Felix

No, and it won't even be close and shouldn't be up for debate. 12 seasons in Cleveland with a career .287/.414/.567/.982 line compared to 4 seasons in Chicago at .267/.396/.547/.942. //thread

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 11:54 PM) Why are people blowing up more about Wise's comments than Fields'? Because one of them has an OPS above .600 while the other has an OPS+ of -10 and is still starting. Yes, -10. I don't like what Fields said either, and I certainly think he's having an awful season, but when you are doing as bad as Wise is this year, there is absolutely no excuse for defending your performance.

QUOTE (bschmaranz @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 11:08 PM) I plan on booing the s*** out of him in Milwaukee on Sunday. I'll be doing the same at both weekend games.

I cannot wait for the day this asshole is released.

I think this is a bad decision, but I'll leave it at that and just be hopeful he does well.

You guys don't know what you're talking about. Whenever you bunt, you get a 3-run HR. It's called manufacturing runs.

I'm so glad we bunt so much.

QUOTE (Gregory Pratt @ Jun 7, 2009 -> 11:18 AM) If you look at all the numbers, Glavine is nowhere near Johnson's league. Neither is Carlton, for what it's worth.

We should clearly bunt more.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 6, 2009 -> 08:43 PM) I'm pretty sure GM's don't make trades based on players rankings in BA's top 100 prospects and the grades John Sickels gives them. No one in their right mind would trade Aaron Poreda for Gorksy Hernandez. I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm just saying that it's pretty obvious that the Pirates didn't get nothing back. That is, of course, unless people posting on a White Sox message board know more than people who do this for a living, but nothing has given me any reason to believe that.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Jun 6, 2009 -> 02:00 PM) First, McLouth didn't cost Atlanta any top prospects. And it certainly wouldn't have cut into the Sox' offering of Richard and Poreda in a deal for another top starter, if such a deal were to materialize. In other words, McLouth was had by Atlanta at the cost of no player who was likely to even play for Atlanta in the near future. I realize this post isn't the most recent, but this has been said multiple times by various people and it's getting annoying. Unless you are a scout that has done full research on these players, including seeing them yourself multiple times, I don't see how you can say this. Gorkys Hernandez was considered one of the top 100 prospects in baseball by BA before this season (RANKED ONE SLOT HIGHER THAN POREDA), while Locke was ranked 7th in their organization. Considering the fact that the Braves have a fairly deep system, it's safe to say that both of them are considered to be pretty good prospects. Both of them were graded as B-'s by John Sickels, and for comparisons sake, he ranked Poreda a B+, Flowers a B and Jordan Danks a C+. I'm not saying he's completely correct, but when you consider the fact that other sites and scouts have what appear to be similar opinions of them, it starts to add up to them being fairly solid prospects. But yeah, you are more than welcome to ignore all of this and keep saying that the Pirates got nothing. I don't really care, I'm getting tired of repeating this in every McLouth thread.

