WCSox

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 5, 2006 -> 09:04 AM) Well what do you want? Call me crazy, but I thought the whole point of the championship Sox was pitching and defense. We've got plenty of offense (well, potential at least) this year, way more so than last year. So if we have a great CF who just happens to suck at the plate, I'll take that tradeoff. C'mon, it's the same deal with Uribe. His average sucks, but would you want anybody but him at SS? Not me. ^^^ Anderson's batting average isn't our problem. Bad pitching, shaky defense, and a general lack of execution with RISP are.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 04:28 PM) Trouble was, we had our best defense today on the left side of the infield, and I can think of at least 3 balls that wound up in the outfield after just barely getting past Crede and Uribe, 2 of the doubles and a hit past Uribe. Gload had one skip past him real fast also IIRC. 2 of the other doubles were just out of Pablo's diving range, so that hurt our left side defense also. We got really really unlucky on where those doubles wound up today...they were all about a foot from someone's glove. IIRC, a couple of those were smoked. Unlucky to a degree, but it's not like Mark was sawing off righties with his cutter and inducing weakly-hit, broken-bat dribblers and pop-ups all afternoon.

QUOTE(brijames @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 12:47 PM) This team is not talented enough to just show up and win. DING, DING, DING! We have a winner! QUOTE(ThinWhiteDuque @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 12:57 PM) Basically, Ozzie put MB in a position where he had to pitch a perfect game to win...And the Rangers can swing the bats a bit, in case you hadn't noticed. Um, so it was Ozzie's fault that Buehrle gave up those 6 doubles (or whatever the number was), even with Anderson in CF? :rolly Mark definitely got some bad breaks, but he also left a ton of pitches up over the plate today. He deserves a sizeable portion of the blame.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jun 3, 2006 -> 09:16 PM) Huge win, but I was almost pissed after the win. Just sitting in the stands, watching them almost screw this game over, I am just glad that they pulled away with the W. ^^^ Hopefully they'll get their heads out of their arses today.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 09:11 AM) This seems like a convenient "injury" to Nelson. Agreed. This might be the reason... QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 09:21 AM) Personally I don't think Nelson is in game shape yet.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2006 -> 03:18 PM) All you have to do is watch Edmonds play, and you can see he's clearly on the downside of his career. He's lost more than one step in the outfield, and his swing has more holes in it than the bottom of the Sox lineup. Mulder is another pitcher who it looks like he's past his peak. He threw a ton of innings during the early part of his career, and he hasn't looked the same for over a year now. Some team's going to overpay for him this offseason. I've watched plenty of Edmonds and, yes, it's dead obvious that he's beginning to decline. Hell, that was evident last year. He took a significant drop in plate production from '04 to '05. Agreed also that he's going to have to move to LF at some point soon. But I certainly wouldn't say that he's "terrible." Even if he has to be moved to LF, he still has another productive year or two in him. Mulder was pretty decent last season, although his WHIP has been up in the 1.36-1.38 range over the past two years. I'm not sure what effect being thrown into the rotation at age 22 had on him... we'll see how he finishes this season.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2006 -> 03:06 PM) :headshake He's terrible now. His body has broken down, as his bat speed has diminished significantly. Also, he's about to go on the DL. "Terrible"? That's a pretty bold statement, and one that would be more accurately used to describe someone like Anderson (at the plate, at least). His numbers don't look good so far this year, but he's still a ML-caliber player. He had an OBP of .385 and hit 29 jacks last season, so I wouldn't say he's washed up just yet.

QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Jun 3, 2006 -> 02:52 PM) It is well known throughout baseball that Philly desperately wants a solid starter. But I have not heard anything about them wanting to deal Rowand (and I doubt they do). The Phils are looking to deal either Burrell or Abreu for a frontline starter. If the Phillies really want Garland, they would have to give up much more than just Rowand. It'd probably take Rowand and a couple of relievers. I have no idea what Philly has in their pen besides Gordon, but the deal isn't going to happen anyway. Jim Edmonds can't contribute in the majors? Unless he's suffered some injury that I'm unaware of, that's not really an accurate statement.

QUOTE(WinningUgly85 @ Jun 3, 2006 -> 01:29 PM) I mean I would love to have Rowand back but what makes these philly fans think that their organization would give up Rowand for Garland. Or that our organization would give up a young, healthy, workhorse starter like Garland for a mediocre hitter like Rowand. As poorly as Jon has pitched this year, the Sox wouldn't even think about a deal like this unless they wanted to unload payroll. The Indians traded Kenny Lofton to the Braves (for David Justice, IIRC) after the '96 season and traded back for Lofton a year later. So I guess there is some sort of precedent.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 05:47 PM) I'd be all ears for any bullpen guys out there who could help. But the asking price will be steep for even a mediocre late inning guy, esp. with all the injuries around baseball. The asking price will be steep for Carl Crawford as well. The Sox will have a difficult time making the playoffs in a competitive AL Central with this craptacular bullpen. I'd rather have Anderson's piss-poor hitting but great defense and reliable set-up man than Crawford and no help in the 'pen.

