balfanman

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:48 PM) None of these guys are sure-fire bets, and when a team like the Padres makes a bat like Gonzalez available - which is something that almost NEVER happens with a large or even mid-market team - then we should view it as a blessing from the baseball gods and do whatever we can to trade unproven players for him. Once again KHP, great minds think alike. Will you marry me and bear my children?

QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:26 PM) Ahhh... I thought you were referring to outside rumors, not to conversations on our board. Yes, I'm sorry that I didn't make that clear. He's just included whenever we talk about giving up something for a big bat.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:43 PM) Yeah, this is getting nasty guys. It's one thing to argue your points, it's another to insult eachother as your concluding sentence for every paragraph. Again, I love the debate here, but keep it civil. You're both intelligent guys, no need to lower the discussion to include insults. I second this. I'm enjoying this thread but....when discussions get nasty is when I for one leave said discussion.

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 05:28 PM) And what if Peavy gets hurt and we put Carlos Torres in the rotation? What if (heaven forbid) Danks or Floyd go down and Brandon Hynick has to make eight starts? What if AJ gets hurt and we're starting a replacement level catcher? The problem is you don't care about depth. In all honesty you can say the same thing about any deal. In your previous example what if Nick Johnson spend most of the season on the disabled list and we have to replace him with a lesser bat, wind up losing a few 1 or 2 run games, and losing the division by a game or two? What if it takes 2 or 3 seasons before Flowers, Danks, etc. become proficient ballplayers. By that time our outstanding starting rotation will be about gone. The truth is that any way we go has risk involved. Personally, I think that going for it all for the next couple of seasons has less risk than hoping a few of these minor leagers pan out.

QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 03:39 PM) Where has there been talk about trading him? Just look in all of the Gonzales / Votto / Halladay / etc. threads

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 03:33 PM) So you're alright with shipping off our top 7-8 prospects in exchange for a player who will more than likely test the free agent waters in two years? Aye carumba. Adrian Gonzalez is a good player. Is he worth that? God no. How many 7-8 for 1 (2, again, if you really want to touch Heath Bell) deals have there been in the history of baseball? I for one would gladly do it. I love the 1 World Series that we won. I think that Gonzales is that one player who could possibly put us over the top, combined with this starting staff. I don't want to see us lose a bunch of one run games because we are 1 bat short. I would much rather take a 2 year shot at winning it all as opposed to being in contention for the division most years only to fall short. If we can sign Gonzales to a long term deal then this deal becomes a no brainer in my mind. Again JMHO If you could guarantee me that even 1 out of every 3 of the minor leagers mentioned in this thread were going to be average major leagers then I might reconsider, but that seems unlikely.

QUOTE (League @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 02:20 PM) He was voted at the best defensive catcher in his league by the coaches, I think he'll stick. Hopefully these aren't the same guys who vote for the Gold Glove award in the majors!

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 02:00 PM) Assuming this is all true (which it isn't), why on earth would the White Sox absolutely murder their sparse organizational depth for a corner player? Gonzalez is a special player, but you're talking about giving up (what you consider -- which is extremely optimistic and foolhardy at best) a starting pitcher with no service time, a catcher who made drastic defensive strides and has the potential to be a .275/.400/.500 hitter, a starting 3B in Viciedo (which is a preposterously stupid evaluation right now), a plus defensive CF, and a good and cheap bullpen arm (something we're immune to, and something we need so we don't do stupid things like sign Scott Linebrink and trade Brandon Allen for Tony Pena). I get it: Gonzalez is a great player, but he's far too close to free agency to do a 7 for 1 (or 2, I guess, if you're into getting Heath Bell, whose value in the late innings probably doesn't surpass that of Hudson) sort of deal. Plus you want to give 2-3 of these guys away. Just sign Nick Johnson. Don't run the organization any further into the ground. If we're giving up the farm, it must be for a cheap, pre-arb up the middle player. Because this corner infielder is special and we seem to be set at the middle infield positions for a few years. If the Sox see Gonzales as the type of hitter that can put them over the top, and I hope that they do, then I would absolutely sell most of the farm for him. There are no guarantees that any of those minor leagers ever turn into half of the player that Gonzales is now. As far as Nick Johnson, sure he's an okay player, but with his injury history he's more of a gamble than the monor leagers in my opinion.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 01:05 PM) With the Royals maybe, because nobody is worried about those guys right now. We've dealt with KC recently, so has Minnesota, Detroit, and Cleveland I believe. But one contender trading with another is a pretty odd situation. But if Detroit is "having a fire sale" so to speak, then I would gather that they don't plan on contending for a few seasons anyway. Selling off Granderson, Mags, Guillen, Bonderman, etc. is a pretty steep changeover from their 2009 team.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 11:06 AM) Add Kevin Dubler to your list. Very bad results, but great promise. I'd wager that Phegley's two years away at the least, with Gonzalez coming in at about 3 years. Dubler added, Thank you, I knew that I was forgetting someone.