QUOTE (Cubano @ Jun 6, 2009 -> 08:59 AM) I got a daughter who I tutor with her school work and it is paying big dividends for her. I just had a son. I am driving a mini van to complete my american dream. Thinking about buying a second home. I am too busy living the American dream. I wish I had more time. I come to this blog almost daily and read your posts though. American dream: 1. Have a job. 2. Have a home. 3. Drive a mini van. You should have talked to Hunter S. Thompson while he was alive. You could have saved him some time.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 12:00 PM) Indeed. I'm biased, but I'd take 1993-2004 Randy over both of them. Dominance is great, but dominance over most of a decade (with the first third in a hitter's park in the AL) is pretty much the definition of a HOFer. I'm still pissed that Randy got screwed out of the '04 NL Cy Young... would've been his sixth. As long as we're cherry picking years, I'd take Maddux from 1992 to 2002 over those years from Randy. Threw slightly more innings in one less year (2576.1 vs 2550) while having a higher ERA+ (171 vs 166), higher K/BB (4.53 vs 4.27) and lower HR/9 (0.5 vs 0.8). Add in the fact that Maddux's two best years during that time are far better than anything Johnson ever has done in his career, and it's not really close between the two in my opinion. If you want to tack on another season for Maddux to make it an even number of seasons, the numbers still favor Maddux. Going from '91 to '02 this time, Maddux has far more innings (2839.1 to 2550), with basically an identical ERA+ (164 vs 166), slightly higher K/BB (4.32 vs 4.27) and slightly lower HR/9 (0.5 vs 0.8). None of this even mentions Maddux's glove, which was considered one of the best in the league. To be fair to Johnson, this glosses over his incredible advantage in strikeouts (11.8 K/9 to Maddux's 6.7), but I think that advantage gets nulled a bit due to the increased walk rate (2.8 vs 1.5). Johnson also threw the same number of complete games as Maddux in those 12 season periods, despite having 49 less starts. So really, what I'm trying to say is that while Randy Johnson was great during those years, I'd give the slight edge to Maddux. Both were fantastic pitchers in their prime though, you couldn't go wrong with either one. Oh, and since I've posted a fair amount in this thread without saying it, congrats to Randy for the accomplishment. I don't really care at all about wins as a stat, but it's still a pretty remarkable thing for someone to do especially when you consider how hard it really is to do. Not only do you need to be a damn good pitcher, but you need to be on a good enough team that you won't get screwed out of wins. It's certainly not easy, and he deserves an enormous amount of credit for getting there. Also: I fully agree that Randy got screwed in 2004. I don't think it's even close between him and Clemens that year, Randy had a far better year while throwing a bunch more innings. Unfortunately for him, he got more than a run less per start from his offense than Clemens, leading to less wins.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 5, 2009 -> 12:44 AM) And this came during the apex of the 'roid ERA. Making these performances even more astonishing. This is really nitpicking. But I'll go with Pedro's 99 over Maddux's '94 and '95. If only because of the ridiculous offensive numbers AL teams were putting up then. The league average for HR's and runs for AL teams in 1999 was 188 and 837. Those are staggering totals. The NL averages from '94 and '95, and any other year from that time for that matter, don't even come close. ERA+ adjusts for ballpark and era, and Maddux's '94 and '95 both are better than Pedro's '99. But yeah, the fact that Pedro did what he did in the middle of the steroid era is absolutely ridiculous. Back to back years of 8+ K/BB and a low HR/9 in the middle of the juicing era is ridiculously good. I don't think they get much better than Pedro was in 2000.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 11:55 PM) I think McLouth is getting to much bashing on here. He isn't this superstar player some in the media make him out to be, but he's a good, solid player. He isn't a stud in CF and not GG caliber, but he's decent. He has very good speed and can steal about 20-30 bags a year. Also, he's got good pop and run producing ability and he can knock 20+ homers, get a lot of doubles, and drive in a good amount (depending on where he's batting in the lineup). Superstar? No, but a very solid player. I don't think anyone is denying that he's a solid player (.800-.810 OPS with slightly below average defense), but he's certainly incredibly overrated (especially by Pirates fans) and not worth a package of our top prospects.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 09:50 PM) No, but none of them can match the 2 single seasons he put up in 99-00. Greg Maddux from 1994 and 1995 says hi. It's pretty much impossible to match Pedro's 2000 season, but I'd take Maddux from both of those years over Pedro in 1999. Of course, when you're debating between a 271 and 262 ERA+ and a 243 and 291 ERA+, it's all amazing anyway and I'd be more than happy to take any of them

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 07:25 PM) Disagree. ESPN BBTN classified this trade as a steal for Atlanta and that McClouth is a good talent. I don't think they gave up that much to get the guy. Oh man. If BBTN says it, it must be true! The Pirates are doing exactly what they should be doing and building for the future. That means trading the pieces like McLouth that aren't long-term answers for a bevy of prospects, which is exactly what they did. Both Hernandez and Locke are highly rated prospects, and Morton could probably go into their rotation right away. Some people don't like this deal because it makes them a worse team today, but it puts their organization in a better position for the future which is exactly what they should be worrying about. Obviously trading players that are already developed and in the majors for prospects is going to be a risk, but that doesn't make it an awful trade. For what it's worth, here's Keith Law's take on it from a chat today:

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 04:31 PM) Poreda is better than anything offered, so is danks. So no, that statement isn't true felix. From everything I've read, both Jeff Locke and Gorkys Hernandez are considered pretty solid prospects. I might give you that Poreda is a better prospect than Locke, but it's not like the guys the Pirates got are scrubs or anything. I only know what I've been reading, but it seems like we would have had to overpay a lot to get him, and frankly McLouth isn't worth that. And for the record, BA has Gorkys Hernandez ranked as the 62nd best prospect in their 2009 rankings. #63? Poreda.

The Sox couldn't have matched that offer unless we offered Poreda, Jordan Danks and something else. Plus, McLouth is incredibly overrated. So yeah.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 03:05 PM) Can we get rid of Kenny and hire someone from the Twins organization. I could only imagine what they could do with a sizable payroll to work with.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 02:49 PM) Nix not doing anything to earn playing time. Maybe if he bunted more, the guys behind him would hit HRs.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 02:21 PM) The bunt there did not manufacture a run it manufactured three. This is an incredibly silly statement and I refuse to take you seriously.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 02:13 PM) Then they should not do them. If they are going to do them, then do them consistently if they are not, then don't. They attempted to bunted in the first inning Tuesday. That'd be fine by me. And f***.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Jun 4, 2009 -> 02:06 PM) Why not bunt there? This team makes no sense with the situational things they do. Balk Probably has to do with bunts being a stupid, stupid play this early in the game and Beckham being a non-worthless player at the plate. Just a guess though.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jun 3, 2009 -> 10:50 PM) I heard. I'm so excited!! Finally a very high (top 10), can't miss spect WE developed has arrived. No one is can't miss. Don't get too caught up in this, as excited as this is.