Gregory Pratt

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) I dont understand how you can expect further regression from players who had uncharacteristically down years compared to their careers? It just doesnt make mathematical sense. I agree about AJP, in fact I would like to see us somehow bring in a younger player to develop, because his regression is very real. The huge question mark about whether this team can compete rest in the hands of the #4-5 starters IMO. Sure, Thome/Konerko/Dye had "uncharacteristic down years" but they are all old. Konerko is a real old thirty. Dye isn't all that young and he has leg issues. Thome's back is bound to go out. Whether it happens in April, May, June, July...he will go down for a good while, and who knows how many he will hit. I see significant regression from those three, and they will continue to be molasses on the basepaths and this team's offense will continue to be one-dimensional.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:45 AM) Whats with the umm? You need to expect some improvement out of the offense next season because of many of the down years of some of the more prolific offensive weapons on this team. So that would be an improvement. I guess what you are saying mostly is that the pitching needs to improve, which is valid considering the amount of runs score on us this year. Of course we cant expect EVERY position to have an all star, but Fields is looking like one of the best rookies in the league this year and we should expect improvement from him as well. Crede coming back improves the position immensely as it was mostly a black hole or manned by a rookie this season. The rotation and the pen should be main concerns but at least be optimistic about a few arms in there, mainly Ehren, Jenks, and possibly Broadway who looks to be a good contributer. The main weakness that I see is the questions marks of Gavin and Danks who will most likely be inserted into the rotation already weakened by the trade (most likely) of Garland. All in all they should CONTEND even without a huge overhaul, but its hard to not think that adding more than 100 runs to an offense that already has shown it can produce, wouldnt at least make this team have a chance at winning the division. I'm not sure that Thome, Dye and Konerko are due to "rebound." I'd expect some regression. The bullpen doesn't inspire me. I see some room for regression from our starters, as well, although I do see potential for improvement, too. (Danks, Contreras, Garland-if-here.) I don't believe Crede will be all that good. He was never that good a hitter to begin with and he's coming off of back surgery. Fields might very well go down if he doesn't adjust to the inside fastball. I have some faith in him, but he is a huge question mark. Who knows what AJ, getting older, will do. But he isn't a world-beater and his defense is tentative. This team is getting old and it lacks a lot of talent. I don't expect them to "compete," unless we're talking 'Comedy Central' compete where everybody becomes bad and we NL Central it.

Why the hell did we make this move, anyway? What a stupid, needless move.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:28 AM) Why wouldnt 40+hr and 120+ RBI making this team a contender? He didnt say the favorite. Umm, because we'd still have Richar, Owens, Fields, Crede, the bullpen, Danks, Floyd, probably regression from starters in our team. I don't see Rodriguez addition as dispelling all doubts about this team which is, as is, fatally flawed. We will see what KW does this offseason but as it stands, not even Babe Ruth makes this team a contender.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:25 AM) If the ownership clause is put in, that's quite interesting - I wonder if the board would do it? If he comes, they instantly become contenders next year again. I really don't think that's true at all.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:16 AM) Well according the rumors that were putting him on the northside... He wants an ownership share of the team he goes to. According to the 2007 Forbes numbers the Sox are valued at $381 million. If they could come up with a small minority share, you could knock off $10-20 million, depending on how big you are talking. Plus a guy like Rodriguez pays for himself at the turnstyle. The Sox know this. Think about how many Arod jersies would get sold? I doubt it will happen, but then again knowing Kenny's history, and JRs business savvy, maybe it isn't that crazy afterall... As far as I can tell, that's not allowed. I don't know where I read it, though. Might be wrong. And I doubt we're going to jump in the Alex Rodriguez sweepstakes. Unless Rodriguez is willing to meet with Kenny without his agent. Plz?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) I read somewhere this morning where Pods is telling teammates he wants to move on. Lets see, you are stealing money instead of bases, fans still treat you like a rockstar and you're not happy. Good luck next year Pods, look forward to your stint with the Long Island Ducks in 2009. he probably got tired of Ozzie saying he can't rely on him. I can't wait for him to be DFA'd by someone next year.

