JUGGERNAUT

Easily. The Oakland athletics have 22 gms vs ALC opponents. Most of them vs CLE, MIN, & DET. If you think we had a tough time with their heavily stacked RHP & 5 LHB to throw at you at the plate just watch & see how the other ALC teams fare. I'm more scared of the A's winning the WC then any ALC team knocking us off.

Mr Roger's neighborhoods: Apr. 6 @LAA W 3-2 6.0IP 1R Apr. 11 LAA L 7-6 7.0IP 3R Apr. 16 TOR L 8-0 5.1IP 4R Apr. 21 @TB L 3-2 6.0 3R Apr. 27 SEA W 8-2 6.0 0R May. 2 @OAK W 3-2 8.0 0R May. 8 CLE W 7-2 7.0 0R May. 14 @MIN W 5-0 9.0 0R May. 20 HOU W 7-3 8.0 3R May. 26 KC W 8-1 7.0 1R May. 31 @DET W 8-2 7.0 1R Jun. 05 @KC W 8-1 7.0 1R Jun. 11 @FLA L 6-5 6.2 5R Jun. 17 WAS W 8-1 6.1 1R Jun. 22 @LAA L 6-0 3.1 6R Jul. 3 @SEA L 2-1 8.2 2R Jul. 9 TOR W 12-10 7.0 3R It was that LAA game that created all this controversy. The team supposedly said something to the press suggesting Rogers was thinking more of his impending free agency & nursing a bad hand than helping the Rangers win. Rogers became visibily upset over those comments & hit a camera man. The rest is history. Though I would agree the team all but burned away any hopes of signing him as a FA why exactly are they seeking to trade what looks to be the most dominant pitcher in MLB in the first half of 2005? They are 6 gms over .500, 2 gb in the WC race & 5 gb in ALW. The infamous WFT of the CWS pre-dates the WC (1999). It borders on utter stupidity to suggest they would trade Rogers at this juncture. This is a Roger's pipedream & nothing more. He is not going any where.

I don't think you can say this will turn out to be a bad trade for the Brewers even if they do lose Lee after 2006. Prior to Lee's arrival they got next to nothing media coverage. Even with Pods stealing bases .. who knew about it? Who knew anything about Pods in 2003? If your measuring their stature as marquee players Lee is a LOT closer to that mark than Pods ever will be. So if nothing else the Lee trade energized the Brewer fan base. Even if that energy only lasts 2 yrs it's enough to build on. The gate alone might give them the ability to sign some of their other stars long term. Something I doubt they could do w/out Lee's arrival.

If Crede returns soon & can play most everyday Simmons will be proven a fool. If not & Ozuna is our everyday 3B Simmons will be proven right. Garland relies heavily on a 3B to make above avg to great plays more often than not. Ozuna is good for avg plays at best.

Injuries of course will play the biggest role but if they both make it to Oct at full strength then I see a closely fought battle. Gm's 1&2 at the Cell: Mulder vs Mark: adv Mark (wind will factor & experience counts) Carpenter vs Garcia: toss up at least 1 day off Gm's 3,4,5 at STL: Morris vs Jon: toss up Marquis vs El Duque: adv El Duque (NL rules make it easier for him to get out of jams) Mulder vs Mark: adv Mulder at least 1 day off Gm's 6, 7 at the Cell: Carpenter vs Garcia: toss up Morris vs Jon: toss up* *But gm 7 is anything goes. Who is likely to pitch better on 1 day's rest? Mulder or Mark? Mark. Who is more likely to pitch better at the Cell? El Duque or Marquis? El Duque. Who is likely to be more effective in long relief at the Cell? Suppan or Contra? Contra. So w/out question in gm's 1 & 7 the adv is with the White Sox. Gm 5 favors the Cards but there is that Mark playing before is hometown fans angle. Which leaves the White Sox needing to just split the toss up games to win the World Series. Yep. The All-Star game makes that much of a difference now

Final score: Cardinals win 8-5 .... if the NL all-stars had secured HF adv. But with a recent 13-4-1 record in the all-star game there was fat chance of that happening. So a Sox-Cards WS will feature 1,2,6,7 played at the Cell where Thomas & Everett will factor heavily. Thats' worth at least 3 pts for an 8-8 tie. Team that makes the fewest mistakes should win.