Only saw the second half of the game, but generally agree with what's been posted here. Even without a good change, Jon did a better much job of locating and sawing off hitters than earlier this season. He still has a way to go, but his last two starts have been very encouraging. Let's hope that this trend continues.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 04:13 PM) You can have a starting cf on a world title contender hit under .200 if he plays solid defense, the rest of the team hits reasonably well, and the pitching is solid. Fixed

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 03:35 PM) The "everything is going to be fine" approach doesn't work when a team's glaring weaknesses are so appearant as they are for the Sox right now. I am willing to look the other way on CF and to a lesser degree SS (though I badly want Cintron in there). I am not one to jump off a cliff every time the Sox lose, I just get concerned when the bullpen proves time and time again that they are not going to be able to pitch anywhere near the way they pitched last year. It's not pessimism or freaking out, it's concern. I agree. We're going to have a difficult time winning a division this competitive with our current bullpen. Kenny's going to have to make a move or two.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 02:46 PM) Same concept with paper ballots. You can fill out as many as you like. And how is Dye getting in over Damon not getting the better player in? Well, sure, the whole system is flawed. That's my point. I'm not arguing that you shouldn't do what you're doing, either. It's just a completely asinine system. I'm sure that MLB could do something to ensure that a person could only vote once. Like maybe tying your vote to your phone number or something.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 02:00 PM) That's what I did 125 times today. No BA though. Wrote in Thome as the 3rd OF. Will probably do a few hundred more during the game tonight. This is what I really hate about the All Star Game. Allowing the fans to vote may have some merit, but it's just way too easy to commit fraud. The best players don't get voted in... the ones with the most aggressive fans do. And MLB doesn't care. :headshake

After watching our bullpen implode (again) last night, I don't see how people can still talk about trading for Crawford.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 11:05 AM) If the kid stays healthy, Garland will be damn jealous. Garland's career average should be BMac's low side if he's healthy. Agreed. I'm just trying not to jinx him.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 09:40 AM) Brandon is untouchable because right now he is the best talent this team has, he's making the league minimum for the next several years, and he's going to be in the starting rotation before long. And furthermore, I can hardly see anybody out there who would give me equal value for a potential lights out starting pitcher who makes the minimum and is under our control for 6 more years. Barring injury, B-Mac will be at least as good as Garland's career average. That combined with his low cost definitely make him untouchable.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 09:27 AM) He's still our best pitcher, and our team cannot dominate again unless it starts winning the games he starts. ^^^

QUOTE(daa84 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 07:18 PM) i hate to get on a guy who has pitched as well as contreras, but tonight is a perfect example of how we need to ride our SP throughout the year. We dont have a deep pen, plain and simple, so we need our starters to go at least 6 every night. obviuosly that won't happen every night, but this is what happens when you starters dont go deep.....your bullpen gets exposed alot more...and when its not deep and you cant get it to cotts/jenks you are gonna be in trouble. You only ride those starters are far as the pitch count will let you. Contreras threw 107 pitches through 5 last night and was clearly struggling. IMO, Ozzie took him out at the right time. What we don't need is Ozzie forcing our starters to throw 130-140 pitches/game. And even if the starters get us 6 innings, there's still three for the 'pen to screw it up. This team is going to be very beatable if KW doesn't do something abou the 'pen. QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 07:38 PM) How many teams do you think would love to be in our position right now in terms of our... farm system? In terms of the scouting and coaching, perhaps. But in terms of players, it's pretty mediocre right now.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 06:11 PM) Then why isn't Pierre playing LF with Murton in RF and Jones in CF for the Cubs? Jones has played a good amount of CF and has good range with a very strong arm which is for the most part, very accurate. Pierre has NO arm to speak of so he should be in LF with the 2nd best arm of Murton in RF. It's been a baseball rule for as long as I can remembr that your OF with the best arm plays RF, it's just the way it is. Pierre is playing CF because he has a ton of range. IIRC, Jones mostly played LF with some RF in MIN. I could see him playing CF, although it'd probably take him some time to adjust (that Pierre wouldn't need). I don't know anything about Murton, so I can't answer the rest of your question. Agreed that a strong arm in RF is desirable, but it's not he only thing that needs to be considered. If I were a manager, I'd put my outfielder with the best combination of strong arm/weak range in RF and the guy with the best combination of good range/strong arm in CF.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 05:57 PM) In all, Pods is mediocre in CF and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone familiar with his history to tell you otherwise. Saying that Pods in "mediocre" in CF is almost giving him too much credit. I've already said that he's a below-average CF, which is a big difference from those that say that he can't play the position at all. Having the player with the strongest arm in RF isn't the most important thing. The throw to 3rd is most important when a player is tagging from 2nd. Having a CF with a strong enough arm to stop a player from tagging from 3rd and scoring a run is just as important. On the other hand, when a guy tries to stretch a double to right into a triple, the RF isn't going to throw him out on a one-hopper from deep RF. The strengh of the cut-off man's arm is just as important in that scenario. But, yes, I agree that Pods would not have been a good RF. Given how few balls are hit there, it'd be a waste of his range anyway.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 05:11 PM) Um, that's exactly right. You put your OF with the best arm in RF because of the length of the throw to 3B. You put your weakest throwing OF in LF because he doesn't have to make the long throw from there. I thought everyone knew this. That's why Vlad... That's nice in theory, but having a strong arm doesn't mean crap if you can't throw the ball accurately. Opposing teams aren't afraid to run on Vlad because he can't hit the broad side of a barn. Back in his prime, Sammy Steroids was another example of a strong-arm-but-nothing-else RF. If arm strength in RF meant everything, why is former left-fielder Geoff Jenkins playing there? And if he can play the position reasonably well, why didn't Yost didn't stick Pods in LF and Clark in CF?

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 03:36 PM) IMHO. I could care less if someone keeps a thread on this, but I think it belongs in Diamond Club and not here. That is where the fouler team of the northside is chatted about, made fun of, and torn apart. In Palehose we try to keep it generally about the whitesox. Not about attendance threads, threads about coverage, or the conspiracy threads or all things northside. Agreed, especially since much of it will inevitably deal with "the other team."

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 03:29 PM) Or they can choose to comment about how they think it's an obsession and stupid. That's the way it works around here, so I highly doubt all you people who say "if you don't like it just ignore it" will get your wish. No problem with that. But as long as it's non-offensive and Sox-related, I support his effort to post such material... even if he is beating a dead horse.