Gregory Pratt

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 09:22 PM) So who is getting sent down to make room for our new old loogy who cant get lefties out. Ozzie Baker gets a veteran. Guess which appendage he will come into face late in the game. More toys for the appendage aware manager. Ozzie LaRussa is more appropriate, and every manager likes veterans over young players, but besides that, your criticism is very well thought out and appreciated.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Aug 18, 2007 -> 12:14 PM) btw, where's Gregory Pratt when you need him to complain about wasting tax payer dollars??!?! Living life.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 08:00 PM) Sorry about this, I was making a post about Alan Regier (Sox farm director guy) in another thread, linking him with Schuerholz and Bill Lajoie and also BTW the Red Sox org. and the thread got archived I think, so anyways: http://heraldargus.com/hanews/archives/ha/...y.php?id=383098 Hi. You should've PMed me. Umm, I'm not sure where that says that he was one of Schuerholz's closest guys or a particularly important person in Atlanta, or that that necessarily means much.

The first two points, I think, stand.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 07:09 PM) The guy in your avatar, one of his top protogees is running the White Sox player development area as of this year. That is Alan Regier, who also spent considerable time learning from Bill Lajoie one of the most respected baseball people alive. I'm not sure if it's true that he's one of John's "top protegees" because I can't find anything about him in the acknowledgements or index of Schuerholz' book and he goes out of his way to talk about many people, so how BIG he is, I don't know, but the fact is that even if Schuerholz came here himself, as long as we have our bulls*** policies about Boras and our lack of coaching and lack of scouting, I doubt we're going to get much better.

It's fair, I agree, and I'm not jumping all over them for that, only and exactly, but it's something that's rather curious. The scouts suck and so do the coaches, though, and I think that's almost undeniable. I think Cooper's good at what he does, though.

QUOTE(shoota @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:55 PM) Anderson should have the center field job locked up, and not have to compete for the job in ST. Sweeney and Owens should come into camp knowing they're competing with each other for the left field position. Anderson's wrist is all messed up, if I recall correctly, and he wasn't good to begin with. His time with the White Sox is almost assuredly over with and he isn't going to magically hit a fastball or a breaking ball. Anderson should have the CF job locked up. Yeah, right.

Shoot the camel. Before it kills again.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:50 PM) The main Sox area scout for this area is Nathan Durst so I guess he is the guy to ask. Granderson went 80th overall to Detroit. Detroit had two picks before Granderson, both were busts. White Sox had two picks before #80. First pick was Royce Ring and second pick was Jeremy Reed. Royce Ring was far from a great pick but he has reached the majors and was a key piece in a 2004 trade. As for Reed, his story is well known. Detroit had two players turn out from that draft, Granderson and Zumaya. Drafts are somewhat understandable, to an extent, because you've got guys who mostly don't pan out, but some things aren't acceptable. Passing on Boras clients, big money clients, going after big ex-football players all the time, generally very very bad, but I don't understand why we let Granderson go. If we can't even scout our own area, what can we scout? Clearly not Arizona or Mexico.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:48 PM) I only addressed rounds because Pratt was questioning the reason why one player should be given a certain amount of money when that amount can be thrown about a larger number of players. To me, this means devoting more money to players taken later in the draft. That's all I infered from his statement. Suggesting there's still less risk with the first round selection than taking several overslotted 12-15th rounders is the point I'm trying to make here. I wasn't questioning s***. I was being sarcastic and I think obviously so. Really, "We can spread the money around instead of using it up on the first round pick!!!!!!" Right right right.

