iamshack

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 09:17 PM) Really though how do we know what Milledge would've done had the Sox kept him? Well we know he wouldn't be playing the kind of defense of Lillibridge has been playing...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:33 PM) Important word here... Alex had a nice series against the A's. I for one want him on our roster, I agree with Hawk that we need him to start hitting, and the fact that he showed some things over the weekend is probably the most exciting thing we can take out of that series.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 03:01 PM) I have probably been the most negative on the Tigers since Day 1, and I still don't feel they are going to be there at the end. I am just not convinced they are anything more than a .500ish team. Maybe that could change if they do some big work at the trading deadline, but I don't see it still. I'm with you here. I still think they suck and their record will eventually show that. They have 5-6 good players in Verlander/Scherzer/Avila/VMart/MCab and that goofball voodoo closer of theirs...but I feel like our roster top to bottom is significantly better than theirs.

QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:46 PM) http://waswatching.com/2011/06/08/a-l-stan...-%E2%89%A5-500/ interesting note... again it's just mindboggling how this team fares better vs team over .500 (THEY HAVE THE MOST WINS AGAINST OVER .500 TEAMS IN THE AL!!) compared to against those under .500. And from here on out till the AS break we have only 1 series against a team over .500, the Dbacks. If only had we played the crappy teams like the way we play against contenders. I just can't see why this team can't do it. Something interesting tho is from what Paul Konerko bought up in the Red Sox series is that the White Sox fed off the energy from the atmosphere at Fenway Park. White Sox swept Red Sox. I wonder if there is a correlation between White Sox winning and the attendance factors at the game. Quite interesting to me. That is not a new phenomenon either...

Let's just keep playing like we are capable of playing and we'll have our chance in the last 50 games.

Love the comment about Ozzie keeping the heat off the team by saying crazy things

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:58 PM) They should. If Danks gets dealt, it is all about money. That being said, if they know they can't sign him, they should trade him. Everything is about money if you're going to look at it that way. It had to do with the direction they were going in as an organization, which, concededly, was due to financial issues. But certainly AGon wasn't a trade that was necessary to make in the same way that Peavy was, which is why they kept AGon until the end of the 2010 season while trading Peavy at midseason in 2009.

QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:25 PM) Million Dollar Qs: Which trade was worse: Jackson or Peavy. I say Jackson. Peavy, by a landslide.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 01:15 PM) Wins. Ok, be delusional all you want.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:38 PM) You don't seem to get it. The Padres didn't want the package we gave them. They settled for it. They wanted, and basically had to, rid themselves of his salary. They can't have one guy, especially a pitcher, taking up that much of their payroll. So by that criteria alone they win. We took on a humongous risk and Peavy to this point has been, well, s***. Now I keep hearing about this insurance policy. I have no idea what the Sox are actually saving or whatever. And I'm certain they won't divulge that info. But it certainly can't be enough to override the fact we've got expensive dead weight continually rotting on the DL. I guarantee you the insurance policy isn't protecting them against groin sprains.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:33 PM) Edwin Jackson thanks you for the vote of confidence. Edwin's been pretty solid after April. He deserves a little confidence.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:27 AM) WHAT? Oh my goodness. Please stop. Hakeem was a two time DPOY, led the league in blocks multiple times, even averaged over 2 SPG a couple years. He was a FORCE defensively. Who was better? Ewing? Robinson? C'mon now. Shoot, score, rebound (probably similar when you adjust for pace), pass, much better FT shooter against better competition. Well, I can't recall many 1965 showdowns between the Celtics and Sixers popping up on ESPN classic or NBA tv. So, no, I've never seen a full game of Bill Russell. Just highlights. What are you getting at? I'm getting at the fact that it's extraordinarily arrogant to claim Bill Russell is the same player as Ben Wallace, without having ever watched Bill Russell really play basketball.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:08 PM) Whatever. You never post in this thread and here you go trying to get smart. No. I didn't see Russell play live back in the 60's. That good enough for you? And I never claimed to know it all. It's my opinion. It's obviously not a popular opinion. And that's fine. I certainly do post in this thread. And since I do not post in it often, I am not allowed to point out the ridiculous nature of your opinion? I didn't ask if you watched Russell play "live" in the 60's. I asked if you have ever watched a game of his in its entirety? They did actually record basketball games in the 1960's.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:08 PM) "Absolute disaster", BS. Peavy gave the team wins against the top offenses in the league already this season and will do more of the same going forward. In this race, wins are everything. Haha...we've gotten 29 IP of basically league average production out of him this season thus far. He's been paid approximately $6.62 million thus far this year. So that means we're paying him $228,000 AN INNING for league average production. Since we acquired Jake, we've paid him roughly $25 million dollars for 156 IP. And outside of 3 meaningless starts in 2009, he's been league average for his entire time here. So thus far, we've paid Jake $160,256 per inning for league average production. Yes, that is an absolute disaster.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:04 AM) I don't see us being buyers in any scenario. We don't have the room in payroll to add. There really aren't many players to add either. Should Peavy return to health for 4-5 full weeks, I could possibly see one of the starters being dealt for a rh reliever and other pieces. But otherwise, I doubt much will be done.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 12:02 PM) He never owned Wilt. His teams owned Wilt. When Wilt had a cast around him, he won. You look at their size, skillset (or lack thereof), they were pretty similar (I'm talking about Wallace here). Even if you put Russell in today's game and give him all the benefits of advanced training, etc, he won't be any bigger than Wallace. Wallace was a physical specimen who fell off a cliff once we signed him for whatever reason. But he had a 4-5 year run that was every bit as impressive as Russell, IMO. OK. Now I feel like you're stalking me or obsessed with me or something. Not at all. You are just Mr. I KNOW IT ALL and I despise people who know it all without having ever even witnessed what they claim to be so absolutely certain about. Answer the question.

