witesoxfan

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 10:27 AM) OK, so take that down to more like $103M then. Not $119M. Cot's has him at a $13.5M for this year, then the $6M starting after, but maybe there is a misunderstanding there. So at the time Passan wrote the article, Sox had anywhere from $102M to $109M committed. If nothing else, what these articles show is a general feeling of a team but not a completely accurate portrayal of a team. I don't fault him, and still believe Passan to be the best current writer in the game, but it's difficult to have a strong pulse on all 30 teams, especially one as reserved as the White Sox are.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 10:19 AM) Granola bars are one of the biggest lies ever sold to people as health food. Even intelligent and otherwise healthy people never bother to look at the fact that most granola bars are about equal to eating a snickers bar in terms of calories, fat and sugar. But iron and fiber!

I missed the $500K, but $7 mill of Konerko's salary this year is deferred from 2014-2020 in $1 mill yearly installments

I have them around $110 mill. Dunn - $15 mill Peavy - $14.5 mill Danks - $14.25 mill Rios - $12.5 mill Floyd - $9.5 mill Ramirez - $7 mill Konerko - $6 mill Thornton - $5.5 mill Crain - $4.5 mill Keppinger - $3.5 mill Lindstrom - $3 mill Beckham - $2.975 mill Viciedo - $2.5 mill De Aza - $2.075 mill DeWayne Wise - $700k = $103.5 for 15 arb+ players +$5 mill for 10 pre-arb players = $108.5 mill +additional money for miscellaneous additions throughout the year

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:58 AM) I wrote it, so I guess it would be my opinion. You write it as if it is fact. It wears on people. --- All I see is that Passan is advacting to be weary of regression. 85-90 losses is far more than regression. He brings up good points, but it's just as likely that this team wins 85 games again, in my mind, than it is that they lose 81-83, and it's far likelier that they win 85-90 than they lose 85-90.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:54 AM) Passan is making a strong case for an 85-90 loss team. Hard to argue against. In your opinion

suck on these!

Beat you both. Have at it!

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:38 AM) Lindstrom's 50ish innings make Crain look like an innings eater. Ventura is going to have to handle the pen better than he did last year for this move to be a good one. /facepalm

QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 09:24 AM) DeWayne Wise sucks! I'd rather the Sox keep Jordan Danks on the team than give Wise more at-bats! Thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, traditional statistics strongly disagree with your assessment.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 11:13 PM) Seattle Times front page: Suppose Chris blackmailed the Maloofs into selling?

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 10:29 PM) I don't know why, but Wise reminds me of Fukudome last year. I think they caught lightning in a bottle at the end of last year. Wise is a grinder, but at 35... I just don't see him contributing much for this season. I don't understand why they wouldn't just go with Danks. DeWayne Wise had a .700 OPS with the Sox. If that is catching lightning in a bottle, then Hahn needs to shoot a little higher on the electric totem pole, perhaps even attempting to harvest a thunderstorm or hiring Zeus as a special consultant. There's virtually no harm in signing a guy for the small amount the Sox did, and Wise is a great bench player to have. There's nothing wrong with letting him be the backup outfielder while Danks continues to get regular playing time.

QUOTE (Lillian @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 01:40 PM) Career numbers are not relevant. However, the last couple of seasons, provide some indication of how well a given hitter, who has played a full season vs a division rival, might be expected to perform. So Nick Markakis' numbers from 15 games the last two years are relevant, but DeWayne Wise's 35 games in his career are not? Of course, the correct answer is that neither are relevant, as both are far too small a sample size with too many independant variables working against each other to be able to determine any sort of correlation between players hitting well vs certain teams. Nick Markakis would be just as likely to hit .200/.250/.300 against Detroit as he would be likely to maintain his success. The correct answer is for them to just play better against Detroit, but the Tigers have good pitching, so that can be somewhat difficult. Nick Markakis isn't going to single-handedly change the Sox fortunes against the Tigers.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 21, 2013 -> 08:08 AM) Solid It took one of the greatest drives in NFL history to prevent them from going 19-0, and they are a fluke drop by Welker away from winning a 2nd Super Bowl too. The Ravens haven't gotten it done in a while either. People who bring up the Spygate stuff are rehashing useless history. All they've done since then, including 2007, is win 76 games in the regular season, make the playoffs 5 out of 6 seasons, make the AFC Championship 3 times, and make it to 2 Super Bowls. Spygate has had literally no effect on that franchise and everything else is incidental. They are unbelievably arrogant, and he's got that part down pat.

QUOTE (CWSpalehoseCWS @ Jan 20, 2013 -> 10:21 PM) I would trade Viciedo if Bourn was signed. Get some young talent for the minors. Viciedo is young talent from the minors, and you're really not going to get much else for him. Bourn really isn't a good fit for this team for a number of reasons.

RIP to one of the best managers of all time

Gassy groundballer. And I don't mean flatulence, I mean velocity.

Oh, and I am dead serious. We've let this whole charade of "Hahn does nothing, he hasn't done anything, thus, Hahn sucks" go on a bit too long. Fact of the matter is that he had already made several moves, including the resigning of Jake Peavy, a minor trade here or there, the signing of Jeff Keppinger, and now 1 year deals with both De Aza and Beckham. I have no problem criticizing upper management, or the manager himself, or players, or anything. However, from this point forward, anything involving Hahn "bring on life support" will be taken as an insult and will lead to suspensions and/or bans.

QUOTE (bhawk99 @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 09:19 PM) Once Rick Hahn gets off the life support system and snaps out of the coma he is has been all off season then I am sure he will make a blockbuster deal. If he could just wiggle his toes to let us know he is still alive. Do you realize...how should I put this, in a politically correct way (f***ing mod status)...OBTUSE this statement is at this point? You want signs of life? Two players avoided arbitration today. --- Still, I can see it now. "B-b-b-b-but they were already under contract DOESNT COUNT" All I have to do is take the 2 most important parts out of this quote: and BOOM, no more complaining. Better change your tune.

QUOTE (Jose Paniagua @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 04:21 PM) We have an "Adopt-a-Prospect" section of the message board, where any poster who wants to 'adopts' a prospect and just tracks their progress. and I just thought it'd be funny if the actual father of a prospect ACTUALLY adopted the prospect in that part of the forum. That's all. No malice intended(and it is really cool we have you here, keep participating!) This is the Adopt-a-Prospect forum

Have to assume Syracuse and Pitt end up in the Big 10 or 12 then too

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/byteam?g...&timeframe= 33.4 passes per game, tied for 8th fewest in the NFL. Opponents completed 63.7%. Opponents rushed 34.1 times per game. Slightly favored the run, but not an extraordinary amount.

QUOTE (floridafan @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 03:39 PM) I am not sure what you are trying to say. But if it is a problem with folks that I update my sons progress and/or setbacks I will stop. I don't want to make any waves for anyone, especially my son. Oh its not problem at all. In fact, it's a blessing. He was just saying that it's ironic that you are adopting your own son on the forum. It's been a while since we've seen this kind of depth and detail of a prospect's progress, and I don't think any of them hit like Eric did, even if it was only rookie ball. The odds are against him but we're rooting for him all the same and greatly appreciate any and all updates.

QUOTE (SI1020 @ Jan 18, 2013 -> 03:00 PM) Absolutely not. I mean should we look at the Alomar brothers and Ken Griffey Jr. again too? Because unlike those 3, Javier Vazquez was pretty good as recently as 2011 and, like Rios, he's an every other year player (if you are to believe that).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawberry Wiki seems to indicate it's a fruit, it's just a different type of fruit