QUOTE(gosox41 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 11:01 PM) Since there is no teal I'll assume you're not optimistic about next year unless major changes are made. If you're being sarcastic then I recommend changing colors as I certainly missed your point. Bob We don't use teal here. We use green. But it isn't always necessary. That said, I don't know if he was kidding or not.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 05:50 PM) 30 ain't young for a catcher. I think the bad thing about this deal is that it doesn't eliminate the deal for next season -- it's two years BEYOND next season. For catchers, 32-33 is when the cliff gets real, real close. Sigh... f*** the scout(s) who recommended Lucy over Suzuki. He/they ought to be taken out back. We have terrible, terrible scouts. When I rip 'em, I say that they don't even have working radar guns, and I'm only half-kidding. I'm just curious if we have scouts who actually recommended Lucy over Suzuki or if that was all save-money, not "He'll be better, trust us!"

I meant, on TV, who's calling it, and I was asking The Board, not just you. I don't expect the Rockies to be blown out or anything. In fact, I believe they'll stun Peavy and the Padres. But he is one hell of a card to draw.

Who's calling the game?

I'm rooting for Colorado, but they'd be better off facing just about any other starter as they've fared poorly against him and he's pretty damn good, if you haven't noticed. Plus they're throwing Fogg at him.

Peavy? s***, poor Rockies, but this is fun.

Let's go Phillies! It's yours for the taking, what with the Met chokejob today.

QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 11:10 AM) I don't want any part of Bonds being on the White Sox. But if the Sox did bring him in, I would hope he hit 88 home runs and drove in 200 while playing a flawless LF. That's just me though. Maybe because I'm a Sox fan. Right right right.

QUOTE(bigruss22 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 10:38 AM) What do you guys think of this? source: whitesox.com could it mean bonds is brought in? If Bonds comes in, I hope his tendons give and we're stuck paying him 15+ to sit on the DL.

I'm just saying.

Maddux' velocity was nowhere near what it is now when he was Broadway's age. I just don't like the suggestion that his velocity is "Maddux-like" because of its implications. His velocity is bad and his control is nowhere near Greg Maddux level. Greg Maddux on acid could throw more strikes than Broadway. Let's just compare Lance Broadway to Lance Broadway. Or someone more to the capabilities of Lance Broadway.

QUOTE(beautox @ Sep 28, 2007 -> 01:14 AM) After watching his start my draw dropped on the movement his fastball; its just been a few appearances at the end of the season but if that is what he was working on all this year developing a quality two seam that just dances in the zone, then that explains alot about his season and control at AAA. his velocity is maddux-esk if he can locate it wont matter if he throws at 88-92 instead of 94-98, especially considering he sells that spike curve so well and its got such great depth. if he continues to refine that change up he will be a force to reckon with. Let's stop comparing him or his stuff to 40 year old Greg Maddux. That's not all that hot a compliment, even if he can still put it through a lifesaver. And further, he will never have Greg Maddux' control. Precious few people ever will, and a guy whose control wasn't all that hot in AAA doesn't warrant such outrageous comparison.

Hockey sucks.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 26, 2007 -> 09:57 PM) Many people have suggested we should sign him to play LF next year. He's one of those guys that shockingly lost a lot of his power. You know who has very funny stats to look at, in terms of power decline..........Brian Giles. Who suggested Jenkings?

I'm sorry, Keith, but Bonds doesn't belong in Chicago, wouldn't be a fit in the clubhouse, would clash with Ozzie and he'd wind up injured, deaf blind and dumb. What you call intangibles -- I call reality.

At the game -- he hit 89 and 87 and 88 all game long. Was absolutely filthy. Good for him. I definitely don't believe in him, but I was happy for him, and I definitely have more faith in him than Floyd. That's not saying much. It was an impressive start, though, and he deserves his kudos.

Something along the lines of, "Someday a box will claim to have knowledge(wisdom?). Don't listen to it." something like that. By one of the old Greek philosophers. Help! What was it? And who?

Ted Williams.