RME JICO

QUOTE(WatchIt @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 11:32 PM) Hey how bout you dont post articles from the other site, and at least if you did say so and not just lie about how you found it you giant douche. Just put the big L on your forehead right now and go back to watching some Scrubs highlights from 2005, oh wait there weren't any.

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 03:25 PM) very interesting. i'm not a big sabermetrics guy, but that is an interesting projection. it will be interesting to see if those numbers mirror reality. Even using worse case scenarios it is hard to project anything less than 92 wins.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 03:34 PM) Whitesox.com? That is already in the extension labeled "Sox MLB Site" since whitesox.com re-directs to the MLB site, which is the same thing I guess. Is there another site you are talking about. Here is the one linked in the extension: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb...ex.jsp?c_id=cws If it is the same thing, do you want it labeled differently?

QUOTE(Felix @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 03:09 PM) Yes, what good are you if you don't have any range? Your pitchers give up more hits and you get less errors.

I would say that Uribe has the slight edge on defense (arm/range) and Jeter has a huge edge on offense, but when you throw in salaries into the equation, Uribe is a much better value. Jeter seems to be slowing a bit and most of his highlights this year would have been routine plays for younger shortstops.

QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 02:26 PM) can you explain what the numbers mean? Here is the definition: Bill James invented Win Shares as a simple way to compare baseball players. The idea was to develop a statistic that allows you to compare shortstops and outfielders, starters and relievers, relievers and shortstops, etc. Since the win is the ultimate measure of success, James developed a stat that measures each player's contribution to his team's wins, or Win Shares. You can check out the 2005 Win Shares here: http://www.hardballtimes.com/winshares/index.php

Using reasonable numbers going off past seasons I came up with the following: 2006 Win Share Projections SP 1. Buehrle - 21 2. Contreras - 17 3. Garcia - 17 4. Garland - 16 5. Vazquez - 15 RP 6. McCarthy - 8 7. Cotts - 10 8. Politte - 9 9. Jenks - 14 10. Hermanson - 7 11. Pitcher - 4 C 12. Pierzynski - 15 13. Widger - 2 IF 14. Crede - 14 15. Iguchi - 15 16. Konerko - 22 17. Thome - 18 18. Uribe - 17 19. Ozuna - 4 20. Mackowiak - 8 21. Player or 12th Pitcher - 3 OF 22. Dye - 16 23. Podsednik - 14 24. Anderson - 10 25. 4th Outfielder - 3 299 Win Shares 99.67 Wins I got this on my first try just using projections compared to the last 3 years. I even have some conservative numbers and I actually think a lot will be higher. Do any of these look ridiculous or not realistic? I only see one or two players that would do worse, but there are about 8 that should do better. The only change would be if Count is moved and B-Mac moves into the rotation, where I would give B-Mac 15 WS. Then the other relievers would account for 8 more WS if B-Mac was in the rotation. That would be a difference of -2 if Count (17 WS) was moved, still equaling 99 wins oddly enough. If Win Shares are that accurate, even if a couple of players under perform or are injured, the Sox should automatically be looking at 94+ wins.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 01:49 PM) Good read, thanks for posting. No prob, I was surprised to find it doing a search for Joe Crede.

I thought this was a pretty interesting perspective about the Sox in 2005 from a Cub's fan. I assume there are many more like him. http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2005/...windy_citys.php

QUOTE(JoshPR @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 01:23 PM) Does that guy have an E-Mail??? I need to know where he gets the s*** he's smoking I mean how this guy still has a job is beyond me. Sheesh Think about all the Yanks fans eating that s*** up. They are probably emailing him right now telling him how he is such a great columnist. Slurp slurp. BTW, you need to make your sig picture bigger.

Guys like him are always contradictory. They will use stats to back up one opinion, then completely disregard the same stats in another. Most of their articles are better for amusement purposes if nothing else. I am sure his new book will be a hot seller in the comedy genre.

Ok, I will be adding these and updating the extension today: Sun-Times - http://www.suntimes.com/index/sox.html Tribune - http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/ Daily Herald - http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/whitesox.asp Rotoworld - http://fantasybaseball.rotoworld.com/conte...MLB&majteam=CWS Sox Rumors - http://www.prosportsdaily.com/mlb/white-sox/rumors.html Anymore link requests?

This is the same boob that picked the Sawks to win the East and the Indians to win the Central just last month. So as long as he keeps changing his predictions, he will eventually be right. I always love how he views the Sox: He hates Pods, and thinks the Sox overpay on every contract.