I never believed in 1 MVP for a team because of the way work is dealt out. Mark is the MVP of the rotation. Sorry Jon. Hermy is the MVP of the bullpen. Sorry Politte. Everett is the MVP of the lineup. Sorry Koney. What constitutes an MVP of the lineup? What you do when it counts the most & how it helps others. Everett RON 46RBI, .352A/.397O/.593S - helps those behind him a LOT Konerk RON 43RBI, .231A/.325O/.435S - helps those behind him very little. No other player has more than 40RBI's in RON sits.

And despite that 2005 weakness he is still sporting 7W, 2L, in 11GS. Do you now many pitchers would kill for a record like that after 11 starts? First 5GS, 3W, 1L 2.70E, 30IP, 1.63WHIP - there weren't too many complaints then. Next 3GS, 2W, 0L 6.19E, 16IP, 1.69WHIP - signs of something wrong Next 3GS, 2W, 1L 7.56E, 17IP, 1.56WHIP - signs of it getting worse Yet even when he was laboring through undisclosed pain he still managed to post a 4-1 record. Who is more likely to go 7-2 over his next 11 starts: El Duque, Burnett, or Schmidt? El Duque. It might be ugly but he wins far more often than he losses.

I can't disagree more strongly with those of you dissing El Duque. Few pitchers in this league feature a 5 pitch arsenal & that is what makes El Duque so lethal in the post season. He is not a power pitcher. He is an off-speed master. His pitches can dip from mid 50's to low 90's featuring: 2 seam fastball, 4 seam fastball, changeup, curveball, & slider. If that were not enough OH is a freak of nature. He can & often does vary his release point on any of the 5 pitches. Which makes him one of the toughest pitchers to read & steal on. For example he might throw the slider from a high arc or a low arc. If you look at his career he's been very consistant. 2004 OH 15GS 8W-2L 3.30ERA, 1.29WHIP, .230BAA. 2002 OH 22GS 8W-5L 3.64ERA, 1.14WHIP, .236BAA 1987+ OH 147GS 68W-42L 4.03ERA, 1.26WHIP, .240BAA Mid 1.20WHIP, solid 50% more wins than losses, & a mid .230BAA. He showed that same consistency in 2004 http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlib...dez_Orlando.stm The stat that matters most when it comes to El Duque is how many times his performance has left his team in a position to win the game. Regular Season wise: 147GS, 68W, 42L. In 73% of his starts his team was either tied, ahead, or within striking distance of tying or going ahead. How many pitchers can make that claim? Post Season wise: His last big game (Oct, 2001) http://stewthornley.net/worldseries.html El Duque (Mr October), having won his 1st 8 post-season decisions starting 1998 was facing Schilling. Hernandez had struggled through much of 2001 hampered by injuries. Schilling stifled Yankee hitters while Hernandez worked his way in and out of trouble. 1st: single, walk, HBP, 1 out: retires Williams & Finley. 2nd: 1-2-3 3rd: walk, walk, 1 out: retires Durazo & Williams. 4th: single, DP, Mark Grace HR 5th: RON 3, 1 out: runner throw out at plate 6th: 1-2-3 7th: With the score tied 1-1, El Duque exits having given up a walk & HBP. 7th: Stanton in relief got Womack to end the inning with a DP. The score after 7IP: 1-1. El Duque had once again left a start with his team either tied or ahead. His last post-season action was Oct, 2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gameLog?gameId=241017102 1st: Damon GO, Cabrera K, Ramirez walk, Ortiz walk, Varitek K. 2nd:Nixon FO, Millar PO, Mueller 1B, Bellhorn K 3rd: Ahead 2-0, Damon LO, Cabrera FO, Ramirez K. 4th: Ortiz FO, Varitek K, Nixon FO 5th: Ahead 2-0, Millar walk, Mueller GIFC, Bellhorn walk, Damon GIFC, Cabrera 1B, Ramirez walk, Ortiz 1B, Varitek K. Behind 3-2. 6th: The Yankees scored 2 to take the lead 4-3. Sturtze replaced El Duque. 9th: Boston scores 1 off Rivera. Tied 4-4. 12th: Boston scores 2 off Quantrill & wins 6-4. For El Duque it was yet another no-decision. He'll give you a heart attack but he'll rarely lose. If he now appears healthy we don't need Schmidt or Burnett. ALDS: Mark, Freddy, El Duque. Long relief: Jon, & Jose. ALCS+WS: Mark, Freddy, El Duque, Jon. Long relief: Jose. What team has better long relief options in case a starter gets in trouble? Nobody. Will Burnett or Schmidt give you a better chance to win than Mark or Freddy? No. Will Burnett or Schmidt give you a better chance to win than El Duque or Jon? Maybe. You have to believe in El Duque but Jon is still a question mark. One that Jul will certainly hope to answer. But even so Jose is there waiting in the wings if either should falter.

