witesoxfan

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 08:52 PM) Cubs offense is really clicking, as they've cut the 8-0 lead to 8-5. The Astros offense is clicking better. 10-5 Astros

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 05:01 PM) Yes, that happened to Rauch. But it happened in 2003, so it would have been before Ozzie's time in Chicago, so I ruled that out. Rauch was traded in '04 along with Gary Majewski to Montreal for Carl Everett, so that was during Ozzie's time.

Rivera was a starter throughout his minor league career. And Eckersley was pretty mediocre during his final few years of starting...he's not in Cooperstown without the switch to the bullpen in 87.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 17, 2010 -> 06:50 PM) KW will find a way to do something. I just don't think he deals anyone of our top 4 guys. Top 4?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 05:00 PM) I can give a pretty entertaining list of some of the signings by the Rays from the early part of the decade as well. John Rocker, Tino Martinez, Fred McGriff, Greg Vaughn, it was a nice place to go to end your career on a 50 win team. Those guys all signed with the Rays though, so they didn't have to give up any players to get them. What chw42 is saying is that the Royals will give up players to bring these terrible players into the fold, and that really is a shame. Their bullpen would look a hell of a lot better with Leo Nunez in it, I can guarantee that much.

I wouldn't care if the Sox DFA'ed him once Teahen gets back. He becomes quite redundant since it would seem like Vizquel is still going to play quite a bit of 3B when Teahen is activated, and Teahen is going to play because of the money he is due. Teahen can play both 1B and the corner outfield spots like Kotsay, but he can also stand to the left of 3B and 2B and field ground balls a little bit too, which is something Kotsay won't do because he throws left handed.

I find it funnier that Ace brought up those 3 when looking at relievers you should draft (because most failed starters becomes relievers) yet all 3 were failed starters.

June 6th through July 18th - .282/.351/.412/.763

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 04:21 PM) Not nearly this good though 2.97 ERA, 1.06 WHIP, 12.13 K/9 in 75.2 innings in 09 3.00 ERA, 0.86 WHIP, 8.75 K/9 in 72 innings in 07 2.25 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 9.8 K/9 in 60 innings in 06 1.53 ERA, 0.79 WHIP, 11.5 K/9 in 53 innings in 03 He's been this good before. He's always been this good. It's always been a matter of him staying healthy. He's had 3 different seasons where he's thrown fewer than 25 innings between the majors and the minors.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 04:14 PM) Why do you bother? I don't mind when someone says Jenks has been adequate or that he's been serviceable, but when someone flat out lies and say he's been excellent overall, I have to say something.

QUOTE (Greg Hibbard @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 09:41 AM) If we define things this way: 1) Great game (A) - no walks, hits or runs 2) Good game (B) - 1-2 walks/hits, no runs. 3) Mediocre game ( C) - not more than 3 walks/hits, not more than 1 run, no BS/loss. 4) Bad game (D) - 3-4 walks/hits and 1-2 runs, or 3 walks/hits + 1 run + BS/loss. 5) Horrible game (F) - 3-4 or more walks/hits, more than 2 runs, or 2 runs with a BS/loss. Bobby has had: A - 11 outings, 7 saves B - 15 outings, 11 saves C - 4 outings, 2 saves (no losses, no blown saves) D - 3 outings, 1 win (no losses, no blown saves) F - 3 outings, 2 losses, 1 blown save (one of the appearances the white sox won anyway) so he has had 6 bad outings this year in 37 appearances. Those six bad outings: 1) April 24th vs Sea - the team wins anyway, 5-4, Jenks gets the Win. Doesn't hurt us. 2) April 29th @ Tex - the team wins anyway, 7-5. Doesn't hurt us. 3) May 7th vs Tor - the team was losing already when he entered the game. Doesn't hurt us. 4) May 9th vs Tor - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us. 5) May 26th @ Cle - the team wins 5-4. Doesn't hurt us. 6) July 18th @ Min - Bobby blows the game. Hurts us. In other words, Bobby Jenks has lost us two games in 37 appearances...31 he has made with the lead. The team is 21-1 since May 11th when he enters the game with the lead. Seems pretty good to me. Including the four "mediocre" appearances: 1) Apr 7 vs Cle - entered the game losing. 2) Jun 12 vs Cubs - gave up 1 run, made it closer, got the save anyway. 3) Jul 5 vs LAA - entered the game winning 9-1, gave up one run. 4) Jul 18 @ Min - gave up 1 in that 8-7 win, got the save anyway. I'd call the non-save 2 of those non-factors. The Minny and Cubs games were made sweatacular, but that's what closers do - they still ultimately save the games, and those were rival situations. I think any outing where a reliever gives up a run or allows 2 or more base runners per inning can be classified as a bad outing. Using that as a rubric, Jenks has had 12 bad outings (and that is not including the first game back against Minnesota when he allowed 2 hits and a run in 1.1 IP against the Twins). That is 32.4% of his appearances. Using that same measure, Putz has had 6 bad appearances and Thornton is at 10. For further comparison's sake, both Thornton and Putz have only allowed multiple runs twice. Jenks has allowed multiple runs to score 6 times. You cite examples of when it did or didn't hurt the Sox, and you mention that one time it didn't hurt the Sox. I fail to see how you can justify those as "not hurting us" when, had it not been for the offense, those games WOULD have hurt the Sox. On April 24th, it took TWO 9th inning homers off of David Aardsma for the Sox to win the game. On April 29th, had Konerko not hit a 2-run insurance homer in the top half, the Rangers would have tied that game up. On May 7th, the Sox and Blue Jays were TIED in the 9th inning and he gave up the LEAD. AJ tied it in the bottom of the 9th, and Putz gave up a 3-run homer. On May 26th, he was given a 4 run lead and allowed the first 5 baserunners to reach and damn near let the Indians tie a game when there was no save situation. Relievers are allowed to f*** up, but to suggest that Jenks has pitched well this year is an absolute farce. He's been mediocre all season.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 02:05 PM) Did you read Hibbard's thread on Jenks? He's been excellent overall. If he had been excellent overall, he wouldn't have a 4.76 ERA or a 1.56 WHIP. He hasn't been excellent overall.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 01:19 PM) If he keeps on hitting well in Seattle, I think it will be time to move him back in the 2 spot. The fact that Juan Pierre couldn't drive in a run to put us up 7-3 in yesterday's game might have cost us. We gotta do something about the top of the order. I thought Pierre was safe, but I also didn't have a great view of the play.

