NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 03:00 PM) Ok, now we're getting somewhere. This is positive if it can be proven last year's renewal rate was 50% No one outside some people within the Sox org can ever truly "prove" that, and you know it. They are under no obligation to publish those numbers in any official way, so all you have is their word. Last year they were saying numbers much lower than they are this year, so, were the lying then to? If by the same amount, this year still looks better. We'll have to see how attendance goes.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 02:00 PM) Nice list and insights. I agree with the evaluation of Kevan Smith. I was happy when we got him in the draft and I think he'll be playing at the Cell sooner than later. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 02:05 PM) It really feels like we have put some high level catching celings into the system over the last couple of drafts in Smith and Ayala. I like Smith, but at 25 years old, he needs to hit in AA at least, before I start thinking about him being a likely catcher of the future. Hopefully he does that, and I think he can. The way they've been moving him up, he may very well start in B-Ham, and if hits well, go to AAA Charlotte midseason. Phegley needs to watch his back.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 09:47 PM) Nothing worse than when you try to turn on sports talk radio and instead you get spring training baseball. Brutal. Forgot the green?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 10:39 AM) I think it's pretty much all but certain Santiago will be the longer reliever/spot starter to start the season. I think they really like the flexibility of having a 3rd lefty in the pen, even if his primary role will be a multi-innings guy and not a situational guy. Otherwise, I think you got the AAA rotation nailed down: Axelrod, Rienzo, Castro, Molina, & Leesman. Not sure if Shirek is still around, but he started 20 plus games last year as well. That could leave Stewart with a relief role. Shirek went to Korea. I don't think they care about a 3rd lefty, a lot of teams have only one, the rest usually two. And the team has said, repeatedly, it sees Santiago as a starter. Therefore, I feel pretty strongly they will have him starting in Charlotte, or even with the big club if Danks isn't ready yet (then back to Charlotte after that). Axelrod or Stewart are the more likely long men, IMO.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 03:49 PM) Add him to the growing list of failed white sox prospects who were ex college quarterbacks. Clayton Richard has done pretty well.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 10:09 AM) I imagine he will be a starter at Charlotte. I kinda doubt it. The Sox have at least 5 real, actual prospects that will be starting in Charlotte - Santiago, Castro, Molina, Leesman, Axelrod, probably Rienzo. That's already a crowd, even if one of them ends up being the long man out of the pen. My guess is that Stewart goes into ST vying for the long reliever spot (the only one open in the pen), and either he gets it, or Axelrod does and Stewart is in the pen in Charlotte. I just have a hard time believing he bumps any of those guys out of the way.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:27 AM) I could have believed that when Escobar was the primary backup, but by the end of the season, who did you want in there? Jose Lopez or Roy "I can't run to first" Olmedo? Lopez, Flowers, Hudson and even Johnson should have all played more, IMO. Forget Olmedo, he was useless.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:07 AM) Basically, I'm thinking back to last year, how bad our bench wound up being (particularly after Escobar was traded), how it wound up with Robin having no confidence in it, and how that probably contributed to guys wearing down at the end of the season. I mean, .240 average, sub.600 OPS last year isn't a hard sell, so can you tell me he'll be any better than that? I think you may have the chicken-egg relationship backwards here. Part of the reason the bench bats did so poorly is that Robin didn't play them enough - that was, IMO, one of Ventura's biggest mistakes last year.

I'm with wite, Angel Sanchez isn't a bad guy for that role. Current bench: Angel Sanchez (3B, SS, 2B) Hector Gimenez © Dewayne Wise (all OF) I think those three are pretty good for what they are supposed to be... but I would love the Sox to find a way to get another LHH infielder in there, and I do think they'll find someone like that. I feel pretty good about Gimenez, as backup C's go, and Wise is pretty good as the OF. Sanchez won't hit a ton but doesn't need to.