I sold my MCI stock at it's highest point after the merger. I never trusted the Brits. I don't believe in the acquisitions of American companies by foreigners. I see no benefits of such acquisitions/mergers for the American people. They simply lead to consolidation of work forces, loss of American jobs, & higher prices. As a Christian we are expected to show mercy & forgiveness towards sinners. But a big part of that includes repentance & restitution to those you have harmed. As Ebbers demonstrated anything of that nature? Not to my knowledge. Let this be a sign to all on Wall Street. If you cheat & get caught your life will end as you know it. The new SEC guidelines coupled with media distribution channels makes it very difficult to get away with it.

http://www.csa.com/hottopics/roe/overview.php This is a very good article on abortion & RvW. From latest media research surveys & polls only 60% of Americans do not want to see RvW overturned. Somewhere in the 40% who do & the 60% who do not lie the majority of us. What we seek is an alternative. Roe is clearly outdated & requires a judicial review since it's foundation was predicated on the progress of medicine some 30 yrs ago. A LOT has changed since then. In particular our understanding of fetal viability & what that means to personhood. The foundation for RvW stems from Blackman's understanding of medicine at the time which supported the belief that a fetus can not be considered a person before birth. Though he became more liberal as the years went by his original trimester decision demonstrates a strong belief that has the fetus matures the doubt for whether it should be considered a person grows stronger. This is clearly evident in his 3rd trimester definition which clearly places the life of the unborn 2nd only to the survivial of the woman. Not her mental health or physical consquences of birth but her survival. What is more interesting is where the court stood in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992): Dissenters: Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, & White - voted to uphold the state's provisions & overturn Roe v Wade. Only Blackman and Stevens voted to continue to "protect the right to choose as a fundamental right under Roe by subjecting state restrictions to strict scrutiny." Which means at the time 7 justices no longer felt the constitution supported abortion as a fundamental right. More recently: http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/bioethic...qs/a0027734.cfm 2000 5-4 decision effectively struck down all state laws banning partial-birth abortion. 2003 PBAB Act passed. Fed judges in CA, NE, & NY prevent enforcement. All 3 judges declared it unconstitutional (Hamilton, Casey, & Koft). The US Justice Dept has filed an appeal to the USSC against the CA & NE rulings. Unlike the 2000 decision there was only 1 groun: absense of a "health" exception. However the PBAB contains such an exception: - when a mother's life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including that of which is could be caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself." That is certainly in keeping with Blackman's 3rd trimester ruling in RvW. But it is not in keeping with the real travesty which is Doe v Bolton. It amazes me how we rarely ever hear this ruling & yet DvB is what changed the nation from being one that tolerates abortion to one that recommends it. DvB essentially interpreted Blackman's 3rd trimester ruling to mean: any & all factors for which one would visit a doctor in the medical community are considered relevan to the mother's health. That is as liberal as it gets & renders the 2nd & 3rd trimester ruliings to be inconsequential & irrelevant. On Jul 8, 2005: A Federal Appeals court upheld the DvB ruling. This essentially makes the current law of the land as it relates to abortion: The constitution supports the destruction of a fetus at any point during it's lifetime in which it resides in any part of the mother. It matters not to the court what medical science says about the maturation process of the fetus, the viability of the fetus having zero dependancy on the mother, or the characteristics & intelligence a fetus might demonstrate towards establishing personhood. As long as the fetus resides in any part of the mother it's ok to suck it's brains out & slice it to shreds in order for extraction. By latest surveys & media research on the subject 80% of Americans believe partial birth abortion should be illegal with the only exception being the survival of the mother. They do not accept the radically liberal position of the court that something as flimsy as grief a mother will feel from the loss as a legitimate condition to allow the partial-birth abortion. ************************************* If Karl Rove has proven anything in the past 8 yrs it's that he's very far from stupid. If the Democrats want to make this an issue of RvW Rove will be more than happy to make an issue of DvB & the PBAB Act. We shall see how the liberals respond then when they justify murder with grief.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_argumen...ipts/04-108.pdf http://wid.ap.org/documents/scotus/050623kelo.pdf O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, & Thomas were the dissenters. Their opinion begins on pg 25. It's a good read for those who believed like I did that this matter does not require protection for private property rights at the Fed level. Highlights of O'Connor's opinion: DYK the govt owns 49% of Hawaii & another 47% lies in the hands of 72 landowners (mostly foreigners)? Hawaiian's only own 4%! The crux of the dissenting opinion is that the Public Use Clause was/is intended to be applied in a narrow view only. Economic or environmental considerations should not be sufficient for taking private property currently put to private ordinary use & transferring to a new private ordinary use. Hospitals, stadiums, roads, railways, airports, etc. do not constitute private ordinary use. A new factory for Pfizer does. Whatever the details of Justice Kennedy's as yet undisclosed test, it is difficult to envision anyone but the "stupid staffer" failing it. For who among us can say she makes the most productive or attractive possible use of her property? The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing a Motel 6 with a Ritz Carlton, a home with a shopping mall, or a farm with a factory. States play many important functions in our system of dual sovereignty but compensating for our refusal to enforce properly the Federal Constitution (and a provision meant to curtail state action, no less) is not among them. I would hold that the takings in Parcel 3 & Parcel 4A are unconstitutional, reverse the judgement of the SC of Conn, and remand for further proceedings. ............................................................... Thomas's opinion: (I rather like this one - it's crafty) The Court replaces the Public Use Clause with a Public Purpose Clause so long as the purpose is legitimate & the means "not irrational". "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The Takings Clause prohibits the government from taking property except for public use (the obvious: hospitals, airports, railroad stations, roads, etc.). Tellingly the phrase "public use" contrasts with the very different phrase "general Welfare" used elsewhere in the constitution. The Constitution's text, in short, suggests that the Takings Clause authorizes the taking of private property only if the public has a right to EMPLOY it, not if the public realizes any conceivable benefit from the taking. On the majority side: (favoring interpreting Public Use to mean Public Purpose) Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, & Breyer. *************************************** It goes w/out saying that the American people have not seen nor heard the last of this issue. This is essentially the litmus question if you will the American people want to hear in the confirmation process for O'Connor's seat. Thomas is not known for his crafty writings but in my opinion he hit a home run in his diseenting opinion by placing the restriction that eminent domain requires the state to EMPLOY the land for public use. That even strikes at the heart of utilities who feel they can annex land with the state's approval for the benefit of the public. Interpreting Public Use to mean Public Purpose is a FAR MORE important decision than RvW because if we have learned ANYTHING from RvW it's that controversial & liberal decisions such as RvW become even further watered down over the years. Kennedy argued that NLDC had provided a convincing economic argument for the usage by Pfizer. Thirty years from now we can only imagine how flimsy an argument will need to be to grant the taking of property.