Jim at SoxMachine recently wondered why we didn't go after Curtis Granderson in the draft a few years ago. I have the same question. Atlanta, as Jim rightly points out, has a big hold on Georgia players but we can't watch Granderson and pick him up? He didn't go all that high, either, so he'd have been worth a look, but I suppose having scouts in Chicago is too much to ask as opposed to the Arizona Fall League or Mexican Ball. Maybe we should buy them new radar guns and an instructional manual too.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) or Why spend money on one guy who may or may not bomb when we can save it for many, many more scouts who will help us discover talented players? I have been all over this organization's scouts and coaches. If it were up to me, we'd have new prospectors and new people to chisel them but you'd also spend the money on good players, too. With our luck, though, we'd wind up asking Hawk Harrelson to leave the broadcast booth to scout.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 06:04 PM) Even if they're unwilling to go overslot or deal with Boras, the chances are still better we'll find a quality player at 4th or 5th than 10th or above. Yes, there's uncertainty even at the top of the draft, but as I've said countless times when this issue has been discussed, you atleast want the opportunity to scout a larger number of players. Not having to hope, for once, that the player we've set our sights on falls. Any benefit for us in the draft should be pursued. I'm really surprised everyone isn't aboard considered the pure crap we've produced the last decade. Why spend money on one guy who may or may not bomb when we can save it for many lesser players who may be good but probably won't be?

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 02:33 PM) I'd go four years with Hunter -- a similar deal to Buehrle. Hunter isn't as good a hitter as he's been this season, but over the last three season's his OPS+ is still at 115 or so. And if they did go after Hunter, the person I'd try to dump is Konerko. Hopefully they can revisit the Kotchman + ___________ deal with Anahiem -- Kotchman is already on his way to being Konerko's equal, but the perception is that Konerko is much better (something like a 25-to-9 advantage in homers for Konerko). I'd do Kotchman + Willits/Figgins for Konerko in an instant. That's not going to happen. Paulie is 1. Assistant GM 2. Too big a fan-favorite 3. Not something that I think the Angels will want to give up Kotchman AND someone for. At this point, why? In-season, maybe, but I doubt they do in the offseason.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Aug 19, 2007 -> 05:45 PM) He'll have more if there wasn't crap surrounding him. We'll see how Dye rebounds next year and what the new 1-2 "punch" in the lineup will be. That may be it, but I'm not so sure it is. -- I'd like to see Floyd pitch again in a game that hasn't turned into a blowout. He didn't impress me last night. He had a nice lead and over-anxious batters, I thought, and today he's got such a big lead, but he did all right, I'll give him that. Still, I'm not impressed, and like I said, even Floyd gets it working one time out of ten.

I seriously wonder how many homeruns Thome has left in him. Last night, I was shocked to see how few he had, and I wouldn't be surprised if he wound up with less than thirty this year and less than twenty five next year.

DJ just said that Podsednik doesn't "mind left-handers." Oh really? He seems to mind all major league pitchers, for one... Yesterday, Hawk said something about how today was the "most combative" he'd ever seen umpires and players, that it has never been quite as "adversarial" as today and I said, "Oh really? Remember when, say, several White Sox players fought an umpire because he wanted to prove he wasn't chicken? Remember the days when they'd get drunk and brawl? You weren't alive, and neither was I -- or maybe you were, but you were a kid -- but we both have access to the same materials, and you're telling me that today is 'adversarial'? And that Joe Crede is better to have on your club than Alex Rodriguez? And that Darin Erstad is the best?"

I remember when I was crazy to suggest that Garland isn't quite as good as he'd been from 05-06 and that his "knot" is disconcerting and that he'd be a PERFECT choice to "sell high" on, and then Flash started saying it but still people said, "No, no, that's a bad idea, he so good," and it's not looking like it. He's a perfect "sell high to a contender" kind of guy.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 11:56 PM) Do do I.

Bring in Floyd. I want to see how many homeruns he can give up in Safeco.

Be safe, be well. Since, you know, everybody's forgetting birthday threads these days. Even mine was forgotten. But you, my man, will never be forgotten. (Not that I was, either, as I got a bunch of belated PMs, but I want you to know you're thought of big man.

"Pissed" isn't "hate."

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 08:22 PM) Here we get TV Fox Sports NW and I can watch the Sox play the Mariners tonight and Sunday. Saturday they are on WGN so 3 nights of Chisox baseball. I'm happy for you. I'm sure it means a lot, considering the fact that you're in Montana and probably don't get to watch enough.

Hate only counts when it's genuine.

Superstitions like this just bother me. They're very silly.