QUOTE (T R U @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 01:16 PM) Yes they wanted to trade for Zambrano have him pitch AND play DH because he is "a lot like Babe Ruth".. If only Ruth had been crazy and addicted to internet porn instead of hot dogs and beer, this might hold true.

I'm a guy who generally likes to look at the bright side of things, but I haven't been this upset about losing to Minnesota since the end of 2008 when the Sox got swept in the dome. The first loss was obviously a bit closer than 9-3 (considering the go ahead run was at the plate), but, in a huge coincidence, the Sox lost the final 2 games of that series 3-2 and 7-6. Thankfully, this was a 4 game series and the Sox won the first one, and they're still up in the standings and don't need a minor miracle to get back into the race.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 12:59 PM) Sometimes, setting your asking price so high that the other side flat out walks away isn't a good negotiating tactic. That'd be fine by the Royals. They're not in a hurry to trade DeJesus and Soria within the division, and there will be plenty of other teams that will lineup for those two, especially considering their contract situations ($4.7 mill in '10, $6 mill team option next year for DeJesus; $3 mill in '10, $4 mill in '11, $6 mill team option in '12, $8 mill team option in '13, $8.75 mill team option in '14 for Soria).

QUOTE (PlunketChris @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 12:28 PM) Don't you think everyone in the league knows that Beckham isn't going anywhere, especially after it came out that Kenny wouldnt even move him for Cliff Lee? That's not going to stop other organizations from asking for him.

2.30 ERA at Safeco, 5.74 ERA on the road. A fastball that doesn't reach 90. A BABIP of .268. K/9 less than 5. Terrible in 3 of his 4 starts since coming back from injury (and surprise, surprise, the only outing he didn't suck in was his outing at Safeco). Fister is no better than a league average pitcher who has been aided by pitching in one of the most pitcher friendly environments in all of baseball.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 19, 2010 -> 11:34 AM) Miguel Olivo's .391 wOBA in way more PAs says hi. I would say that's entirely a product of playing in Coors. Home - .400/.421/.689/1.110 Away - .210/.313/.360/.673

I saw 17.5 great innings of baseball this weekend, and then saw some AAA pitcher come in to pitch the 9th yesterday. That ruined my s***.

