bigruss

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 10:51 PM) If Buehrle is traded, his contract becomes 19 million per year, everyone overlooks this. But, if he were in the NL, he'd be the best #2 pitcher in baseball. Im 90% sure that there is only a $1 million increase per year if he is traded. Edit: Yup, goes to 16 million from 15 million. http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2154/base2010.jpg

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 10:29 PM) Cliff Lee is the greatest pitcher of the modern era. I thought this was Fathom saying this.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 03:24 PM) I believe I know what you're getting at. It is a close friend, and she's a 6 or 7. Not worth it Yea it was meant as a joke, I personally could never cheat with a friend's GF, if we were both really into each other I would handle it differently.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 03:10 PM) I believe my friends' GF wants to bang me. She has texted me multiple times to meet for dinner. It is difficult to bring this up to either party without possibly starting a s***storm. The best course of action seems to be continue making up excuses as to why I cannot meet. Anyone else ever been in this situation How close is the friend to you? How hot is the girl?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 02:22 PM) Temporarily, of course. Long term, perhaps not. That's usually because a team doesn't win after the new stadium is built.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 02:12 PM) Really? How many franchises have we seen significantly boosted by a new ballpark? Or because of a conveniently placed ballpark, looks north.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 01:48 PM) So we'd have to suck for years to replenish the farm. No thanks. I like what's been done down there the last few years, especially the drafts. Morel, Viciedo, Beckham, Sale, Lillibridge, Danks, Floyd and Quentin are all cost-controlled guys we've brought up in the last few years. Those are all major league players in some capacity with some looking like stars. We're doing ok. Our pitching staff is so good that we have to try to win next year with some of these kids. I wish the pressure wasn't so high on them here but it is what it is. The Swisher and Griffey trades are the only ones I don't like. Swisher looked like a good player but didn't fit in here. I give KW a pass there. You can't predict a guy won't fit in. He didn't have a Milton Bradley reputation or anything, he just sucked. Griffey for Masset was just retarded though. Peavy trade is a winner for us if he pitches. Only Richard is pitching for them now and he sucks away from Petco. Dex Carter, Poreda and Russell all regressed this year in the minors; horribly regressed. That one looks good if The Peav gets on track. Farm seems better than ever to me even though that isn't saying much. We just have a bunch of guys who have graduated from the minors but have yet to fully dig-in up here. Middle ground sucks but whatever. No, but that is one way to do it. Just look at the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, etc. They'll spend extra on the draft, international signings, and development while having high payrolls, because they complement expensive talent with good young cheap talent, and no they don't have to suck to get high draft picks. They scout extremely well and are willing to pay more for a player who has all-star potential.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 18, 2010 -> 10:56 AM) Its not my job. I dont work for the White Sox, so I dont know how they are going to work next season. I assume they have a plan and that they will do their best to put a winning team on the field. JR has spent more money on the Sox than any other owner has. If he feels the Sox had the money to take on Jackson, then Im not going to question him. I think Jackson is the better pitcher, so if JR has the money, Im going to take the better player. It's not just whether or not the Sox can take on the salary, it's opportunity cost. Look at the Sox not resigning Ordonez, and what they were able to do with that money. The Sox have to be better at looking at contracts and figuring if that money would not be better spent elsewhere, especially when they have a viable cheap alternative already in house.

QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 03:54 PM) JR said on The Club that this deal was "a no-brainer". Those are powerful words and your points seem to back up Jerry's line of thinking; mine as well. I'm so much happier having Jackson for 2011 than Hudson. He's got ace-stuff; he's probably our best pitcher, and I always thought Hudson would have at least a year of growing pains in our park, and in the AL. Do you people that hate the trade think Hudson would have put up those AZ numbers here? Color me curious. It's too bad for you guys that Peavy didn't get hurt earlier so we could have evaluated Huddy a bit more. Taking baseball decisions from JR is such a horrible, horrible idea. Of course he will back his GM and staff up, and it should be pretty obvious that although JR is involved in baseball, he is no scout and shouldn't be treated as one. His power is in his financial decision making. Just because you have ace-stuff doesn't make you a better pitcher, Jackson is one of the most inconsistent pitchers out there. Hudson has shown in the minors and now with the DBacks that he is good, not great (he won't pitch this well over a full season), but he has swing and miss stuff, and won't walk a ton of batters like in his first 3 games this year with us. He has good command and will be a solid #3 for years to come, all for dirt cheap. Color me curious how're going to recover from this $8.5MM hit and how're going to fill the holes we have not only this season, but season's forward. Isn't the goal for the team to not only put the best team out on the field this year, but consistently? Losing pitchers like Hudson for guys like Jackson, all contracts considered, is what will prevent that unless our farm system goes on steroids.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 02:39 PM) No youre not reading correctly. You have parsed out very important points: Hudson was unproven, you had no idea what Hudson would bring for the rest of the season. Jackson was far more proven, furthermore Jackson had far more talent. Some times you have to trade a young unproven cheap talent for an expensive more proven more talented player. You are acing like Hudson has more talent than Jackson. Jackson is the more talented player, Jackson is the more proven player. Generally more talent + more proven = more expensive. The only thing Hudson had going for him was being cheap, and Im sorry but keeping Hudson just because he was cheap is not a good plan if you are trying to win this year. You never know what is going to happen in the future, so you try and give your team the best shot when they have one. Proven in what? Inconsistency? His monthly splits are mind boggling. Jackson may be more talented, but he has shown that he pretty much ends up being a 4th starter with potential to be better but can't do it for a full season. Hudson is a 4/5 right now with potential of a solid 3, that's not to far off and when you factor in what you could do this offseason with $8.5MM then suddenly Hudson looks alot sexier than you paint him.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 17, 2010 -> 06:49 PM) Adam Jones has a lot of talent. The other 3 are easily attainable for some obscure player you would never miss if KW is interested. In fact, he could have had George Sherrill for nothing but wisely passed. The Orioles lost 93 games in 2007 and lost another 93 when they traded Bedard in 2008 and 98 games in 2009 and 96 in 2010 not that it didn't work out for them because of the injury, but even with this "enormous" haul they received, if Bedard were healthy, and never traded, chances are they would have won more games. The Sox are trying to win in 2011. If they lose 93 or 96 or 98 games, there is going to be a whole lot of payroll slashing because attendance will take a huge nosedive. You forgot about pitching prospect Chris Tillman, ranked in 2009 as the #22nd best prospect in all of baseball and looking to be a frontline starter for years to come.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 17, 2010 -> 06:36 PM) Only because of injury. If Danks is going to get hurt, but all means, trade him. The talent given up in that trade was enormous.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 17, 2010 -> 10:37 AM) But you are forgetting the 2 years of Danks's services when he should be coming towards a peek. This is not a guy to trade. How many ace-like pitchers get traded and what comes back is even better? If the White Sox are in a win mode, dealing perhaps their best starting pitcher is dumb. Erik Bedard for one, what a lopsided trade.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 09:34 PM) The Gemma thing has actually better and the Jax Tara thing is good in that he does not want her to blow everything and he can see her as a way out of the MC Way out as in Jax gets booted or as an escape clause for Jax to leave on his own will?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 03:51 PM) I was getting tired of all of the focus being on Gemma, and they finally got away from that in the last episode. Now it looks like they're going to focus on Tara a lot more, which should also suck and be boring. I guess they have to fill the episodes with something, but they were giving way too much time to Gemma and I'm thinking they'll do it again with Tara. The stuff with Unser now having to do his job, and the little argument Clay had with him for not giving him a warning (when he actually just heard of the raid himself) should make things interesting. Agreed on the Gemma/Tara spotlight, just not that entertaining to me. The Unser thing could get veryyyy interesting IMO, but was up with the bond hearing (or whatever it's called) getting pushed back, was that a favor Unser did or did it occur somehow else.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) That's good news. I have wanted him back in the organization forever. Hopefully it works out for him, and Kudos to him for seeing his kids through school first. He's done some spring training activities with the Sox, but it's clear he doesn't want to commit that time quite yet. It still looks like he has the itch to come back.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 06:14 PM) Konerko was brought in when he was pre-arb. Buerhle was home grown. The point is that cheap guys eventually become expensive if they are good. That is having a pipeline flowing. Over 10 years or so the Sox have had different home grown talent play for them. Well have to see what we have in the future. Prospects are a crap shoot, a guy could be a top prospect and do nothing, he could be unheard of and become a star. The Sox have had plenty of cheap talent, just over time if you want to stay consistently competitive you are going to have to pay. And eventually you are going to end up trading younger cheaper talent for more proven veterans. If you want to win you have to risk. Wait, so if I'm reading this correctly, you state players that were brought in cheap and stayed with the Sox for years as productive players, but then you are okay with trading good young and cheap talent for decent talent that is expensive and only has one year left on his contract? Whaaaaaat?