I see the BIG problem now & I'm going to look up the dissenters. If this is primarily a liberal decision then perhaps a new conservative court could overturn it. While it's true that the power resides in the states to pass laws against eminent domain how long is it likely to take for that to happen? A long time. Since tax revenue & profits are concerned in this decision it's not a slam dunk for any state & lobbying efforts on both sides will typically lead to long debate. The 5 justices who supported this decision should have issued a ruling similar to the one they did for the 10 commandments & religious symbols. Essentially stating no general rule or lemon test can be applied & that each case must be deliberated separately. That would have allowed them to rule in favor of the one case in Conn but insure that any future cases take a long time to work themselves through the courts & ultimately leaving the USSC to decide in each case whether the benefit to the government & the public outweighs the loss to the private individual.

Omar will fit right in. 05 RON .365/.907, 04 RON .332/.852 Pods, Iguchi, Omar, Thomas/Everett, Koney/Gload, Dye, Rowand, AJ It doesn't matter whether Omar hits 2 or 3. What matters most is that he will have Pods/Iguchi ahead of him & Thomas/Everett behind him. That should bring out the best in Omar. He has better RON numbers than Iguchi so he deserves #3.

Chemistry is certainly important & don't kid yourself it's not. If Beltran had not bonded with the rest of the Astros there's no way they go on that run. Sometimes the guy bonds & sometimes he doesn't. Everett certainly has bonded with the White Sox in now 2 tours of duty. I think Rogers would bond. I didn't hear any complaints about him when he pitched for the Twins. I personally think this is a Gammons wish rather than a plausible rumor. The only reason I can see the Rangers trading Rogers is for PR. They've taken a hit over the incident & it might be better to give him a fresh start. I don't believe that. Trading an ace when your in the race is a white flag move. It doesn't matter who you get it's not going to be enough to keep you in the race. Texas does not have that kind of owner & is not likely to do that. The best thing to cure a PR hit for the Rangers is to win. Prove they can win while Rogers is serving time & the media will think even more of them. If KW did find out the Twins were the likely destination for him then he's got to make a move to counter. Either keep Rogers from going there or trade for someone as good or better. That's a total order considering he's a proven AL LHSP.

Thomas doesn't have to play vs LHers but he does vs RHers. So if you are to rest him because he's still laboring try to do it when you are facing a LH starter. Having him come off the bench is always a good thing. Ozuna, Timo, & Harris are gone. In their place comes Omar, Randa, & Gload. Widger, & Everett round out the bench. As for the staff & pen: Rotation: Buehlre, Garcia, Garland, Schmidt, El Duque Pen: Contra, Marte, Shingo, Politte, Cotts, Hermanson That makes Ozuna, Harris, Timo, & Vizcaino trade bait.

pitching wise LHers are getting the better of us: http://baseball.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/pitc...Type=2&type=vsb vs LHB: .330O .428S .758OOP .258BAA vs RHB: .296O .363S .659OOP .238BAA Why does OAK have our number? Only 3 LHP on the staff, & 5 LHBs in the lineup. Any new arms need to be strong vs LHB's. This yr's Schmidt does not fit that profile but last yr's did. As for Contra/El Duque moving to long relief, Contra vs LHB: .318O .376S .694OOP .213BAA - good El Duque vs LHB: bad - don't look

