ScottyDo

Ahh, so it begins...

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 03:41 PM) Don't kid yourself the rotation hasn't been good enough either. Rios and Dunn are going nowhere and there is at least some hope for Beckham. Rnk(AL) R/G R/G Against (rotation) 2011 11th 7th 2010 7th 8th 2009 12th 2nd 2008 5th 6th 2007 14th 11th Long story short, you're mostly right that the rotation hasn't been wonderful. However, we play in a hitter's park and 3 of the last 5 years we have been in the bottom 4 teams in the AL in runs scored. We have little to no power in the pipelines, while we have a few decent pitching prospects. All our power/production last year came from a guy in his mid 30's who will not be around much longer. Once PK's gone, I shudder to think what our offense will look like. With Viciedo and CQ out, too...who is gonna hit in the middle of our order? Are we seriously gonna have a 3-4-5 of Morel/Flowers/??? ? EDIT: I shouldn't say that we have a few decent pitching prospects, I should say that we have long-term control over a few decent young pitchers. Prospects would imply that they're in the minors, which are mostly barren.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 14, 2011 -> 11:09 PM) A couple of observations from that video: 1) Dude stood way off the plate. I think the game's changed in that respect. Batters cover the plate more now. 2) It's amazing how little Hawk's calls have changed since then. Except he didn't sound like he was likely to die just then. 3) If that happened today, they would have cut to commercial WAAAAY too early and a lot of the power of the moment would have been lost. Stupid commercials. Also, that was awesome. I wasn't a Sox fan yet; I wish I was, after seeing that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 03:25 PM) No one would give that up for Viciedo until he has a full, successful season at the MLB level. The sox have messed around with him and moved him around too much. I just don't even understand why we'd do that. Are we trying to be the all-pitching, no-hitting Sox of the last five -- largely mediocre -- years? A not yet 23 year-old with the talent of Viciedo is exactly the type of player the organization doesn't have enough of.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 03:16 PM) My contention is Viciedo or Ramirez might be able to bring the Sox that return. Hasn't our problem been hitting since '06? Alexei I can see, but Viciedo?

QUOTE (Reddy @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 02:48 PM) just watch his scouting videos... kid is a BEAST. 500 foot home runs Vertical jump better than Derrick Rose Athletic as hell Cannon for an arm Hits a HR to Left, then Center, then Right back to back to back. I officially want him. Here's One I'm no scout, but I'd put the kid on the 25-man roster. I saw that he hit a couple of bombs lefty just to show off...he's not a switch-hitter is he? That was just for demonstration purposes?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 02:34 PM) Teams do not give up potential top-of-the-rotation starters in trades very willingly. Indeed; draft, please! That's how we ended up with Sale.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 24, 2011 -> 02:05 PM) This is an oddball question, but I'm trying to buy tickets for my dad as a Christmas gift, but also as a family gift, and I have a soon to be 1-year old nephew. I would like to see the White Sox at Target Field, but have no idea what the hell they do with infants. It may be different between stadiums, but I imagine it's pretty much the same throughout. Anyways, does anyone know the Sox policy on this? I imagine the Twins is the same, but want atleast a little confirmation. My understanding is that the Twins and their fans eat babies, so I would either avoid Target Field entirely or get a fake mustache for the kid.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ Dec 22, 2011 -> 06:48 PM) I went straight here assuming there was no Dunn thread. My question was how much out of shape was he in regards to past years? I don't know, but I'm sure he'll be in the best shape of his life come March.

Law is being silly. I admit, it's somewhat perplexing, but this is a move you CAN do during a rebuild. You don't pass on talented young lefties long-term for less-than-market just because you're rebuilding. Does he assume that it was going to be a >5-year rebuild or something? Not saying I saw it coming, nor that I have any idea what's coming next. But because of the alluring numbers involved with this deal, I don't see this signing as contradicting either a rebuilding or contending mindset.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 21, 2011 -> 01:48 AM) How do you figure? We have Viciedo and Rios and Quentin, with Quentin likely to be traded. Unless you really want to go in to the season with a De Aza-Rios-Viciedo outfield. For me, I expect De Aza and Rios to be platooning for most of the year. Since I don't think Rios will be sitting much, this is actually what I'd like to see. I guess you never know how Ventura's gonna do things, though.

