NorthSideSox72

Anderson in LF? He was RF the other day. What happened to the "Anderson won't be a backup" thing? This is a little upsetting. Its like they are putting Anderson and Erstad in the opposite roles they should be in. I'm not sure if that's better or worse than Anderson in AAA and Terrero as the 4th OF. Maybe better because he could more easily become the starter, maybe worse because he won't be getting the playing time.

Mackowiak has never played an inning, majors or minors, at C. Just checked, out of desperation. In case anyone was curious.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:33 PM) He's 33 year old journeyman catcher whom the Sox signed to a MLC after trading away Chris Stewart. How's his D? The stats never tell the whole story on that aspect. Boy, the depth really isn't there for catchers in our system, is it? I like Donny Lucy, but he isn't ready.

Wow, no AAP page on Wiki Gonzalez. Anyone got some background beyond the stats?

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:04 PM) Charlie Haeger, 2006 stats 3.44 ERA 4.91 UERA ...you know, just saying That seems to happen a lot to knucklers, no? That is definitely something to consider. Also, I wonder what that spread is for other pitchers at the AAA level.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:17 PM) Hall hit .292 vs LHP last year, and is a .274 career hitter vs LHP. Chris Widger was actually a damn good hitter for the first half of the season. Corrected. I meant Erstad. Typed too quickly and had Hall on the brain.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:11 PM) DARIN ERSTAD, isn't that one of the reasons they brought him in? He's supposed to be Gload except capable of playing the OF as well. Hall Erstad vs lefties last year: .192. Last three years: .238. Again, like Mack, not the comparison to make. Against LHP, if Thome sits, Hall or Perez were the best bench options available for 1B. And Perez was not yet on the 25 (though he may be now). EDIT: HA! I meant Erstad against lefties.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:09 PM) Perez played the last two days. Then I stand corrected on that point. And now with Hall out, he's probably more likely to make the team (and probably less likely that Anderson makes it). But Perez was certainly no lock to make the team.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:07 PM) Who do you want to see as our back-up now? Hopefully they find a way that he can rehab this and only miss a few months. If it is in fact a torn labrum, its a scope and about 3 months of recovery and PT, then some time getting stretched out and back to normal after that. And you can't start throwing really until the end of that 3 month period. Plus it takes some time to get 100% of your strength back. That was my experience anyway. That puts him in minor league rehab in maybe July, and if things go well, back to the team August-ish.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:03 PM) We got like 4 deep b4 Hall at 1st base. Paulie, Mack, Perez, Ozuna. I dont know why Toby ever would have needed to play 1st base. Unless, as was discussed earlier, Perez doesn't make the team (he still hasn't played since he got hurt, I believe). And Mack can't really hit lefties well. Therefore, he makes sense as an occasional start over there against LHP, if he can defend the position (which I honestly don't know if he can or not).

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 02:00 PM) How often does a catcher have to dive for a ball? Thus, is it safe to say that maybe Hall isn't used to having to dive? Now you're just picking. You know darn well that catcher is a position more apt to injuries of various kinds than 1B, and that was my point. And catchers have to move around all over the place in all sorts of awkward ways. Do they dive for ground balls? Obviously not. They do all sorts of other risky things, though. Playing a guy at 1B to see if he can play there, in ST, is not like putting him in traffic. with his hands and feet tied up.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 01:53 PM) Give me a break. He's not a first baseman, plain and simple. He has two freaking career at-bats in the majors at the position. He had no clue what he was doing there, as you could tell on the first play when he stretched the wrong way on a routine play. I'm not blaming Ozzie to make myself feel better....I'm blaming Ozzie because an idiotic decision lost us an integral part to this team. No, a freak injury (how often does a 1B tear something diving?) lost us an integral part of the team. And he's had more than 2 AB's as a 1B this spring so far, so it seems Ozzie was considering him as a backup plan there. Finding out if he could be useful there is the sort of thing you are supposed to do in ST. I'm as pissed as anyone else he is hurt, but blaming Ozzie just doesn't make any sense.

QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 01:50 PM) From my experience with the labrum, if the diagnosis is made that it's torn, it's pretty obvious to see the tear. I can actually tell you from experience that's not always the case. They didn't see mine until they did an chemically-enhanced MRI. The X-Rays didn't show it. Is this diagnosis from the MRI or no? Anyone know?

