Young and Rogo for Griffey, etc. What we get for Garland will really give me the value of the Vazquez trade as I don't think we will start the year with 6 starters.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 02:17 PM) He will join Bob Wickman as having the worst stuff of any pitchers ever to be a closer. Throw David Weathers into that mix. Man, the Reds could really use bullpen help.

As far as mid-season trades: Would anyone trade Garland within our division to a contender (Cleve, Minn)? No way we strengthen our division rivals. Would anyone trade Garland to an AL powerhouse (LAA, NYY, Bos)? No way we strengthen our future playoff opponents. Would anyone trade Garland to the Cubs? No way KW does that. Would anyone trade Garland to an NL powerhouse (St.L, Hou, Atl?)? No way we strengthen our WS opponent (for prospects that can't help us this year). That really lowers the possibility of a trade as any team that makes a mid-season deal is a likely contender. I don't see any trade happening involving Garland mid-season.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 02:13 PM) Why not get fair value for Garland instead of just dumping him because "we have too many pitchers." If we're not getting a great deal for Garland we could use BMac out of the pen as the long man and go with an absolutely studly starting rotation. I'd rather hold onto Garland and either move him mid-season or take the draft picks than move him for a trade I don't feel we get the better of. I certainly don't want to just dump Garland but I think our choices boil down to either: 1) Trade him now for a package we like 2) Keep him next year and let him walk and get the 1 or 2 supplemental draft picks I don't think a mid-season trade is feasible for the following reasons: 1) If Garland is tearing it up, I don't see how we would be able to get rid of him in any shape or form while we look to repeat next year (unless of course, we get a lot of injuries and are out of it by the trade deadline...which is unlikely). 2) If Garland is even average, the only teams that will look for a "rent-a-player" for the remainder of the season are contenders and we could not trade him to a contender if we have world series aspirations in '06. 3) If Garland sucks it up next year, we would not be able to get any value or even get any takers for a player in his walk year. The best we could hope for was to have him continue to eat up innings or come out of the pen and may be get the draft pick at the end of the year. The risk-benefit analysis suggests that we trade him now or get the draft picks. I think with BMac looking ready to go and the Vazquez deal, along with the fact that signing Garland looks remote, we get the best package for him now.

Still no one with anything for Salome Barojas? I posted him after answering Joel Skinner (but I see now that it may have looked like I was signing off as "Salome Barojas"). Any way, I followed the rules and answered the previous and then posted one of my own. There are many bending the rules in this game by listing 3 or 4 on one post (name droppin' no doubt), some that aren't even answering a previous post.

This is their answer to the Mackowiak trade?!? Signing a guy from the Japanese Soft"Ball" League? Let's see if they try to bring back Scott Erickson as a response to the Vazquez trade.

QUOTE(FGarcia34 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:22 PM) Home AVG's: Blalock - .297 Crede - .235 Away AVG's: Blalock - .231 Crede - .269 Personally, I'd rather have a hitter hit better at the Cell than on the road. What are Blalock's splits at the cell? That would be more telling than "home" since if he were traded, "home" would be the cell.