southsider2k5

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 05:18 PM) 3.) See I don't understand this reasoning. I understand the "logic" behind the trade. But if you are going to trade the ONLY closer on the team, make sure u have a fricking closer before doing so. Sox fans giving Hahn a pass on this deal confuse me. YES YES YES I understand the reasoning behind the trade. Relievers/closers are a dime a dozen and Reed wasn't that good anyway and he's just going to get worst. In return, Sox get an everyday third baseman for 10 years! Yes I understand the reasoning. I do not applaud the reasoning. Davidson is a huge flop right now and the Sox had a bullpen so bad it is beyond belief. Don't trade all your closer candidates. You must keep at least one who CAN CLOSE. I wish I had bosses like you guys. You guys give Hahn the benefit of the doubt cause on paper it was a good trade. Like Dick said SO WAS LOU BROCK FOR ERNIE BROGLIO. Hahn on this issue in my mind gets a big, fat grade of D. You know if we had a killer bullpen this season, the Sox might be right there with the Royals. Now what did I do with my shocked face...

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:45 PM) I am going to respectfully disagree that they don't need pitching. Sale & Q - 353.2 IP, 302 H, 109 ER, 88 BB, 363 K, 21 HR, ERA - 2.77, WHIP - 1.10, K/9 - 9.2, BB/9 - 2.2, HR/9 - 0.5 Rest of SP - 552 IP, 630 H, 329 ER, 216 BB, 361 K, 78 HR, ERA - 5.36, WHIP - 1.53, K/9 - 5.9, BB/9 - 3.5, HR/9 - 1.3 Yes, Rodon will likely come up next year and improve those by himself, and you [may] get Noesi for the full year (and he's a perfectly adequate 5th starter with a bit of upside) but one of the biggest ways I do think the Sox could improve this team is if they found a replacement for Danks in the rotation. Finding a suitor for Danks will be difficult, but if the Sox get creative, I don't think it's impossible. I'd only do so once I have an agreement in principle for an upgrade, but the Sox rotation could go from top heavy to very good next year. I think they also need to add a bat, but looking position by position, I think the Sox have a lot of spots covered with guys that are either solid or need an extended look - Flowers, Abreu, Sanchez/Johnson/Semien, Ramirez, Gillaspie, Viciedo/Semien/Taylor/FA, Eaton, Garcia, whoever. The area of biggest need is LF, but you can also just bring in good bat too. I know the dogs are rabid for John Danks, but I am not really willing to just give him away for a loss at this point, unless it gets us something that makes a lot of sense. I think we are seeing a tired John Danks in this second half, and I say that from his mechanics looking awful for about the past two months, combined with this being the first time since 2010 he has been over 180 IP. I think next year he will around a league average pitcher. I think we are also seeing come conditioning breakdowns from Noesi for the same reason. I think the workload is wearing on him now, but will payoff next year.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:42 PM) The intent is to improve the team? OK. By your own standards... at the time of the trade, nothing occurs. Here a year in, we've replaced one cheap and below average closer with a committee of cheap and below average closers. Davidson does nothing. So as of now, it's a wash. Next year, Reed gets expensive. And Davidson may, or may not, be a contributor. So it could become a good trade, or it could end up remaining neutral. The only way it is a losing trade is if Davidson never contributes AND Reed suddenly becomes an elite closer. So there's a good chance the trade is a wash or a win. And you just keep refusing to acknowledge that you cannot work this entirely in hindsight. At the time it looked like a clear winner. Basically, I fail to see a way this was a losing trade at this point. And it only could be later if those two things I noted earlier both occur, which is pretty unlikely. As support, I will repost this. #1 This is the type of trade you make a GM when you are rebuilding, and you need position players. #2 Matt Davidson has not performed how the White Sox wanted him to do up to this point. If you want to give up on a 24 year old with plus power at 3B, and just look a the today of the deal, the Diamondbacks have "won" the trade to this point. #3 Just because Davidson has not performed so far, doesn't mean you wouldn't make the same sort of deal again.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:30 PM) I'm going to take my shoes off. Matter of fact, I'm going to take my sweater off, too. Let's just pretend for a second. It's okay to pretend. I like to pretend, and I bet you like to pretend too. Lots of boys and girls like to play pretend. Oh look here's the little trolley, why don't we take a visit to The World of Make Believe... Sale - Game 1 Cueto - Game 2 Quintana - Game 3 Rodon/Noesi/whoever is healthy & hot - Game 4, and if not, maybe Sale on short rest (why not?) Yeah. Now lets take the pants off too. That would be so FUN. OMG. Even just the regular season would be a blast watching that rotation. Hey it would be great to have Mike Trout and Gio Stanton hitting behind Jose too, but that isn't really realistic either.

Freep Tigers ‏@freeptigers 7m No good news on Avila. More lightheadedness when he worked out today. His return remains unknown.

