witesoxfan

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 02:14 PM) He just said that he thinks this thread sucks, which apparently got him banned?? No, the post was just deleted. There's no need for those types of posts on the board.

The minors are very different. Minor league players are tested randomly for all drugs and I believe all drugs carry the same penalties. The MLBPA would have never allowed that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_...#Drugs_of_abuse I also seem to recall that these test results are generally announced privately. Players can also serve suspensions while on the DL, so while I have no proof, it would not surprise me if, as determined by the owner, commissioner, general manager, and manager, a player would require a suspension and suddenly hit the DL with a "bad back" while showing no side effects from it otherwise because they want to keep that aspect under wraps as best as they can.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 12:27 PM) I don't speak Spanish, but I can only assume that this post is freaking out about the Bulls. Welcome, Cuban. Stay up (I'm assuming "Keep") Abreu jersey becomes a star. We are missing your opinions and your knowledge here. I hope your start writing again. ITS CALLED A TRANSLATOR STEVE

QUOTE (scs787 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 12:12 PM) Cubano!! Any thoughts on this guy... http://cuban-play.com/estadisticas/labor-d...er-bello-veloso Looks like a backup

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 11:34 AM) Drug of abuse = marijuana? Most likely

Steph Curry is amazing, and there are totally times I would take him over Rose, but starting from scratch, I don't see any way you can't take Rose.

What all are we considering here then? I mean, costs do matter at this point, so you can rule Dunn out, and current production matters, so that rules Viciedo out (and possibly/probably Garcia too) for a few teams. The fact that he's an outfielder matters as well. I think Eminor's list is perfect. As of this moment, simply non-tendering or trading De Aza just to be rid of him would be one of the absolute worst things the Sox could do.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 11:24 AM) No one is as pretty as you are.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 11:26 AM) Very few teams in baseball are going to choose DeAza over Ramirez, Abreu, Viciedo or Avisail Garcia. If money were no object, they might also select Dunn, and some would take Gillaspie as well. Half those teams would rather have Beckham at $4.4 million than DeAza to be a back-up/4th outfielder at the same price. I disagree with this notion, especially regarding Dunn, Gillaspie, and Beckham.

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:51 AM) You are starting a new franchise in Seattle. The NBA, in a strange move, says you can choose one of two players as your franchise cornerstone whose salary won't count against your cap. You can have Derrick Rose or Stephen Curry. You're an expansion team, so you don't have any existing pieces to consider in your choice. Who do you choose? Derrick Rose. The part you forgot to mention is that I am a criminally motivated psychopath and I kidnap Steph Curry as well.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 11:04 AM) girls, girls, you are both pretty As pretty as me?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 11:06 AM) I would think there have to be laws against sports books making bets other places. Otherwise everybody would be doing this. I don't think anybody would do this even if they could. There would no longer be a "house." First, unless one house simply abstained from betting which, in reality, would be irrational thinking at the margin (because if you are offering 40:1 odds and you can find a place offering 42:1 odds, you can take half the money you make and place it at 42:1 because then you make money no matter what) casinos would bet with each other all the time. Secondly, and probably more importantly, you would begin to see casinos jockeying with each other for the reason above to offer lower odds, which is an aspect of a free market economy, and instead of the Sox being 50:1 dogs to win the World Series, that would suddenly make its way down to about 8:1 or 10:1, and the Red Sox would probably be at 4:3 or something stupid like that. At that point, you lose the customer because they have virtually no incentive to bet because what's the point? It would actually in the casino's worst interests to bet.

QUOTE (JoshPR @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:29 AM) I agree with you on the rest too. Just in case you wondered... QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:45 AM) That's all I'm saying. It's not that De Aza is awesome or irreplaceable, it's just that he is not even close to the biggest problem we have. And the idea of replacing all of those players is absurd. It's simply inefficient cost wise to do so regardless of any other reasoning.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 10:39 AM) Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeymanCBS 1h ellsbury, garza & drew on #yankees menu (along w/ beltran, choo, mcann & tanaka). http://cbsprt.co/19gOVjc Yankees are interested in everybody. Sun rose out of the east today too btw

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 08:16 AM) To be 100% fair...it's 162 innings, not games there, and most of those innings there were in 2011 when the Sox had already moved him to 1b in the minors then he was called up and put back at 3b after spending most of the year playing 1b, so literally with no practice or preparation before playing there. That said, people should indeed stop trying to put him at a different defensive position. He's got a good enough arm that even if he doesn't get to a ton of balls he can be a tolerable corner OF if he's on a team that doesn't deserve to have the Benny Hill theme played every time there's a ball hit to a fielder. My numbers included his time in AA. Professional, not MLB. He's at like .895 in the majors

