RME JICO

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 05:29 PM) Not to mention Mackowiak can play 1B so they've really got that spot covered. If they only carry 11 pitchers, another multipurpose player would be nice. JD can also play 1B if needed, so I doubt the Sox put another 1B on the roster. It is going to be OF or RP.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 04:54 PM) There is no need to bring team wins into the picture. Marginal runs/team wins is the same for good teams and bad teams. That is why win shares are fair to all players, regardless of their team's winning percentage. 21 win shares are not better than 25 win shares, the error in the calculation would have to be so large that it isn't worth throwing out there. So Brandon Webb is as good or better pitcher than P. Martinez, B. Colon, J. Smoltz, C. Carpenter? Just look at some of the lists and you can see that there are several odd rankings. I was just trying to say that Win Shares doesn't necessarily indicate how good a player truely is. It is pretty damn close, but there are always exceptions. If Win Shares were that accurate, then 3 / $29 million for the 7th best pitcher in the league is a felony.

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 02:17 PM) From the O's perspective which is harder to replace? Tejada's offense or Contreras & BMac's arm? So this would be a better deal for the O's? One guaranteed year from Contreras and B-Mac while you lose Tejada and Bedard. You failed to mention that they would lose Bedard's arm too, and the Sox would lose Uribe's defense. I just don't see this happening, B-Mac seems to have more potential than Bedard post-injury. If Bedard didn't get injured last year, then this would be a great deal for the Sox, but it is hard to trade two healthy arms for one powerful bat and one questionable arm in terms of injury. If the O's did this and couldn't sign Count to a new deal, they would only have B-Mac and Uribe in 2007 for Tejada and Bedard. I say hold Count until ST or the trading deadline, then get some great value for him when teams are most desperate to win now.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 03:52 PM) This couldn't be farther from the truth. Sorry mis-worded it. Corrected now, not "is" but "can". Win Shares don't always show how good a player actually is. There are some misleading numbers. Most of them are accurate, but if the league went strictly off Win Shares then the CY Youngs would have been MB and Willis. Here are some other good ones: Konerko is the 10th best 1B in the league after Giambi or Helton? Mark Grudzielanek is a Top 10 at 2B. Inge better than Crede at 3B. Eckstein is the best SS. AJ is the 21st best Catcher. Crazy Carl was just as valuable as Pods. Chris Capuano won 18 games, but only has 12 WS, even though he was 4th in the NL in wins.

I just found it funny how someone can make this into a bad deal for the Sox. If they traded Jon I can see how some can say it was a good move and how some could say it was a bad move, but I never could see how signing him to a 3 year deal can be considered ludicrous. BTW, Garland was also 7th among all pitchers in Win Shares in 2005. NL Cy Young Carpenter - 18, AL Cy Young Colon - 19.

Here are some quotes from Mike's Baseball Rants about the Garland deal: An unqualified success? He tries to show that Garland had a bad 2nd half compared to his 1st half. What a discovery! Ludicrous contract? Under an average of $10 million a year for 3 yrs after guys like Burnett and Millwood got and average $11 and $12 million for 5 YEARS! How is that ludicrous. Wow, another freakin math wiz. That is a complete apples to oranges comparison. The only true comparison is with current contracts signed this year. Another great secret, but 21 Win Shares on a team with 99 wins can be better than a guy with 25 Win Shares on a team with 85 wins. BTW, MB had 23 WS in 2005, Garcia and Count had 18, so I guess those guys are overpaid too. http://mikesrants.baseballtoaster.com/archives/308868.html Your thoughts.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 01:29 PM) One of the things about steroids is that you can find different steroids which will do different things to your body. There are steroids like THG, which seem to make your body explode like happened to Bonds & Sosa, but then there are others like Winstrol which supposedly help you add muscle mass and strengthen your body but without making yourself look like the governnor of California - your body doesn't explode. There's lots of ways to be a "true" roid guy, and I believe even Canseco's book says that the reason Raffy took Winstrol was that he didn't want to look like a monster. That kind of makes sense, but why wouldn't everyone just take Winstrol so it doesn't look so obvious.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 01:11 PM) The only reason I still have doubt that Raffy took steroids is that there is really no reason for him to keep up this charade anymore. Whats the point for Raffy? This guy has made his money and had a good career. And if his career was close to being over before this happened, it must be over now. Why does he want to keep pushing it? If knowingly he did it, you would think he would just come clean and say "Man I screwed up, I saw my career slipping away and tried for one more glory season.", and just walk away from the game. The most unfortunate thing for Raffy is the only proof anywhere is in his test that he failed. He has nothing on Tejada except a story. It just seems to not be worth it for Palmeiro to drag it out this long if he really did it. The only point by denying it is to save face. If he admits it, he would have zero chance at the Hall of Fame. That seems to be his only reasoning, unless he really didn't do it.

It is really hard to believe that someone would go in front of Congress on National TV and state that they never did steroids, surpass a major Baseball milestone, then get caught doing steroids in about a 4 month time frame? Something seemed really odd about the whole situation when it went down. I am pretty sure that he did take some type of performance enhancer, but he never looked like a true roid guy like Giambi, Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, or Canseco. Those guys looked like they were on roids, Raffy never did, but his numbers definitely reflect something happened to him in the early 90's. He went from hitting 8 HR's in a full season in 1989 to hitting 37 in 1993, then hit 38 or more HRs from 1995 - 2003. Sosa - 15 HRs in 1990, then hit between 35 and 66 HRs from 1995 - 2004. The years are ironically similar.