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/battin...Type=2&type=reg CWS vs LHers: weak links (Koney, Pods, Timo) Frank Thomas .286/1.114 Gload 2004 .425/1.102 Jermaine Dye .303/1.036 Juan Uribe .348/.976 Carl Everett .351/.900 Aaron Rowand .333/.825 Chris Widger .267/.824 Joe Crede .281/.801 Pablo Ozuna .367/.792 T. Iguchi .275/.788 A. Pierzynski .267/.787 S. Podsednik .328/.741 Willie Harris .333/.733 Paul Konerko .181/.689 Timo Perez .100/.200 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/battin...Type=2&type=reg CWS vs RHers: weak links (Aaron, Crede, AJ, Widger, Uribe) Paul Konerko .270/.871 S. Podsednik .284/.704 Aaron Rowand .252/.675 Jermaine Dye .257/.793 Joe Crede .232/.703 T. Iguchi .281/.729 A. Pierzynski .246/.707 Juan Uribe .207/.532 Carl Everett .241/.759 Timo Perez .271/.729 Willie Harris .197/.481 Frank Thomas .222/.963 Pablo Ozuna .190/.435 Chris Widger .242/.578 Ross Gload .167/.333 Notes to KW, Ozzie: Catcher: I don't believe in upgrading C at mid-season. It's too big a change for the pitching staff. I think that was one of our downfalls when we traded for Johnson. He hit for us but the pitching declined considerably. For better or worse you need to stick with AJ & Widger even though they won't produce much vs RHers. Short: The middle IF bench is woeful vs RHers. Omar is the answer there. Yes, it means Uribe becomes a bench player but come on already. He's produced a 532 OPS! That's horrible. You can make the argument to stick with a guy if he's slighty below 700 but approaching 500? Fughedabut it! Omar Vizquel vs RHers: .326/.787 That's a 255 OPS jump over Uribe! This is a no-brainer! Thomas needs to play most of the time. He's got the best OPS And stop being so damn cheap! Uribe at $9.5M/yr even as a sub is more than reasonable. He can play 2B, SS, & 3B at a solid everyday level as insurance against starters. He is a great bat vs LHers. He's still going to get a LOT of playing time. There are plenty of LHers for the Sox to face n the 2nd half. The guy was going no where fast in COL before KW got him. Next ST he'll still get the opportunity to beat Omar out for the starter role. DH: Ozzie cut the s*** out. Thomas needs to be the everyday DH unless for some reason he can't play. He's got the best OPS on the team vs LHers & RHers. 1B: He's hitting over .400 in the ml, & hit .425 vs LHers in 04. Gload vs L, Koney vs R should get it done. 3B: You need a strong bat vs RHers on the bench. Randa. Randa 05 vs R: .305/.882 Randa 04 vs R: .282/.743 Randa represents an obvious upgrade at 3B vs RHers. The addition of Omar & Randa to share time with Crede & Uribe makes Timo, Ozuna, & Harris obsolete. The bench vs RHers: Crede, Uribe, Gload, Everett, Widger The bench vs LHers: Randa, Omar, Koney, Dye, AJ If Randa & Omar are too high of a price to pay then get comparable guys that are strong vs RHers that can play SS & 3B.

I have to admit I was relying on Griffey's past and stature as a measure of his D. I didn't bother to crunch the numbers. Yes, it's possible Juggs can put together a post w/out looking at the numbers. When I do you guys always catch me on it http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/fieldi...llInningsPlayed 05 F% AR 13th .990, KGJ 16th .985 05 IP AR 7th 717, KGJ 12th 680 05 TC AR 14th 191, KGJ 10th 199 05 A AR 23rd 2, KGJ 17th 3 05 RF AR 17th 2.37, KGJ 10th 2.60 05 ZR AR 4th .923, KGJ 22nd .820 Cincy pitchers are generating more hits right at KGJ than White Sox pitchers are for Rowand. But Rowand is covering a LOT more ground than KGJ these days. Griffey has the better arm, but a 3-2 assist advantage is insignificant. I think it's time some of you start giving Aaron props. 2004 ZR AR 1st .921 KGJ DNP enough The Southtown obviously does not value Rowand enough either to even suggest KGJ. Post season championships are won on pitching, big plays, & big hits. Aaron has a better chance of helping all 3 categories than KGJ. Let's just hope Aaron starts hitting again but like Crede his glove talent has earned him that everyday player status.

