WhiteSoxfan1986

The only thing that would make this season worse is if we were to trade for Elijah Dukes.

Why the hell is Nick Massett still on this team?

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jul 6, 2007 -> 01:30 AM) Garland should command two A level prospects and a B level prospect. If you can't get that keep him and try to get that for Vazquez. That's about right. He should command more than the package the Astros gave Colorado for Jennings.

Awesome, I'll make sure to vote.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Jul 5, 2007 -> 02:01 PM) That no talent ass clown was on 90210 back in the day Also, how can he not feel weird.. when he has 15 she was like 2 years old From Wikipedia

This is from Jose's wikipedia entry Take it for what it's worth.

Anybody read it? I am probably gonna buy it and wanted to get some reviews.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jul 4, 2007 -> 04:05 PM) only won 78 games? With the team they had, 78 games was a ton. I don't care if it was the NL, 78 wins for a 15 million practically all rookie team was amazing. Very, very talented rookies.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 4, 2007 -> 03:35 PM) It will either be Gavin Floyd or Nick Massett Please let it be Floyd.

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/videos/a1dc3e542...cad346ce73652ae Here it is.

Hopefully the derby is stocked with lefties.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jul 3, 2007 -> 02:37 PM) I can't wait until Vazquez walks off the field in late September with a respectable 4.30 or so ERA this year and shuts up a lot of people here. I can see it being around 4.00. Isn't Jenks eligible for arbitration after the year?

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 11:48 PM) Actually, I would say that Bobby is one of the best "closers" in the game. You put him in a save situation and for the most part he gets it done. Kal, you're usually all over this stuff so where does his save percentage rank the last 2 seasons compared to others? So it doesn't matter when he comes into a tie game and blows the lead? QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 3, 2007 -> 12:53 AM) Saito: 46/49 | 93.88% Nathan: 52/56 | 92.86% K-Rod: 71/77 | 92.20% Hoffman: 69/76 | 90.78% Wagner: 56/62 | 90.32% Jenks: 63/70 | 90% Rivera: 44/49 | 89.80% Putz: 59/66 | 89.39% Papelbon: 54/61 | 88.52% Valverde: 44/51 | 86.27% T. Jones: 57/67 | 85.07% Ray: 47/56 | 83.93% Borowski: 60/72 | 83.33% C. Cordero: 43/53 | 81.13% Fuentes: 50/62 | 80.65% Isringhausen: 48/60 | 80% Dempster: 40/51 | 78.43% Street: 46/59 | 77.97% F. Cordero: 49/63 | 77.78% *IN ORDER TO QUALIFY: Must have had at least 45 SVO since beginning of 2006 What about ERA? I would love to know Bobby's ERA when he came into a tie game during that time period. If you go just by save % Joe Borowski is considered a top closer.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 10:16 PM) I think trading Jenks would be a good move. Not based on the fiasco tonight. Just becuase his stuff is steadily declining, the Sox won't compete in the next 3 years, and he would fetch a bunch in trade. Keeping him around serves no purpose. Jenks is not one of the best closers in the game, as some people on this board think. His ERA last year was 4.00 (not good for a closer), this year 3.21(not bad, but not very good for a closer).

There is no excuse for Sweeney to still be in the minors.

Just heard it on the last update, didn't say who would be called up.

The video has been removed.

Sean Marshall just walked Kevin Mench Ryan Dempster sounds almost exactly like Will Ferrell.

I'd vote him into the hall.

I haven't read through this whole thread so I'm not sure if this has been mentioned. Buehrle is a 10-5 guy in a couple of years, so the Sox would only have to give him the no trade for the first two years of the deal. If the deal doesn't get signed because of a no trade clause, I really have to question Williams/Reinsdorf.

The article did say the video was early in the year and he was at 87-90, so he could have adjusted his mechanics.

I love how he ripped Paxson last night.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 28, 2007 -> 12:33 AM) Look who is number 1. We got a steal for the Garcia trade. It amazes me that people still complain about that trade.

Congrats to Frank. Hopefully this secures his spot as a FIRST BALLOT hall of famer.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 27, 2007 -> 10:21 PM) I'm torn. This team is old and in desperately need of an influx of young talent and it's going to be tough to do that from within considering how weak the Sox' farm system is, especially when it comes to position players. So trading away a player of Buehrle's caliber should help big time in that regard. However it appears KW isn't being offered anywhere near the sort of talent you'd expect to receive in any Buehrle deal, so restocking the farm through a deal involving Mark doesn't look like it would work. The Sox' front office could instead choose to sell off other pieces such as Jose Contreras or even Javier Vazquez both of whom are signed long term and have reportedly caught the eye of a few GMs around baseball. Besides freeing up the money owed to Jose would be a huge asset in free agency. There's also Jermaine who should have some decent trade value if he can get back on the field within the next week or so. Then there's the financial aspect. I don't buy the 4 year, $50M offer one bit, it just seems like too much of a weak deal for a player of Mark's caliber. He should be looking at 1-2 more years and $20-$40M added on to that. So realistically I'd expect Mark to re-sign for a deal closer to 5 years, $75M. After doing some research this week I had a very tough time finding any starting pitchers who received a 5+ year deal and actually performed consistently well through out the entire length of the deal. Names like Park, Millwood, Colon, Dreifort, Brown and the best comparison of all, Mike Hampton who was actually a year younger than Mark and a better pitcher at the time he signed his 8 year deal with Colorado, he also had the same clean bill of health that Mark has had over the course of his 7 year career. Hampton hasn't pitched in 2 years now and that deal is now considered one of the worst in the history of the game. I just don't see how Buehrle is any different. So the chances of Mark living up to the expectations set upon him by a 5 year deal are pretty slim if history is any indication. That being said the man is the face of the franchise, a team/community leader and one of the better starting pitchers in the game so it'd be tough to see him go. If the deal is 5 years and anymore than $70M I'd say let him walk and take the 2 comp picks if you can't find a good enough trade. With the team's financial constraints the way that they are, it's not a great idea to have .30% of your payroll tied up in 2 players (Mark, Paul). If the deal is as reported today, 4 years, $50-$60M I do that in an absolute heartbeat. I'll also add that if Mark does end up inking a deal for 5 years and close to $80M I'll be happy to have him back. I personally wouldn't sign him to such a deal if I were the GM but as a fan it would be great to have Mark around for the next 5 years. It would be interesting if the shopped Garland, they would get a lot more for him.