Seems like the Red's might have some interest in Count after they missed out on Morris: http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...0388/1071/SPT04 Any prospects in the Reds system that would be worth it?

Thanks for your comments. If anyone has any recommendations, or more Sox links you would like me to add, just post them here, or PM me. I can update the Extension fairly easy. Also, I know there are a lot of graphics gurus here, so if any of you can create some custom 16 x 16 pixel Sox icons for use within the Extension, that would be awesome.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 11:40 AM) I installed it, but I don't see anything different. Let me know how it works. (Nevermind, I see it. Pretty cool.) Sorry for the confusion. It installs next to the Help in the upper File bar.

I didn't know if there were any others posted or out on the web, but I created a SoxTalk Firefox Extension. It is basically a new menu that allows you to navigate through the site easier. Here is the link, just Save as and then use Open File in Firefox to install it. http://www.pcgamingtech.net/downloads/soxtalk.xpi Here is a picture of the menu: http://www.pcgamingtech.net/images/soxtalk.png If you use Firefox let me know what you think, and if you don't you should try it out.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_3358525 1 year for $800,000.

It will definitely be over 2.5, but the rest will depend on how they start out next season. If they start out hot again, then that number can easily reach 2.8, but 3.0 seems like a huge leap from last year, even after a World Championship.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 08:07 AM) If Juan progresses a little offensively, he'll be a bargain at his salary for the next two yrs. the sox will need the lower salaried position players so they can afford the high priced pitching staff Talking in terms of low salary positions, you can basically equate the following: Contreras + Uribe = Tejada + B-Mac in terms of salaries, since trading Contreras would move B-Mac into the starting rotation. Having Uribe's and B-Macs salaries coupled with some of the other low salaries does give some flexibility in re-signing other players, but Tejada will only make $10 million in 2006 and $12 million in 2007 (equal to Paulie). Those are pretty good numbers for a perennial All-Star. This is not like the O's are trying to unload Tejada's salary, so they are going to want a lot in return. I doubt any team will offer enough to get him.

I would keep Williams, he has more upside. BTW, do you think you got a good deal out of the "2nd round pick, Jeremy Shockey, and Randy Moss for Antonio Gates" trade? That seems like a lot for Gates, even though he is pretty dominant.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 05:26 PM) Bedard 2005 > 5 IP: 15 GS, 25 ER 1.67 ER per start It's so like a White Sox fan to focus on the negative & ignore the positive. The attention getter here is that he avg'd 1.67 ER per start over 15 starts. That means when he's on he's dominant. He was on nearly 2/3rd's of his starts. If you extend it to 33 starts you are looking at an avg of 18 dominant starts over a full season. 18 dominant starts IF he is healthy. That is a big IF. He had completely different numbers before and after his injury, so until he proves that he can get back to his early 2005 form, he is a huge risk.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 06:31 PM) I'm sorry to keep bringing up this point, but I find it highly unlikely we trade someone at the deadline. Besides for the Nomar situation, you never see teams that are trying to win actually trade a main contributor at the deadline. Of course, if the Sox choke this year, then we could trade Contreras. The Sox had a lot of things go right in 2005, but there would have to be a monumental collapse for them not to make the postseason in 2006 with the team that KW is fielding. The only way this would happen is if the pitchers under perform and the team gets hit by the injury bug. So what are the options for Count? The Sox keep him thru 2006 and let him walk. They re-sign him and trade one of the other SP's, or they move him before ST. Any other scenarios?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 06:23 PM) The problem with waiting until the trading deadline to find a desperate team is that the desperate teams may very well be the teams we don't want to help out by giving them a dominant starting pitcher. What do we do if we hold onto him and the best offers come from the Red Sox or the Angels? Do we really want to go into a pennant race and give a dominant starting pitcher to our main opposition in the playoffs? Thats true, I never really looked at it that way. Obviously we don't want any deals in the AL if possible, and definitely none in the AL Central. So in that case I guess moving him by ST is more realistic. I just find it really hard to believe with the signing of Jon that the Sox are going to keep Contreras. I really thought Garland was gone, but it seems like Jose is now the odd man out. KW really makes the offseasons exciting.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 06:05 PM) Exactly... we have 5 starters under contract now for not only this year but next year too... I dont want to pay Contreras to have 6 starters and than because of that 11 million not be able to afford Buehrle. Yeah, having 5 starters locked up thru 2007 makes it hard to believe the Sox will re-sign Contreras at all unless they are willing to deal one of the other SP's. Waiting until ST or until the trading deadline seems to be the best time to find desperate teams. It seems like Contreras is trying to break the bank since he probably feels that this is his best shot to get a great contract.