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Nov 1, 2013 -> 02:42 AM) We had exactly 3 hitters who amassed more than a WAR of 1.0 last season. THREE f***ING HITTERS!!! One of those was Rios who isn't even here anymore. Just because he was one of the tallest midgets doesn't mean him a tall person. No, it makes him an average sized person, which means he's perfectly average and perfectly acceptable. The Sox need to get rid of those that are 2 or 3 feet tall. I have no problem with the Sox trading De Aza, but this "LET'S GIT RID O' HIM, HE DUMB" attitude really gets old.

QUOTE (Andy the Clown @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 07:40 PM) I'm presuming they would move Tank to 1B, or...wait for it... 3B I posted it last week, but in 160 professional games at 3B, Viciedo's fielding percentage is about .905. That means, given about 350 chances and even allowing a .015 error margin, Viciedo would likely make about 28 errors at 3B - at the minimum. He might make as many as 40. I am not an error and fielding percentage guy for the most part, but Viciedo can't get to balls and can't field the ones he gets to. At some point, you have to be able to field the ball cleanly.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 03:04 PM) I think Linstrom is a luxury more than anything else. $3.5m for a glorified one-out righty guy is a lot for a team rebuilding. It's really not, considering just based on the number of right handed hitters in the game. If the team struggles, he can also be dealt at the deadline for a piece as well. Everything about this move makes sense.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 02:14 PM) I'm surprised people got on me about AJ and not Rowand. As I recall there used to be a lot of Rowand bashing. As far as Thome, he exuded leadership to me. Maybe I'm mistaken. AJP is all sorts of a pest to the opponent looking for any edge to WIN. Rowand gave up his body a lot. I'd take a Rowand over a DeAza or Rios so quickly it'd make your head spin. I'd take Thome over just about anybody who has worn a Sox jersey. If I'm wrong about him, then so be it. I guess an argument could be made he didn't have TWTW since he hit into the shift so much when he coulda gone the other way. People didn't bash Rowand, Crede, and Pierzynski so much as they got tired of people always equating them with the Sox winning. Those guys contributed, but the most important aspect of that team winning the World Series was the pitching. That offense actually kind of sucked, comparatively speaking, but that pitching staff was otherworldly good. It wouldn't look that good any more, but it was 8 years ago and offenses were still running hot.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 01:53 PM) Is picking up Lindstrom's option evidence that they won't be cutting payroll? I would think he'd be gone if that were the case. I don't think this is evidence of anything other than wanting some sort of veteran presence in the bullpen as well as returning good value. If his option had been $7-9 mill, that's a different story.

If the offense struggles, which I'm sure it will, we'll see someone post in June or July "what's the point of hiring this guy if the offense doesn't improve? FIRE STEVERSON!" And then said person will be jumped on and ridiculed mercilessly

QUOTE (scs787 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 11:56 AM) Saturday @ 7p. Kinda lame that it appears the All Stars or whatever weren't picked on their AFL performance. Semien was garbage, Leesman/McCray were better than Bassit(though all 3 were real good), and Mitchell put up better numbers than 3 of the 5 OFers on the team. I'm glad they pick it like this. I'd much rather watch Semien than any of those other guys. And he's had a bit of a long season too...13 games in the AFL (50 PAs), 21 games in the majors (71 PAs), and 137 games in the minors (626 PAs). Dude's probably a bit tired at this point, what with 747 PAs this year. I still want to see what he's capable of.

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 11:08 AM) He is the perfect candidate to trade near the deadline for a couple of prospects like we did w/ Frasor. And Frasor brought back Myles Jaye if I recall correctly. And Daniel Webb

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 31, 2013 -> 10:14 AM) We don't know Ricky that well yet, but just as a reminder...if you wrote this post about the previous White Sox GM, later that day there would be a major free agent signing. I really think Williams kind of gets a misleading reputation. He never really lied to the media and if he said something, he meant it. It's just that he was so intentionally vague in his remarks that anything could be interpreted to mean anything. A reporter would ask him if he was looking to add pitching in free agency and he'd say something like "As a team, we are always looking for pitching and for ways to get better, so if that is a way we determine that we can improve this team, then we might look at pitchers in the free agent market." It's a lot of words, but in the end, it basically means nothing.

http://www.fangraphs.com/not/joe-west-to-a...iscuous-umpire/