QUOTE (pktmotion @ Dec 18, 2011 -> 11:30 PM) Thank you. The Reds I thought matched up well for a possible Danks/Floyd/Thornton deal. After the Latos trade, they aren't an attractive trade partner anymore. People can talk about how "so many" teams are after SP, but it means nothing unless we match up well in a trade. At the end of the day, it was a lost opportunity. The only teams we wouldn't match up well with are ones looking to trade RP prospects, right? Are we flush enough at any other position that we would have trouble matching up with any team that wants Danks? Basically, I'm confused as to how any team that wants Danks would match up better than any other, as long as they have enough value within their system (which, pretty much all the rumored suitors do).

I really think people are overly concerned that we haven't traded more players yet. Look around, the trade market is still more than ample. There's no reason to rush about it.

QUOTE (Andrew @ Dec 16, 2011 -> 01:11 AM) How stupid are the Nats? They covet Buehrle, but then prioritize Gio over Danks???? They probably coveted Buehrle because he would cost money, not prospects. Then, once he's off the table and you have to start considering trades, they probably think Gio is the better player. That's not particularly dumb to me. However, Rizzo can suck it.

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 11:44 PM) Yes Will you be in trouble if you post any brief synopses? I don't know what the policy is on Insider material

QUOTE (sin city sox fan @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 11:36 PM) Yes Anything interesting?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 06:56 PM) The story is at least one pitcher on the staff last year thought Coop was looking out for himself in the last year of his contract and wasn't the 'same old Coop' until he got his extension. Like it or not, that perception is a legit story. As a stand-alone story, this premise -- lame as it is -- might stand. In the context of Cowley's career, it's an incredibly transparent move, and one that should be beneath a columnist for a large newspaper. I mean, I'm not looking for New York Times integrity out of a sports columnist for the second paper in town, but you'd think he'd have some pride in his craft, and the ability to see the larger context of the things he does. I see no evidence to that effect, though. All I see is an immature boy who craves praise and attention.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 04:26 PM) No, I don't think I am missing the point. I agree with what you are saying. The point is that he is a columnist, as has been pointed out here, and they have their take on things and it is jaded in many ways by their allegiances with certain people. I am not sure his opinions are completely invalid though as being right half the time is better than being wrong all the time I guess. I do think he gets a bit to personal and snotty in his columns. Here's where we disagree, I think. The reason you have columnists is because you value their ability to analyze a situation and come up with a solid explanation or unique perspective. But if they only ever look at half of the story, they are incapable of coming up with a solid explanation OR a unique perspective (it was only unique the first time they wrote). Here's a clumsy metaphor: Say you're an insurance adjuster and you have to do cost/benefit analyses, but you only ever look at the costs when writing your reports. In that case, I've entrusted you to come up with an answer based on all available evidence, but you never once come up with a good analysis. You're not half-right, you're always wrong.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 05:11 PM) I don't know how Joe Cowley is perceived in Chicago. I gather from fellow Soxtalk folks that he is not well liked. He does seem to like to stir things up a bit, but the questions I have on this Cooper stuff is: Is what John Danks said untrue? Did John Danks deny it or say it was taken out of context? Is it news to baseball fans? Now we have more similar type stories coming out albeit from a different writer. Jake Peavy is not to happy, but he does say he discussed his differences with Cooper. Is that news? Is it true? The difference to us here might be if one appears more critical of the Sox organization than the other. I have said it before and that's it is no secret there were differences and controversies last season internally. Maybe the problem is we don't like to see dirty laundry aired in public? Colwy takes a negative spin on things, but if ther ammo is there I guess he and other writers will take it, load it up in a story and shoot it. The team and organization needs to quit bashing itself and get back to being a winner. Maybe what w are seeing is just part of the healing process internally? You're missing the point. It's fine to be critical of the Sox organization if enough evidence points in that direction. There are plenty of articles critical of management that I have NO problem with. The reason Cowley is despised is not because he criticizes the Sox, but that his criticism is always informed by his own petty squabbles and allegiances. His opinions are invalid because he can't see through his own distortion.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 02:23 PM) It's called being a reporter. There's a Cowley-style half truth if I've ever seen one. You've got part of the reporter formula right...you do use quotes to advance a narrative. Unfortunately, the piece you're missing is what narrative to tell. You determine the narrative by observing a situation from as many angles as possible and determining the best way to summarize it. You do not, however, take a very obvious, long-standing agenda and establish your narrative around that. That's called being a BAD reporter. Columnists do that, but A) Cowley's been doing this same crap since he was a beat reporter. Nothing changed except his title and B) Columnists may spout opinions, but those opinions still need to be based on a convincing body of evidence, otherwise readers will call you out for all of the B.S. listed in this 10-page thread, and more. QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 02:33 PM) The hatred toward Cowley on here, it's as if he said something disparaging about Soxtalk. Clearly, you already know about that. I wasn't present for any of that and I still hate Cowley, because he's self-serving and his opinions are invalidated by his bitter, obstinate and vindictive personality. QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 15, 2011 -> 04:17 PM) Seriously though, he's such an insecure asshole. Cowley should just take his one man show to Miami already. Amen to that. I've never seen a guy yell so loudly that he doesn't care what anybody thinks. He'll go on radio shows and twitter for hours on end trying to convince everyone that he doesn't care about criticism (much like one Ozzie Guillen. Hmm...). Seriously, it's like he's still a child.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 02:28 PM) God darn it, Mr. Do, you use your tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore. Aww, shucks, Mr. Milkman