A thought has occurred to me (that doesn't happen very often) that with all of the talk of trading Flowers, among others, to acguire an established bat; how far away are our other minor league catchers. Miguel Gonzales Josh Phegley Kevin Dubler any others I hope that I got the names right. If we can get 2 more years out of A. J., are any of these guys on track to replace him by say the 2012 season?

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 10:27 AM) But the point is, the Sox can offer quite a bit, and certainly nothing that other teams would sneeze at. And I still believe that draining the farm for a bat like Gonzalez is acceptable, because you're draining it in exchange for a shot at a World Series title for two consecutive years. KHP, I like the way you think, in fact........ I think I luv you man.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 02:45 PM) Rondo is a little b****. But anyway, the make-up calls still piss me off. Just call the game fairly and then admit it when you f*** up and try to do better next time. It's really not that hard. Work to create a culture of accuracy as opposed to one where some calls are overlooked, others are made for no reason, etc. There's so much contact in the game that you're not going to get everything right, but at least make the major calls. Like Melo's trip up of Deng last night RIGHT IN FRONT of the officials. Bulls***. This is another thing that I just do not like in basketball today, all of the contact. You have to be a muscle bound thug to even have a chance in todays game. I'm not an athelete by any means but I did play a little basketbal in grade school and jr. high, and was good friends with several of our high school team members. That was back in the 60's and early 70's when basketball players were thin and lanky for the most part. I seem to remember getting called for fouls if you barely touched the guy you were gaurding.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 02:36 PM) I would do Konerko + Linebrink for Castillo though. We would cut $11M off the books in 2010 and only add $500K in 2011. Castillo really has no worth to us, but maybe we could eat half his contract and send him elsewhere. Castillo at $3M per in 2010 and 2011 might work for someone else. I think that this would work from the perspectives of the teams and I would love to see it. Doesn't Konerko have a no trade clause and doesn't want to go east?

Thank you fellas, I'll try to get it right next time.

QUOTE (balfanman @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/2009/11/williams_details_thinking_behi.html'>http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/2009/11/williams_details_thinking_behi.html According to the Sun Times it looks like K. W. & Ozzie are pretty set on Ramirez at ss & Beckam at 2nd. P. S. I hope that the link works, I seem to have trouble with those.http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/2009/11/williams_details_thinking_behi.html The link doesn't seem to be working. Can someone please fix this? Thank you!

http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/2009/11...nking_behi.html According to the Sun Times it looks like K. W. & Ozzie are pretty set on Ramirez at ss & Beckam at 2nd. P. S. I hope that the link works, I seem to have trouble with those.http://blogs.suntimes.com/whitesox/2009/11...nking_behi.html