QUOTE (kapzk @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 10:30 AM) Aaron Poreda was DFA'd by the Padres which means only remaining player from the Jake Peavy trade is Clayton Richard. This trade is looking great on KW side but obviously we know Jake hasn't been one bit of what he was in SD as injuries have derailed his chances but only time will tell what sort of contribution is to come. It looks horrible for us, regardless of whether the Padres get any production out of anyone we traded for them or not. That trade was not about players, it was about Jake's condition and money. It has been an absolute disaster for us to this point, regardless of how you view it.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:51 AM) I totally disagree and I'm pissed that basketball reference doesn't have advanced stats for players from the 60's. I guarantee when you normalize for pace that they're indeed similar. Maybe there's another site out there. Yeah, Russell was better for a longer period of time. I'll give you that. But peak wise, there was no difference. Bill Russell's 11 rings has exaggerated his standing among the all-time greats. How many full games of Bill Russell's have you watched in their entirety?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:48 AM) Let's put it this way: Hakeem >> Russell Yet Hakeem is never mentioned as one of the all-time great centers. It's always Wilt, Kareem and Russell. Then there's the next tier. Hakeem and Shaq would make a dirty diaper outta Bill Russell. It wouldn't even be funny. It would be like when Jeff Hornacek would check Jordan. I think debates like this are extremely fascinating. It's unfair to compare players of different eras though...it just is impossible. Each era of players is usually better than the one that preceded them, however, that era owes their increase in skill to those that came before them. Talent development in sports is the same as it is with anything...expecting Bill Russell to be like Hakeem Olajuwan is like expecting the late 1960's Apollo astronauts to have iPads. It just doesn't work that way.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 10:47 AM) It all depends on my MRI results and where the tear is and how big it is. If its something that requires surgery either to repair or remove, I have to do it just to make sure it doesnt happen again. Its its a small tear and I can rehab for a month, I'll do that. Well good luck. Keep us posted!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 11:20 AM) 1-2 months they say depending on the tear. So what are you leaning towards?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 10:05 AM) This is hilarious. Russ said basically what I've been saying. I say it and you act like Hitler on acid. No, he sure as hell didn't. And he sure as hell didn't start claiming the Cardinals are a model of efficiency while the White Sox are crap right now. I've been saying this same stuff to you over and over and yet you choose not to reply to it. Instead you use hyperbole and ridiculously over-the-top phrasing to trash the White Sox organization. And you do this continuously, with different organizations as the subject of your lust, on a monthly basis. Finally, maybe Russ gets a different kind of response because of the tone and tenor of his posts.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 10:57 AM) 3-4 months if repaired surgically to recover 100% activity. By that point I will be the crabbiest motherf***er to ever live And what about to rehab?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 09:51 AM) Tomorrow is decision day on my knee, surgery or rehab, we'll see which direction we go. I've modified my workouts to be extremely upper body heavy with some core thrown in, still sucks I cant really do my workouts fully. What are the respective recovery times?

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jun 13, 2011 -> 08:49 AM) And it's built an inconsistent team (which is what I was going for, could've been more clear). And although you stated that it isn't an excuse to not draft or sign international talent well, at the same time you are saying it's working or hasn't been found to not be working. If you combine the Sox ability to pick up projects and turn them into servicable or better players along with drafting and developing well then you would be looking at the Sox as a gold standard organization. Instead, they tend to shoot themselves in their foot and hold themselves back. Well it's pretty easy to admit that our draft philosophy was horrible from about the time Kenny took over as GM until about 2006. At least in terms of the top end of the draft. But I liked the Beckham pick, the Mitchell pick, the Sale pick. Not so sure about the pick this year, but I haven't seen this guy at all yet. Clearly we need to draft better. And I'd like to go over slot because we do compete on an annual basis and that means we're drafting lower in every round, so we should take advantage of talent falling due to financial reasons. I'd like to improve scouting in LA, but I think that will take time after the whole fiasco that occurred there. So I am trying to be patient. I am certainly NOT SATISFIED with our drafting and international scouting. I DO NOT think it is ok to draft and scout as poorly as we have. However, I do love the philosophy of player acquisition that we do have, and that may be driven entirely by budget. And perhaps it is time to shift how the budget is allocated. What I was saying in my previous post is that I'm not sure that our current method of player acquisition is not as good as the traditional methods utilized by the rest of baseball. Obviously there are some teams, such as the Red Sox, Phillies and Braves that I admire. But I think we are very competitive with the model we use.