QUOTE (flavum @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 01:14 PM) Yes, Kenny and the entire coaching staff. At the very least, a new GM and let him make that decision. Kenny shouldn't have been given the opportunity to fix his own mess. It's ridiculous he's still there. It would be incredibly foolish to let the best part of our coaching staff go just so we can say that we joined the Clean Plate Club.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Dec 14, 2011 -> 01:11 PM) Yea, it's shoot the messenger around here regarding Cowley. Interesting info in the article regardless. We only shoot the messenger when the messenger editorializes a very obvious agenda. You can tell from the verbal contortions he puts his article through to cobble together a narrative from disparate quotes. There are plenty of columnists who have written about the Sox' troubles that I don't have a problem with.

I am a big-time non-fan of Cowley's, but some of these direct quotes are not particularly spinnable...clearly, something is going on, unless Cowley is straight-up making things up which seems like a no-no even for him. That said, I don't see much of it as that big a deal. Even the most condemning quote -- that Coop was in survival mode for the first few months -- is couched by the statement that Coop returned to normal right after he got his extension. So he behaved badly under the gun, oh well. He's extended now. The stuff about Jake Peavy is weird...looks like Cowley's re-spinning an old non-story into a new one, but even if they're not on the same page...sounds like Peavy's problem to me. If you had to describe one person as obstinate and a bad communicator, would it be Coop or Peavy? Either way, though, I don't think Peavy went back to his old pitching coach because Coop sucks at his job; au contraire, Coop has received nothing but praise from anyone up till this article. As for the Danks stuff...seems like he's not very serious about staying around here, otherwise he'd probably soften the edges of what he says, and likely not talk to Cowley at all since he's clearly embattled against the Sox front office. Finally, seems like there's a good chance that Cowley is cobbling together an article which does two beneficial things for Cowley: a) it attacks a person who doesn't get much criticism, so seems unique to the people who are easily impressed and b) attacks a guy who was not totally loyal to the Guillen camp, with which Cowley is clearly married. Cowley is nothing if not vindictive, and there are piles of evidence to that effect.

Not many IP in the rotation, though. Good thing these are just guesses.