QUOTE (Middle Buffalo @ Jan 14, 2013 -> 11:32 AM) My 2cents: 1. I am not sure how I feel about Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, Clemens, etc as HOF players. I don't mind them being on the ballot and waiting while the case is argued. 2. Baseball writers are as guilty as anyone for the "epidemic" of steroids. There's no way PEDs were as prevalent as some players have suggested, and everyday beat writers weren't aware of it. They chose to ignore it. There's always a player or two who leaks info to the media, and it happened in this case also. Writers could have written the story, but they weren't brave enough to do it. It could have been done without naming names, also. They could have just used statistical evidence and let the public decide. Instead, they were busy writing stories about shrinking ballparks, tighter winding of the baseball, etc. 3. Whenever we compare guys like Raines and Lofton, someone will say "different eras." Wouldn't it actually be harder to have success if you were playing clean in the PED era? 4. Mark McGwire - skinny kid. Mark McGwire, skinny kid hit 49 HRs as a rookie. I still believe he 'roided. I also believe he intentionally left andro (legal supplement at the time) in his locker so he could use that as and excuse for size/power increase. 5. I always hated the argument that steroids don't make you able to hit the ball. That's usually the jock rebuttal. PEDs helped them hit the ball farther. Warning track flyouts became 5th row homeruns. Goes hand in hand with the stories of how hard guys like Clemens and Bonds worked out. Isn't recovery one of the benefits of PEDs - making longer/harder workouts possible? Bonds, by the way, is listed as 6'1"/185 lbs in baseball reference. 6. Whenever someone says that they don't know if they would have voted for Sammy or Palmeiro (and I've heard that this week) even if there wasn't a cloud of suspicion, I think that writer should have their vote taken away. Sammy and Palmeiro's lifetime numbers are pretty good historically. One guy hit 600+ HRs, and the other had 550+ and more than 3000 hits. If Palmeiro put up his numbers in NY, we'd never stop hearing about him. http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/sco...almera01:Rafael Palmeiro&st=career&compage=&age= Hell, he was so good that he won a Gold Glove as a DH. 7. The argument is always made that Clemens and Bonds were HOF before they started taking PEDs. Depends when they started. If you believe the reports, Bonds started after the 1998 season. How do we know he didn't start in 1993 (or sooner) when he moved to SF? Isn't that the home of BALCO? Who knows for sure? But, if you go by the 1998 start date, sure he was a HOF player. He still cheated for about a third of his career. Clemens is a little more tricky. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/clemero02.shtml He was falling apart physically when he left Boston. By most accounts, he started using around the time he went to Toronto. Look at his stats. As soon as he arrived in Toronto, he got healthy and became a great pitcher again. He left Boston at 33 with a 192-111 record, and he was fading fast. Those are not HOF numbers. How many wins would he have ended up with? 240? Is 240-150 a HOF record? It wouldn't have been based on the 300 W/500 HR markers that were guarantees before the steroid era. From age 34 on (when he reported to Toronto), Clemens went 162-73. 8. Eye test - Piazza juiced. He had improbable power to all fields, and if you work backwards you could easily put him on the list of guys who cheated. If he or any other player wasn't a cheater but stayed silent, too bad for them. Their silence contributed to the inability to statistically compare players numbers through the history of MLB. 9. Ultimately, PED abuse led to higher salaries because agents negotiated tainted statistics vs. the historic numbers. So, if a player is negotiating a contract and he has numbers that compare with guys in the HOF, they were awarded higher salaries. Higher salaries = higher ticket prices = Avg. Joe fan being priced out of the game. I don't feel sorry that they won't be able to sign HOF on a autograph that they sell in the future. These guys got rich while they were pricing me out of the game. 10. I used to think Pete Rose should be in the HOF because he bet after he played. Now I don't think so. He knew he was breaking the rules, and he thought he was above the law. If he serves as a cautionary tale, all the better. 11. This year is kind of the perfect storm of PED abusers being eligible at the same time. Next year Maddux, Glavine, and Thomas are eligible. Randy Johnson, Smoltz, and Pedro are the season after. Griffey the following season. Those guys and players like Raines, etc who are close will make for some decent classes. It will get interesting again in 2017 when Pudge Rodriguez, Manny, and Vlad Guerrero are 1st time eligibles. 12. Finally, I don't know what it says about me that I love both MLB and NFL, and I'm sure that PED use in football is equal to, and probably greater than, what it is in baseball, and I don't really care that football players cheat. To me, it's all about loving the numbers of baseball historically and being able to say that Ken Griffey, Jr. is doing something that hasn't been done since Willie Mays, or Randy Johnson compares favorably to Bob Feller. It put players in context for me historically. I guess, in a way, Barry Bonds cheating to surpass Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron's power numbers just goes to show haow great they were, but it bothers me to see his name next to, actually above, their names. I don't agree with all of your points, but this is a great post.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 03:06 PM) My guess is that Don Cooper sees something in Stewart that he really likes and wants another chance to try and develope this in him. I agree. But I also am willing to be they are going to try to make him a reliever again.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 10:38 PM) Holy f***, I'm so sick of the trolling and pessimism on this board. People don't have to be overly positive about this team, but for the love of god please support your negative outlooks with some logic, reason, and/or stats. KC finished 13 games behind us last year. They added one very good SP and two s***ty ones. If you really think KC will win more games than us next year, please go through their roster and our roster and then show us all where their gains and our regressions add up to 13 games. Otherwise, stop with the god damn b****ing and worry about the team ahead of us on paper that is Detroit. Thank you. KC made one big add, and has a few young players who could mature into bigger hitters.... they also have a rotation that is medicore overall, and weaker in the back than almost any in baseball, and still have a number of huge holes in the lineup. The Sox got a 3B who is very likely to be an upgrade over what they got in 2012 full season, get Danks back, and other than at catcher have what looks to me like a better bench so far. Is it possible KC beats out the Sox? Yeah. Likelihood? About 1 chance in 10, at best.