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 09:42 AM) with the Rios/Peavy trades, KW has already said that we dont have money for a big FA signing this winter. How would we be able to take on a big (and bad) contract like Harang/Arroyo??? Our #5 spot in the rotation is already taken care of cheap with Garcia/Hudson, why would you pay your fifth starter $7-8 million for the same production? I don't have all the answers, or even any for that matter, but I believe that if Sox management thinks that our pitching is good enough they won't hesitate to spend more to go for it all. I think that our biggest need right now is a big, left handed bat and Votto or Gonzales fill that bill.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 09:58 PM) Gotta love Dye using the Rios arrival as an excuse. I love Jermaine's contributions during his time here, but there's no doubt in my mind that he's one of the veterans we keep hearing about that might have been too comfortable in the clubhouse and didn't really like the influx of young players. I really have to agree with you Fathom. The reaction from some of the vets on the Sox really bothered me when they brought in Rios. Here your G. M. is bringing in players to try to help your team win, and we apparently had some veterans who were worried about their playing time. I don't know who all these players were for sure but we do know the J. D. was one of them. Worry about winning first and your contract will take care of itself. Again, I'm not in the clubhouse and I really don't have any inside information other than the media. But with the Rios thing, the Swisher thing, the Getz thing, and other issues that I'm not remembering; I believe that it's time to replace the leadership in the clubhouse. It would not upset me at all to have Dye, Konerko, and maybe others gone for the 2010 season.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 07:06 AM) Almost as big a pipe as Adrian Gonzalez. And MLB trade rumors speculating that a stud such as Votto could be available is no different than me speculating that I could somehow bang Ice Tea's wife Coco if I were to run into her. So why couldn't we do this? I brought this up a week or so ago. We have been dreaming up scenarios for Gonzales for a couple of weeks now and if we could get Gonzales then we could get Votto. We have a G. M. who thinks big and knows how to get things done. It would depend, as always, of what the other team thinks of our available players. If we take back one of their big contract pitchers would something like Hudson, Flowers, Nunez, AA prospect, A prospect for Votto, Hurang/Arroyo work?

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 04:50 PM) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/deazaal01.shtml He actually won the Marlins opening day CF job in 2007 and was off to a pretty good start before getting hurt about a month into the year and killing his year. I would not mind at all if he was our opening day starter in centerfield, If He Earned It. I would not want him starting if however they just gave him the job at the start of spring training like we have seen in the past with Sox management. A starting outfield of Quentin, De Aza, and Rios seems like it would be pretty strong defensively at the least.

I agree. I don't think that you put together this strong of a starting rotation just to half ass it in other areas. Go for it all. Of the younger players I like D2 to blossom for some reason, maybe because I think that he might have the same tenacity of his older brother. I wouldn't mind trading anything or everything else on the farm for Gonzales though.

I have no idea why I even started to read this thread as I quit on the NBA years ago for this very reason. I go back to the Boerwinkle, Sloan, Love, Walker, Van Lier days. Basketbal was more fun for me then. I watched the Jordan era championships somewhat, but that just reinforced what I already knew. The Bulls for example would completely dominate a team like the Knicks in the playoffs, but the NBA made sure that the series went to 6 or 7 games for revenue and I just hated it. You can never be sure if the team that wins in the NBA is the best team on any given night, or if it is just the team that the league wanted to win. I have not gone back and checked for pure numbers as I'm not necessarily a stat guy, but I believe for years (and I'm sure that this still goes on) the road team would get called for fouls much more often then the home team. You had to be a pretty bad team to get called for more fouls at home than your visitor. If that doesn't tell you that they are catering to the home crowd, and it is not really a "fair fight", I don't know what would.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 7, 2009 -> 10:43 AM) He can be "a leader, the captain of the infield, a clutch hitter in the postseason, perennial all-star and future Hall of Famer , everything Beckham thrives to be" at second base too. I agree with this. I realize that "traditionally the shortstop is the leader of the infield. That does not mean that in some cases the 2nd baseman can't be, especially with the language barrier that Ramirez probably has. Gordon seems to be a natural leader and can lead just fine from 2nd base. There are many, I believe, that felt that Derek Jeter should be playing 2nd base instead of shortstop, especially when Arod came over. Jeters defense has been maligned at shortsop for years, despite all of his "Gold Gloves", which we know are a fraud anyway. If Jeter had played 2nd base for the last few seasons instead of shortstop, would he of been any less of their infield leader then he is now?

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 6, 2009 -> 01:08 PM) WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! Okay, I love what Pods has done for this organization, but it sounds like we're FINALLY making defense a priority. All I can say is hell the f*** yes. Gosh I hope so. I've always been more of a pitching & defense type of guy. To me a 1-0, or 2-1 type game is much more exciting than a 9-8, or 12-11 type of game.