I am going to say this. We need offense more than we need pitching. We the limited resources we have, I think it would hurt the franchise more than it would help it in the long run to give up the haul that would be needed to get a guy like Cueto here. The starting pitching staff is the area that has the least to gain from a big infusion of a top flight talent. We have a guy like Carlos Rodon waiting in the wings, who could be as good, or better, than Cueto, without giving up anything.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 04:00 PM) I am actually a math guy. I do know the probabilities that Addison Reed contributes on the major league level vs. Matt Davidson was definitely greater coming into this season, and are now even greater at this point moving forward. BTW, if I am playing the results, I will win every time. I get to put my chips on red after the ball as landed.and that is what I am getting at. We have hindsight to show this was a bad trade. Somewhere along the line, the White Sox failed on this one. It is obvious. I don't know why some are so offended that this could possibly be called a bad trade. Matt Davidson just isn't as good as what many thought. He won't be the last. I think what everyone is trying to tell you over and over and over again, is that this isn't nearly as clean and simple as you want try to frame it. A deal like this isn't black and white. It isn't even close to done as the tradees are now 24 and 25. The need to rub it in everyone's face is more the problem than any actual evaluation of the trade.

Daryl Van Schouwen ‏@CST_soxvan 2m Konerko had spikes on Weds and was available to pinch hit.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:59 PM) For the 3rd time, feel free to be outraged. If you're the media, cover the story, don't take it to the next step of trying to create some narrative that doesn't exist about that issue. Why do you hate orphans? I haven't seen you say anything about them either.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:51 PM) I think that's been covered/talked about, no? So why do love animal cruelty? I haven't seen you talk about it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:34 PM) Be outraged, but don't act like it's the biggest deal in the world. This criticism of mine applies more to the tone and narrative used by the media than individuals reacting to the story. To the kid getting the s*** beat out of him by a stick, it is a big f***ing deal. Some people actually feel the need to stand up and say that we don't have to allow that as a society.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:20 PM) Being that there is no Powerball drawing tonight, the beheading odds are a tad higher. I still doubt it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:23 PM) So 3 days ago everyone was outraged over child abuse right? And 6 months ago everyone was outraged over domestic violence right? And a year ago everyone was outraged about the name Redskins right? The media absolutely should cover these stories, and in some ways it's good that they become more high profile so that the country can be reminded that these terrible people/events exist. But it IS a little over the top when the media covers the story, and then takes the next step of asking stupid questions like does the nfl have domestic abuse problem? are all nfl players violent? etc. Just because something isn't in the news, doesn't mean people suddenly don't disapprove of it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:08 PM) Um, really? That's a pretty awful reply. It is pretty obviously mocking the idea that anyone wants to be kidnapped and beheaded, especially since I am guessing your odds are higher of winning the powerball drawing tonight than being kidnapped and beheaded while living in Kansas.

South Side Sox ‏@SouthSideSox 25m First two seasons: Edwin Jackson w/Cubs: 14-32, 5.47 ERA, 70 ERA+ Jaime Navarro w/Sox: 17-30, 6.05 ERA, 74 ERA+

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 02:00 PM) I'm just repeating stern after 9-11. I really don't want to be kidnapped and beheaded Try it and you might like it I say.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 01:50 PM) You have to admit this is just something else for people to talk about and be pseudo fake outraged over. Can we get back to domestic abuse? Oh and the Redskins name? Or have we exhausted our outrage on those already? Damn, I wish had had room to be outraged at more than one thing at a time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 01:49 PM) So his extension was for 3 years? Which was exactly why I posted that clip. Thanks for catching that.

This seemed perfect for this thread. http://www.theonion.com/articles/iphone-6-...irc=tech-trends

Tracey Myers ‏@TramyersCSN 6m Brad Richards: "I want to prove that I’ve got tons of hockey left in my career. This is a great opportunity for me." #Blackhawks

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon-he...ew-are-lukewarm

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:34 PM) No, because you are basing normal on numbers accumulated at Reno. He had about a team average OPS. .831 does not equal .770.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:31 PM) His HR rate is what is killing him. If that goes back to normal, he is better than a AAA strikeout machine who cannot field or hit .200. Hahn made some great moves last winter. This trade wasn't one of them. And if Matt Davidson goes back to normal, the Sox win this trade in a laugher.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:26 PM) Yet his k rate is going up and his walk rate is going down. What about the rest of the peripherals you aren't mentioning?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 19, 2014 -> 12:22 PM) And the example got paid $3.2 million, which is less than Downs and slightly more than Belly. If that is expensive, just wait to you see what Hahn is going to have to spend to fix the bullpen. It would be interesting to see what other offers, if any, they had for Reed. It does boggle my mind there is not 100% agreement the trade did not work out for the White Sox. You are muddying the water here between a few different, yet distinctive points, and I think almost everyone else is in agreement with them. #1 This is the type of trade you make a GM when you are rebuilding, and you need position players. #2 Matt Davidson has not performed how the White Sox wanted him to do up to this point. If you want to give up on a 24 year old with plus power at 3B, and just look a the today of the deal, the Diamondbacks have "won" the trade to this point. #3 Just because Davidson has not performed so far, doesn't mean you wouldn't make the same sort of deal again.