[White Sox at A's 7/2 Gamethread]

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STADIUM!!!!

 

 

Well whatever it does has to do with, its always happening in Oakland

[White Sox at A's 7/2 Gamethread]

Jeez, Garland was perfect thru three, with an 0-2 count leading the 4th and hits they guy in the back. I have just one comment:

 

O-I-O

(Only In Oakland)

 

I better not have to freaking post that again tonight! SFF

[Freddy]

Not going to have 3 guys on the same starting staff get into the game, not going to happen, and IMHO, It's better that way.

 

Normally I would agree, but we have a case where the team playing near .700 ball may very only have one position player in the game, and a reserve at that. The team deserves strong representation - somewhere.

 

To be honest, though, I would rather have no Sox players in the all star game. This season holds far too much promise for anyone to be getting hurt in a "popularity contest".

 

SFF

[6/30 - Sox vs. Tigers Game Thread 12pm CT]

http://www.weather.com/activities/driving/..._topnav_driving

 

Looking at it hour by hour -- it doesnt look so good

 

 

Dang that means our game will end the same time as the Cub game. I thought we would be able to listen to our own postgame coverage. Thought I could get some peace from the "wood-ie priorgasm" that has been going on in this town lately.

 

SFF

[MELTDOWN Thread]

I knew a lot of folks would be venting, cursing, and jumping on the Sox case. The Sox didn't take advantage, they were too eager, they were weak at the plate, the pressed. They they they... That is the easy way out. What we have to realize today is that the result wasn't what the Sox and Garland didn't do - its what the Cubs and Prior did do. It is easy to admit the Sox hosed it because that implies they should have won it. That wasn't what I observed though. Today the Cubs were simply the better team, and had the better pitcher. End of game, end of story. Believe me, I would rather jump on the Sox then give the Cubs their due, but this one was earned by the Cubbies, folks. They were the playoff quality team - this afternoon anyway.

 

SFF

[Flubs vs. White Sox 6/26/05 game thread]

Prediction:

 

Regardless of what we may have heard, until the Sox put a point on the board, Baker is leaving Prior IN.

 

SFF

[We are in the playoffs...]

It would take a lot for them not to make the playoffs, but anything is possible. In 2001, it would have taken 102 wins just to get the wildcard. Although unlikely, it is hardly impossible that Minnesota could sweep the next series against the Sox. In that scenario, we are talking about a 5 or 6 game lead and we have a real pennant race on our hands...

 

SFF

[McCarthy/Santana]

I realize that it is retarded to rank guys based on one outing, but I'll at least try to answer the guy's question. From what I saw of the two players I'd rather have B-Mac. Santana seemed to be featuring only two pitches: a 94 MPH fastball and a decent slider that he didn't seem to have full control of. He had no real breaking stuff from what I saw, which is a major problem. B-Mac on the other hand had a really nice curveball that he seemed to have solid control of, and he has a changeup that we didn't really see in that start. His fastball didn't quite have as much zip, but that could change as he fills out his frame a bit.

 

 

Thanks Zoom. That is about all I was asking. Having not seen Santana, I didn't know if he threw heat, had pinpoint control, nasty offspeed stuff, or some combination. Therefore, I had no general idea how he compared to BMac.

 

SFF (aka "the guy")

[McCarthy/Santana]

Hey, I didn't see the first Angels game on Monday. However, I heard Santana being described as having "electric" stuff and being lights out in the minors. My question, judging by how you saw Santana look, is: who would you rather have, him or Brandon McCarthy. Which one is has the better upside?

 

SFF

[How do you feel about interleague play?]

I won't doubt it is here to stay and on balance is a good thing, but in a way it seems a bit unfair the way it is now. I mean, is it fair that every year the Mets have to play the Yankees six times while St. Louis always gets the Royals for that part of the schedule every year? The rivalries are great, but it seems a bit inequitable...

[Sox loss of power myth...]

Dang, they are really just one good game away from being #3 - and Thomas will be back soon!

 

SFF

[How do you feel about interleague play?]

So now another crosstown weekend has concluded, and as more often then not, the Sox came out the better. However, overall, do you like interleague play and these annual bloodbaths with the Cubs? Frankly, I cant stand them. I can't stand the Cubs, I don't like to have to think about them, and I hate the way my guts get tied up in knots every time we have to play them. Winning against them is almost more of a relief then a cause of celebration for me. I don't know about you, but I wish the Cubbies would just stay over there in their own league where I don't have to put up with them. How do you all feel?

 

SFF

["Pale Hose" called best alternative nickname]

I thought this would be fitting the "Pale Hose Talk" forum. I don't know if anyone saw it (forgive me if it has been posted here) but Frank Deford's Viewpoint column in SI.com is all about how "Pale Hose" is the best alternative nickname in all of sports. Awesome. Here is the link:

 

Hail to the Hose

 

SFF

[Brandon McCarthy ML debut game thread vs Cubs]

I can't wait to see this tomorrow. I know it won't happen, but I would love to see him throw the first pitch 10' over AJ's head and the second behind the hitter, just to scare the crap out of them. Then settle in and have some fun...

 

SFF

[White Sox vs Cubs Game One Thread 5-20-05]

Bulls***.  This ain't Mickey Mantle we are talking about.  The Sox don't cower to anyone.  Smart baseball, yes.  Pitching around someone every time at bat.  Hell no.