WTF? Your Results: Timo Perez's critical flyout in the Bottom of the 8th of Game 1 of the ALDS vs Boston. This flyout propelled the Chicago White Sox to a 14-2 win and eventually a World Series Championship. You are barely even known and sometimes get carded to enter your own house. People like to use your name in palindromes. OMIT TIMO.

QUOTE(GasHeGone @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:23 PM) f*** it...let's trade bmac and count for tejada Then you put Uribe on the bench? Trading B-Mac would be the equivalent to the Cubs trading a young Dontrelle Willis - a horrible move! KW sure has everyone speculating now. I thought Jon was gone for sure, but getting him for 3/29 compared to Burnett 5/55 and Millwood 5/60 looks like a steal.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Dec 28, 2005 -> 03:19 PM) FACT: You can never have too much starting pitching!! FACT: People will b**** here no matter what!!

Sorry, color blind.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 02:13 PM) You're a Marlins fan? In all honesty, I don't see him coming back. It is highly unlikely that he would come back, but I guess you never know. If Anderson tanks and the Sox go looking for a Veteran Outfielder, then maybe. He could come back in Free Agency, but I don't see him coming back with the other guys waiting in the wings. He probably has as much of a chance coming back as Frank does.

QUOTE(rangercal @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 03:24 PM) Where do we vote? We can't vote, unless you're one of the 550+ voting members. Otherwise, you just wait for the results.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 26, 2005 -> 02:40 AM) The Sox won 73% of their regular season games when Pods was caught stealing. I've been saying this for years, but caught stealings are where it's at. The Sox had a 1.000 Winning percentage when Pods stole a base AND was caught stealing in the same game. The bottom line is if the Sox were running (stealing or getting caught), they were putting enough pressure on the other team to win at least 72%-73% of their games.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 02:39 AM) Yes, they are. I know you love Pods and all but in general SBs are overrated. SB's are overrated? By who? I would have to disagree. The Sox won 72% of their games when Pods stole a base, and only 58% when he did not. They won their last 13 games (including post season) when Pods stole a base. They were also 5-8 during the August slump without him in the lineup (including 6 straight losses). The SB sets up the offense and makes everything better. It makes a single or walk into an extra base hit, it reduces the amount of sacrifices needed to score, and it puts added pressure on the pitcher. Stolen bases by themselves are not going to win you ball games, but if you couple them with timely hitting, then they become multipliers.

Another hilarious article. Is this guy seriously drunk? or does he think it is April 1st? The Sox give up one SP (Garland/Contreras/Garcia/Vazquez), four prospects (Borchard, Rogowski, Munoz, and Charles Haeger), and they only get back Bedard, Ohman, and either Hill or Guzman. Riggghhhttt. Normally anything that is posted has to go thru an editor, so I guess he slipped this by them:

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 06:05 PM) The Colts went 0-5 in the preseason. Anyone trying to draw anything from that just doesn't make sense. It does, because the Bears actually got to play against the Colts on the field. This beats just watching them on film. So the actually outcome of the game doesn't really matter, but the actual experience against the opponent does. The Bears only allowed 7 points in one half against the Colts 1st team offense, and the Bears defense is on all cylinders right now. The Bears were also using Hutchinson and Orton at QB, and Thomas Jones did not play. The Bears were missing both of their starting safeties for the first time, which are both critical against the run. So the Steelers exploited that weakness. Very similar to how an "on the bubble" team made Peyton look like Eli all game. Everyone as bad games, but it will be interesting to see how each team responds down the stretch.

I know pre-season doesn't mean anything, but the Bears did beat the Colts this pre-season in Indy. From what I remember the Colts were getting knocked around a lot. A Colts-Bears Superbowl would be the most entertaining of the teams currently in the hunt. Seattle is really the only legitimate threat in the NFC, and who knows how the AFC will play out. Too bad Houston blows or we could have had another CHI - HOU Championship.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 05:12 PM) i personally like this deal, bc bedard is a young lefty who we could use out of the bullpen this year, and could start next year. you throw in a prospect and im sold. we could lock up bedard for years. He is the same age as Garland, but I believe has higher upside. Bedard has been in the league less than Garland, so the White Sox would have more leverage contract wise for a few more years... and he sure won't cost 10 mil a season. Yeah, if you throw in a top prospect from one of the other teams then it becomes more reasonable; but Garland straight up for Bedard would be a loss.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 05:26 PM) Well, let's just say I'm less impressed by Byrd and Johnson than Millwood and Elarton. Definitely a downgrade IMO. Byrd seems to be over the hill and Johnson has never impressed me.

Losing Garland straight up for Bedard would be a horrible loss for the Sox. Yeah they are reducing payroll, but there is no way you can compare Bedard to Garland: Bedard started out 5-1 with a 2.08 ERA, and had 52 Ks to 14 BBs. Then he got hurt. After the injury, he goes 1-7 with a 5.44 ERA and 73 Ks to 43 BBs. That looks like 2 different pitchers. It seems like he is a high risk high reward pitcher.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 02:37 PM) You're reading it wrong.. The Orioles would get Ramirez & Garland. Your right, I typed Garland on the wrong line (fixed).

Why would the Sox do this? The Boston Globe is out of their minds. O's lose Tejada and Bedard - gain Ramirez, Garland??? Red Sox lose Ramirez - gain Prior Cubs lose Prior - gain Tejada Sox lose Garland - gain Bedard??? Riigghhttt! http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/reds...lookout/?page=2