Thanks for all that. I particularly like these... QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 02:37 PM) -Season ticket sales are "hundreds of points" ahead of where they were at this time last year. Boyer did expect that to mean not as big of a single game sales today, but he felt that many people who would usually wait for today and buy a few games were going ahead and buying 7 or 14 game plans to get the seats they wanted, and the games they wanted ahead of time because of the new pricing structure. Season ticket renewal rates were "90%+" this off season. The rebalanced pricing to some extent after finding their high end tickets were on the cheap end of MLB, and their cheap seats were among the most expensive. Despite the increases in the diamond and platinum areas, their renewal rates were 99+%. -Despite the Angels and Yankees leaving Stubhub, the Sox have no plans to do so. They do see them as a partner. -The team is taste testing 7-8 new concessions items as possibilities for 2013. They have not changed pricing, but they were concerned about the amount of complaints the year end survey had about food quality versus pricing, and they are pushing their vendors to fix that. If season tickets are renewing north of 90%, and 99%+ for the most expensive seats... and they are putting on many times over the number of new season ticket plans... it seems very likely the net season ticket base will be higher this year than last. That's a very good thing. Stub hub thing is good for us season ticket holders who can't go do every game (who does?), and gives us an avenue to unload unused tickets. Also psyched about the food. Seemed like it had gone downhill a bit in recent years, so its nice they are working on that.