I think both Rowand & Uribe are the type of players that are just happy to be on the team. They know with Ozzie they will get more playing time than on any other contending team. Griffey in particular is the kind of contract GM's salivate over: Signed in 2000, Griffey was paid $7M for 2001, & $6M from 2002-2009. Everything else in the contract is deferred ($57.5M that doesn't begin to earn interest until 2009). There are no penalties if he is traded but Griffey has an iron-clad 100% no-trade clause. He's said he will veto any trade but so did McGriff years ago. The media pressure usually gets to you & you cave in. Why? Because not doing so makes you look like you could care less about winning.

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/co...nt/ladewski.htm Schmidt, Omar, & Griffey. Addresses all of our weaknesses when you consider Contra/El Duque can compete for who starts & who is long relief. The total $ cost in 2005 to acquire all 3 would be about $8M. With these 3 guys you don't worry about future cost because their value on the open market exceeds the value of their contracts. Let's say you get swept in the first round. If you don't want to keep them around there will be plenty of buyers willing to take them off your hands. With Schmidt it will cost you $3.5M to say sayonara. Talent wise what they like in our bench & no less than Sweeney & Gonzo in the ml's. You have to be realistic. When Cincy & SFG scour our ml's for players they need they are going to lock in on these two. KW is not good at getting teams to take less than what they want.

If you don't believe KGJ is available .. read & learn: http://www.prosportsdaily.com/mlb/reds/rumors.html What exactly am I suppose to hope for with Rowand? His whole career he has proven to be a mid 800s OPS hitter vs LHers & a mid 700's OPS hitter vs RHers. In 2004 with a monster 2nd half he exceeded that. Rising to high 800's vs RHers & mid 900's vs LHers. But he started that surge in June. This June he went into a slump & the Knights are not an option to get him back on track. With Griffey you are getting a player with a career avg of high 800's vs LHers & high 900's vs RHers. Do you know what that means? If Griffey just approaches his career numbers he still produces more than Rowand's career best. At US Cell he should flourish. Put another way Griffey's career numbers vs RHers are better than Thomas' career numbers. I don't even think Aaron would blink twice at the possibility of the White Sox getting Griffey. He's like the best cure imaginable for solving our weakness against RHers. I think you are dead wrong in the CWS not keeping Uribe if they trade for Omar. Cutting him lose now saves you $7.3M over the next 2 yrs but only about $1M this year. That $1M is more than reasonable to keep him around as a super-sub IF. The same can be said of Rowand. Here's the formula your adopting to win the World Series: Trade for all-star caliber talent to replace good starters. Move the good starters to the bench. Trade the bench with ml prospects. That strategy keeps your chemistry intact while you upgrade your lineup. As for the ml prospects say goodbye to Gonzalez & at least Sweeney. Both of them are likely to be future all-stars. But that won't help you win a WS in 2005.