 

 

All I know is that I don't really want this intercity series to be another where it winds up being "Lee" who killed the oppostion with his bat.

 

SFF

[kruk called us out.]

First, if you check my screen name I hope you wouldn't expect me to attend 50 or 60 games a year, but anyway...

 

I don't thing you can write off these early season attendence figures as simply the fault of the cold weather. Look at Cleveland. Back when they were winning they sold out that place for like three or four years straight didn't they? That's in Cleveland, too - friggin' Cleveland! Their weather is no better then Chicago's this time of year. I just don't see how you can reconcile the attendance for a winning Cleveland franchise with the attendence of a winning Sox club without getting critical of our turnout. Either there are a lot of poor fans out there who don't go to games or there are not that many fans in the first place. My guess is that the Sox actually have a fairly small fan base - although the fans they DO have are the best and most dedicated in baseball.

 

SFF

[Source: tribune sox close deal with wscr-am]

What, no Sox games on AM1000 next year? Dang, I have always enjoyed my Sox games interspersed with static and spanish talk...

 

SFF

[Congressional hearing thread]

Regarding Sosa's statements - Is there any possibility that he lied by denying using steroids because he doesn't think American jurisprudence would apply to him?

 

SFF

[Jermaine Dye blurb at ESPN.com]

I think Dye will be productive but I wouldn't hold my breath for 305-31-99. I really wonder how many steals Pods will end up with. You would think he'd have an increase with such an awful obp last year but more than 70 is hard to imagine

 

Tim Raines has said that, personally, he would like to see Pods steal a hundred this year.

 

LT

[ISU Anyone?]

ISU alum here -- graduated 1989

 

Go Birds!

ISU ---->

 

 

SFF

[Signings and a new name mentioned]

Uggy Urbina's name has been mentioned on ESPN Insider with the White Sox being one of the teams mentioned.

 

 

I would like to see this - if nothing else to hear the announcers trying to pronounce the double play tandem.

 

LT

[ESPN's Siskels talks about BMac]

Springfield, to be honest, I have no idea where you ever heard Bmac being talked about as a flamethrower.  He's always had a tremendous strikeout to walk ratio, but the only time he was really talked about prior to this year was on these boards and FutureSox.com and I know that I never talked him up to having a blazing fastball.  This year I started mentioning the fact that he's added velocity to his fastball (he's also added weight to his frame) and a year ago, I mentioned he was projectable, but I don't know where you got where he threw mid 90's.

 

I also should tell ya, if your reading BA's prospect books, sure they are good, but they got some flaws.  For example Jesse Foppert hitting 100 MPH, well he ain't even close to that at the MLB level.  Then their is the White Sox's Brian Miller throwing "easy heat" around 95 MPH and that ain't happening either.  Sometimes guys get a velocity labeled on them from the very best they've ever hit or what not or they could be getting clocked on a loose gun at the time.

 

I think WS's stadium gun is a little too high.  I saw Castro hitting 95 MPH and I don't quite think he hits that.  The best thing is for people who have the ability to watch the guys a few times, to chart their gun readings and roughly take the average.

 

Still, if a pitcher has good movement and good command on a few pitches, he should have a sucessful career. 

 

BMac has made some tremendous strides this season and some of the bigger prospect reports are starting to catch eye.

Yea, I don't believe the reference to his velocity came from one of these message board comments. Rather, I was a brief mention in a press story somewhere (perhaps linked to on one of the message boards). He is certainly is a strikeout type pitcher, so perhaps the source deduced that he relied on heat for his strikeouts. In any event, I had held some incorrect assumptions about him.

[ESPN's Siskels talks about BMac]

I don't have a whole lot of use for early minor league prospect reports. When I first heard about Bmac when he started in Great Falls, I remember hearing that what he was was a flamethrower in the mid 90's or better. Now from what I can tell, his fastball is just average. It is almost deja vu. back in 2000 when the farm was supposedly loaded, I asked one of these boards if the Sox had any real fireballers among the prospects, and the immediate reply from someone was "Yes, Jon Rauch". Boy was that wrong. Not that I am saying that velocity is the end all, but I don't much appreciate the deception.

[Omar Vizquel]

I grant that Jose is the team leader. However, I don't see the problem with changing the "leadership" of a team that, regardless of talent, cannot ever crack the 85 win mark.

[Soxtalk Soundoff: Jon Garland]

JGar! He will put it together, he is still only 24.

Once again, we hear the he is "only ___ years old" explanation. No offense, but what makes this valid reasoning now? Thing about it: we are rightly optimistic about the futures of typical 24 year olds. We know they don't physically develop after 24, so we conclude it must be mental. In other words, we are optimistic about typical 24 year olds (even if they suck) because they still have to mature and learn how to pitch at the MLB level. However, mental maturity and wisdom really come from experience rather then physical age. It just so happens typical 24 year olds haven't had the opportunity to get that experience. Now lets turn to Jon Garland specifically. He is only 24 but he is not typical - he has been around for 4 years. Therefore, unlike typical 24 year olds, he has had the opportunity to get the experience to mentally mature and learn. So if you are still optimistic, there must be something else about his age hindering him that you think he can still conquer in the future. What is it?