QUOTE (Jim Busby @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 02:49 PM) The first major signing for Paddy and his staff was Luis Martinez, a Venezuelan righthander who landed a $250,000 bonus in December. Martinez, a 17-year-old from Carupano who trained with Luis Blasini, is 6-foot-4, 195 pounds and physically reminiscent of former Dodgers righthander Ramon Martinez. After throwing 84-88 mph around July 2, he improved his velocity over the winter and now throws downhill with an 88-91 mph fastball that has hit 92. He has a big frame with long arms and plenty of room to fill out, so he should throw harder eventually. His high-70s curveball is his best secondary pitch but he'll mix in a changeup too. Martinez is expected to make his pro debut this year in the Rookie-level Arizona League. What Happen to this Pitcher???? Signed in 2011? If his only play so far has been in the Arizona development league, then his stats won't really show up anywhere yet. As an 18 year old this season, he might show up at one of the rookie affiliates, or possibly in the DSL. I haven't heard anything about his showing yet.

I'll open with this... the Sox released Mitch Mustain, per BA.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 03:03 PM) Here's this from the article, hope I'm not making people at BP angry Seems like his high ranking is mostly about a projectable frame and potential for breaking pitches, only one of which he throws now (and not that well). I fail to see how a guy like that is #9 in the system. But hey, its all opinions.

QUOTE (QuickJones81 @ Jan 23, 2013 -> 01:12 PM) Myles Jaye is a surprise in the top 10. Anyone else this high on him? I'm interested in what excites them about him. I questioned that in another thread. He's got a decent fastball and one good breaking pitch, along with an emerging change-up. But he has control issues as well. He's young. I think he's certainly worth keeping an eye on, but I don't get the 9th ranking at all.

Check it out here. Thoughts?

QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) I'm stumped (and at work...no time to research.). Please enlighten the class. As per the blacked out answer above, those are the payroll ranks for each World Series champion, for years I could get data for. There can be a lot of discussion about what those numbers do and don't mean, but here are a few things I think are obvious. First, spending the most money doesn't necessarily win you anything - the #1 payroll team won the championship just once in 12 years, and only three times in 12 years was it even a top 5 payroll team. Second, while money alone doesn't get you championships, spending SOME money gets you in the discussion. Note that all but one of those seasons, the winner was at least in the top half of baseball for payroll. Spending a whole ton of money is no guarantee of success.

Story.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 09:15 AM) Also interesting that Barnum is down all of the way at 10. I can understand that more than I can Jaye at 9. Barnum is all or nothing, most likely. He is a big-power prospect at 1B, and he's very young. Maturing into real power is hard to do, and at 1B with little else to go on right now, he has to do that to succeed. So I get that, purely as a look at high bust potential. Jaye wouldn't even be in my top 25. He's got control issues, not much velocity, and only one reliable breaking pitch. He also didn't do so well in 2012 in A ball, got hit around a lot, walked a lot of guys. That's not to say he isn't an interesting guy to watch - I just don't get the 9th ranking at all.

QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 22, 2013 -> 08:50 AM) There are intelligent "posters" like Eminor3 who offer astute analyses and address issues, while there are "posters" like you who just like to criticize me (and others), if they don't agree with you. I started a thread just for you. You should check out the "Fun with Numbers" thread.

BP Top 10 published. Myles Jaye at 9? Interesting. FS Top 25 comes out later today.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 02:59 PM) Iowa State's starting to make me believe. I'm not convinced that they aren't the second best team in the Big 12 right now, and I suppose I'll find out a lot more against Kansas State next Saturday. I believe they are pretty good, but I wouldn't put them ahead of KSU yet. Saturday will definitely be fun. IState's B12 schedule so far doesn't really reflect a lot yet - they've played the hardest game on the slate (@ KU, lost in OT), and three should-win games against bottom feeders (admittedly some on the road, which is good). They need to play teams like KSU, OSU and OU to really get an idea where they stand. Hoiberg deserves a ton of credit.

Here's a fun exercise. Let's see who can tell me what these numbers represent... 2012: 8 2011: 11 2010: 10 2009: 1 2008: 12 2007: 2 2006: 11 2005: 13 2004: 2 2003: 25 2002: 15 2001: 8 And that's as far back as the data I was able to find goes. Lamar in particular... tell me what you think these numbers are.