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 10:13 AM) The Dodgers rushed him and then gave up on him. The Rays had confidence and Jackson improved tremendously under them, but it made no sense to pay Jackson through the arb system when they had so much top-level pitching coming up the pipeline (an extremely uncommon situation in MLB BTW). The Tigers got him and Jackson continued to get better there as well, but the Tigers were up to their necks in bad contracts and had to cut salary somewhere, so they traded him and Granderson since they couldn't just dump Magglio, Robertson, Bonderman, etc. on anyone. Jackson got better and better until his first half in AZ, and then they went into salary destructo mode and were still able to trade him for a big return after giving up a lot to get him in the first place. I don't think confidence is really the issue here. It's very rare to see the type of young pitching depth the Rays have and had at the time, and then the other two deals were made when ownership mandated a cut in payroll. Saying Jackson was moved because of a lack of confidence is just an assumption, however we know KW was shot down on several Hudson deals because a lot of other evaluators didn't think the ceiling was there. Ceiling was never a question with Jackson. The Rays got a terrible package back for him though.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 04:45 PM) Doesnt come off harsh. I dont know beyond a reasonable doubt, but Im pretty sure using deduction and rationalization I can come to those conclusions. 1) How do I know what the rest of the league thought of him? Well that is simple enough. In 2010 Hudson was rated as the 3rd best prospect in the Sox minor league system. (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prosp...010/269333.html) Furthermore at the start of the season, Hudson was considered the 66th best prospect in baseball with a grade of 65. 66 DAN HUDSON RHP, WHITE SOX Best Tool: Command. BA Grade: 65. Opening Day Age: 23 ETA: 2010 Now to the deduction and argument. KW has been/is one of the most aggressive GM's in baseball. Based on this, I believe that KW called as many teams as possible concerning Hudson and using Hudson to bring in talent to the White Sox. Based on the fact that KW was only able to get Edwin Jackson, I believe that Jackson was the highest price any other team was willing to pay. The highest price any other team was willing to pay, is the value of Hudson on the open market. As for the Nationals, how do I know that they didnt want Hudson straight up for Dunn? Well it assumes that KW valued Dunn over Jackson, and that KW wanted Dunn over Jackson. If those are true, then it is likely that KW offered Hudson for Dunn. The fact that Dunn was not traded for Hudson suggests that the Nationals valued Dunn more than Hudson. If Hudson was > Dunn in the eyes of the Nationals, they would have made the deal. The only other conclusion is that the Sox believed that Jackson > Dunn and therefore trading Hudson for Jackson was actually getting the highest possible value. It could be possible that Diamondbacks didnt want any other spect than Hudson and that Jackson was "KW's guy", that just doesnt make a lot of sense in the grand scheme of things. From all accounts the White Sox #1 priority was offense. The fact that Hudson was traded for pitching not offense, seems to suggest that KW could not get an offensive player who had more value than Jackson, so he made the trade for Jackson to maximize value for Hudson. As for dirt cheap middle of the rotation starter, sure those are great if your aspiring to be Kansas City or Cleveland. If you want to win a World Series ring, you need some one who can potentially dominate in the playoffs. Jackson had the stuff to be dominant. If you are going to be a contender you some times have to give up on unproven prospects for a chance to win that season. Its the nature of trading. If you're not the Yankees or Red Sox, you need good young starters to complement your team. Hell, look at their rotations and you'll see that they probably rely on young starters just as much as anyone else. Ignoring this is ridiculous, the Sox cannot afford this rotation as is and still truly be competitive next year unless Kenny pulls a rabbit out of his ass.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 09:13 AM) This post is spot on. Most of us seem to forget that we were right in the middle of a race with the twins for the AL Central crown and a trip to the playoffs when Jackson was acquired. I for one, felt a lot better with a proven veteran like Jackson going in a big game than I would have felt about an unproven youngster that could have poo pooed on the mound in that big game. Plus Coop has probably forgotten more about pitching than any of us could ever know, and HE wanted Jackson. In Coop I trust. You don't overpay for a mediocre pitcher when your farm system is already bare and can't feed your MLB team with young, cheap starters.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 10:51 AM) ON that I'll agree, but I'm still allowed to be a little disappointed. Especially if we traded away another starting pitcher recently (augh, that again!) It's in the Edwin Jackson thread so it's okay

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 01:50 PM) I can tell you one thing that isn't happening with the Cardinals this year. They're not taking on salary. They have something of a large possible commitment coming up to a guy who plays 1b for them. Their total salary has bounced between $90 and $98 million the past few years. Simply signing that guy is a commitment to instantly go beyond $110. Adding Buehrle would push that to $125. Just my hopeful dream to get something decent in return for Buehrle's contract.

Buehrle and prospects.

Recovering from last night while attending an important lunch meeting with Business Career Services, fun....

TNT = Thursday Night Tradition Starting it..... NOW.