That's f***ing great. Now we lose one of the upgrades we got this offseason, AND we get to listen to people blame Ozzie to make themselves feel better. How dare he play Hall at a position less risky than catcher to get some time on the field. That bastard.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 12:57 PM) Lets say a Ligue wanna be runs onto the field and starts gunning down Sox players, the first player he'd come in contact with is the firstbaseman. Do you really want to run the risk? That's what I thought.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 12:29 PM) All I'm going to say to support my case is this: Charlie's splits from last year. True. Also... 5.64 ERA in July, then 4.65 in August, including 1.56 in his last 3 outings. After his call-up mid-year, he went home and struggled, then got it together. That tells me something as well. Not disagreeing with what you are getting at, just pointing out that he didn't fall apart as the year went on, as the numbers seemed to indicate. He struggled after the call-up, then picked it up again.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 11:24 AM) I dunno, I think that Charlie probably has some more he could learn from AAA as well. Maybe more than Floyd, given how much time each of them has spent there. Charlie's still only 2 seasons removed from starting the year in high-A ball, and he did struggle for a lot of the 2nd half last year. He has to work on throwing more strikes with the knuckler, and he's only been throwing it for a couple years, so the more work, the better. Based on how they performed this spring, Floyd to the pen where Cooper gets to keep working with him and Haeger to AAA where he can work on throwing strikes is as good of a gamble as any other one we could have made. Floyd needs consistency and confidence, and he isn't getting those in the Sox' pen. Haeger needs a new challenge, after how well he did in AAA last year (his spring numbers I question, given the knuckle thing in dry high air), and still was almost as good as Floyd in ST. I guess I just see different needs in those two than you do.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 10:30 AM) I'm willing to bet you right now that Toby Hall doesn't get a single at bat at 1B this season, there is absolutely no reason for it. If Hall does start a game at 1B that means both of your catchers are playing in the game at the same time, something no manager likes to do especially since Hall has NO experience at that position. I can't think of a single good reason for Hall to be playing first, he won't be there during the regular season and it's an unfamiliar position to him, why even risk putting key player at a new position at the end of a late March game? If you want to see what he can do for you at 1B then have him start a B game at the position. He makes perfect sense, as long as Perez isn't on the roster (and I think he may not be), and as long as you don't DH him. He can slide from 1B to C just fine. If Thome has the day off, it leaves Ozzie an option. And Ozzie has already played him over there a couple times now (not sure exactly how many) in ST, which should tell you he is thinking about it. Hall will probably catch against LHP a lot, but they've also said they want AJ in there against lefties occasionally too. In those scenarios, if Thome sits, then Hall at 1B and PK at DH makes sense.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 10:17 AM) The problem with this war is it is more of a war of psychology then ever before. And, let's face it, Americans are wusses in the wars of psychology. We don't have the guts to stand up for our values anymore. B.S. Standing up for our values is why some of us despised this war from day 1. Going across the globe to topple a loathsome but irrelevant dictator who couldn't have harmed us if he wanted to, spending trillions and losing thousands of lives while making us less safe is NOT something I consider part of our good values.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 08:24 PM) I get so tired of seeing this line of thought. Unless the relievers are getting rocked, the batters aren't going to face the same reliever more than once. Our 9th inning guy is Jenks, and our 8th inning guys are Thornton and MacDougal. So Haeger comes into the 7th at the latest, probably relieving one of our non-flamethrowing starter. Maybe you missed the point. No one is syaing that batters are going to face the same reliever more than once. So as a hitter, you get 2-3 at bats against a starter (throwing, say, 90-92), then you get Haeger (65), then maybe one of Jenks/Thornton/MMac at the end, at 95+. Not every hitter will get that same lineup of pitchers of course, but some will. That is the line of thought, and it does have some validity.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 08:14 AM) Still, I believe our system fixes itself if we let it work. I think an impeachment trial would be a huge mistake and I frankly haven't seen enough that I would pin personally on Bush. I agree the system does work, almost all the time. And we've seen that with Bush. He has rejected any hint of concensus-building or cooperation, in favor of absolutism (which, unfortunately, is in vogue right now). The consequence is that he was able to get very little done from his agenda the last 2 Congresses, and now he is being threatened with taking away the checkbook.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 08:06 AM) I believe every President has felt that way, most have been better at hiding it (Clinton) or just giving them money (Reagan). It's part of the balance and works pretty damn good. I don't think so. There is a difference between wanting your way all the time (which yes, every Prez does), and actually thinking of yourself as being above the process. Clinton worked the process really well, and got a lot out of Congress by playing the game. Bush just ignores them, and the Supreme Court, and anyone else in his way. There is an important difference there.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 26, 2007 -> 07:52 AM) Two thoughts for the price of one post. Impeachment would be a terrible thing and I have not seen enough to warrant impeachment. As soon as I read my Spidey senses pop up and I start to weigh these comments against what votes is he trying to pick up, if any. This may indeed be about his Presidential positioning. But I still agree with him. Bush thinks he is a king, and Congress is only an inconvenience for him.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 06:19 PM) Would that have been the case without the video considering she only suffered bumps and bruises? Who knows. The option would still have been there of course, but maybe if its not out there on TV for all to see (and there would also be far less evidence), the prosecutor aims lower. That's part of the process. But since he's a cop, and its male on female, assuming there were willing witnesses, agg bat could still have been the charge.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 25, 2007 -> 07:51 PM) No, you play hardball with the government, and you let them know that the people who are harming other innocent people will get blown into their next life. It kills me that you all are so ready to run out of there to let the power vaccuum to begin. "ohhhhh there's just NOTHING we can do but get out". It sickens me that you all give up so easy. Maybe we should have said the same thing in World War II. There's alternatives, there's ALWAYS alternatives, except to those who want to say "America has lost." OK, whatever. Let's just bury our heads up our collective asses, run away, and let the people who want to do us harm bomb the s*** out of us in our own towns. It will happen. WWII? Run away and hide? Iraq is going to bomb us? A little over the top, no? If you are so convinced there are "alternatives", then I'd like to hear one. I mentioned one earlier - Kurdistan. But I really see no others, and even that one has major risks. What would you suggest? Are you saying we should just stick it out as-is, despite the fact that there is no sign of it getting better?