It's mid-season so let's look at our strength's a weaknesses & who's available: Omar, Griffey Jr Omar $12.5M/3 yr deal w SFG vs Uribe $9.5M/3 yr deal w CWS. Omar is an avg hitter vs LHers & a great hitter vs RHers. Uribe is a great hitter vs LHers & a poor hitter vs RHers. Both are solid defensively. Even at 38 Omar is on par with Uribe. Griffey Jr is a great hitter vs LHers & a great hitter vs RHers. Rowand is a great hitter vs LHers & an average hitter vs RHers. You can look up the stats yourself. The greatest weakness on the team is the ability to hit & score runs off of RHers. That supercedes are apparent weakness in the bullpen. If we were to get KGJ we don't have to trade Rowand. We can keep him as insurance against KGJ's health & as a super-sub OF. This trade makes Perez expendable. Likewise if we get Omar we don't have to trade Uribe. We can keep him an insurance against Omar's age & as a super-sub IF. This trade makes Ozuna & Harris expendable. The net cost for $2005 is about $7M in additional payroll. Well within reason of a WS budget run. The new Sox lineup: Pods, Iguchi, Omar, Griffey, Thomas, Koney, Dye, AJ, Crede The new Sox bench: Widger, Everett, Gload, Rowand, Uribe That stacks up with anybody in the game including STL & the NYY. That put's us in the low 80's range. There is still a few million left for long relief help in the pen. A guy that is near starter quality that can give you 3 strong innings of relief on any given night. Of course it be expected to rest the next night. There are guys like around the league. You call them 3-4 inning starters. Prior to this year, Garland might have been considered one. Guys who usually break down in the 4th & 5th after 3 solid innings of work. That's what this team really needs the most pitching wise. Consider Sun's game. The Sox are winning 5-4 going into the 7th. The short starter type guy can get you through that inning & into the 9th for your closer. To find these guys just look at starters who have great numbers for their 1st 3 innings or first 45 pitches. They usually don't cost much to trade for. I'll scour the teams to create a list. The rotation: Buerhle, Garcia, Garland, Contra, El Duque The bullpen: solid short starter, Cotts, Politte, Hermanson, Marte/Jenks, Shingo/Vizc It's a lot better than it has been this past month.

I'm going to make two posts because there are two discussions going on & they both have bearing on trade discussions. The first is RF vs ZR. Range Factor is nothing more than a calculation of an individual player's value. As someone pointed out that can be easily influenced by not only the home stadium, but the division, & league of the player. It has very little comparative value. Zone Rating is more along the lines of Sag's RPG & NPERA. It's based on a Markov Chain analysis where all players data is considered over time. The zone is not determined arbitrarily as some suggest. It's based on the best players to ever field a given position. The combination of those players strengths (N,S,E,W) defines the maximum zone for each position. ZR is of course influenced by factors like RF (home, division, league) but to a much smaller degree. It's more influenced by the game taken as a whole over time. I don't see any value to RF because the individual data means more. Nor do I see value in just using ZR. You really should look at the top 6 categories: IP, TC, F%, ZR, DP, & A. If you just want a short story then: middle IF: TC, DP, ZR & OF: TC, ZR. Why? If you have a high error rate it's going to hurt your ZR. If you have a high assist rate it will help your ZR. That drops off F%, & A. Likewise if you're playing more often you will help your TC's. Your ability to play more is dependant on both your glove & your bat. It makes a difference to the total defensive play of a team. This is where I disagree with Ozzie when it comes to awarding gold gloves. What you do with the bat counts. If you are a great defensive player but a poor hitter you won't be able to play as often & that will hurt the team defensively when you don't. Chavez deserves the gold gloves because he's both a great bat & great glove. You can depend on him to be there day in & day out. Crede on the other hand as proven to be a great glove but a weak bat. During slumps you are likely to sit him & that hurts your defense. You can't depend on him to be there day in & day out. If he wants to win a GG he needs to hit consistently enough to warrant the playing time to boost his TC's.

Good article. The cost of capital in the US far exceeds that of China. Often we think of just the wage difference. A Factory worker in the US making say $20/hr vs one in China making enough yuan to equal about $3/hr in value. But that's only part of the story. The cost of constructing & operating a factory in the US is about 5 times as much as in China. Even after greasing respective politicians. Mostly because China won't float their currency like the US, Europe, Japan, & most of the other G8's. I think the best analogy is that US corporations are married to the USA but have a mistress overseas in China. China no doubt will try to seduce those companies to divorce the USA in the future. China's a prostitute turning homewreck seeking to be new wife. If you don't put a stop to the infidelity now divorce is inevitable & you'll get nothing in return. Not even child support.