QUOTE (VAfan @ Jul 16, 2010 -> 11:29 AM) You raised a lot of issues, but this is the one I want to focus on -- what could we do in the postseason if we don't upgrade our pitching? Here's some potential pitching matchups given what we have and other teams have. Danks-Floyd-Buehlre-Garcia versus Sabathia-Pettitte-Hughes-Vazquez/Burnett Beckett-Lester-Lackey-Buckholz Price-Garza-Niemann-Shields/Davis Lee-Lewis-Wilson-Feldman/Harden Which of these groups would we be better than? If Beckett's healthy, I'd take all 4 of their #1s over any of our guys. In a 5 game set going to 5 games, we can get that #1 twice. That would put us in a deep hole. Do we make it up with #s 2-4? Yes against Texas and possibly against the Rays. I don't see it against the Yanks or BoSox. So, without an improved staff, how will the Sox go anywhere in the playoffs if we get there? To my mind, starting pitching is the most important thing in the playoffs, not hitting. I also think the addition of a bat, even a thumper like Dunn, is not going to make our lineup better than the Yankees, or Boston, or Texas. But if you put Oswalt in our rotation (taking Peavy's spot), I'd give him a fighting chance against the #1s on all the other teams. And I'd like Danks, Floyd, Buehrle better if they were slotted 2-4. Remember, Floyd's pitching great now, but was gassed in the playoffs in 2008. Think back to 2005. It was when we moved Contreras to the #1 hole that we suddenly had a postseason rotation that could match up with anyone. Buehrle couldn't lead, but he was good as the #2. And Freddy was awesome as the #3 guy, while Garland pitched great in his two starts, partly b/c he was very well rested. The other thing Oswalt gives us is the airtight rotation that would let us pull away with the Central division title, enough perhaps to give our guys some rest down the stretch. Getting Roy also keeps him away from the Yankees, Tigers, or Twins. So, I'm still pulling for the Oswalt deal. Jon Lester is the #1 starter for the Red Sox, and I don't see any other way around it. Also, come October, I'm taking Danks over Price, and come October, I would take Oswalt over Price and maybe Lester, but that's not a guarantee. Beyond that, the only rotations I would say are better than the Sox rotation right now are the Yankees and Rays, and the Rays rotation is actually very similar to the Sox rotation with two great starters at the top and two solid but sometimes shaky starters making up the 3 and 4. Further, the only bullpen of the group that you can argue is better than the Sox is the Rays, and I they don't have, for lack of a better term, x-factors in Santos and Sale coming up. Floyd was gassed in the playoffs in 2008 because he'd thrown 30 more innings than he'd ever thrown before. You bring this up, yet it probably doesn't hold true anymore and then you don't consider the ramifications of it on guys like Hughes, Price, Niemann, Lewis (who averaged 177 innings in Japan the previous two seasons), or Wilson. That's a bit misguided. Beyond all of that, all 4 of those teams have the Sox crushed offensively. If the Sox add a bat, the offense can open games up and begin to put pressure on the other team to score some runs. If the Sox are going to add another starter, it doesn't have to be a guy that is going to take every final trade chip the Sox have to make the deal. If the Sox are going to go all in this year, I still think getting a guy like Ben Sheets may be the best route. He's allowed a home run on 12.3% of his flyballs (which is high for him) and he's missing fewer bats than in the past (7% opposed to about 8.4% in 07 and 08, and 9.5% in his career, which may be a sign that his stuff isn't there all the way), but he would, at the very least, be worthy of a flyer. --- I'm not going to continue sitting here arguing over something that likely won't happen. If the Sox do trade for Oswalt, and if he approves a trade, I'm not going to be upset. However, I do understand how much it costs in regards to prospects, what Oswalt has stated in the past, and the financial ramifications it will have on next year's payroll, and all 3 of those signs point towards Oswalt not coming to the South Side.

QUOTE (Chi Town Sox @ Jul 15, 2010 -> 04:49 PM) I might have missed something, wasn't there a rumor (I thought ended up being true) that the deal was Sale would be called up by September? That's the plan

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 15, 2010 -> 04:25 PM) Aren't lefties hitting him better this year than righties? Yes. RHB .200/.265/.292/.556 LHB .267/.336/.388/.724

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Jul 14, 2010 -> 09:56 PM) I don't know that that's the case and I kind of hope it's not. His inability to draw a walk, and therefore to get on base, is pretty extreme. 8 walks in 265 plate appearances this year between Charlotte and Chicago (all walks coming in the minors, 1 intentional). He pretty much needs to hit around .300 to even be worthwhile, that's not easy. His upside seems likely to be like Crede 2006, but without the superb defense. His defense definitely has not been as bad as we might have feared at third base considering Kenny decided to switch him to 1st base as a 20 year old (you generally don't do that if you feel like you can get utility from a player at a more demanding position). But you can't expect it to ever be a strong suit, and you've got to be concerned mobility wise about a 21 year old who's just 5'11'' and weighs 240. If he can actually hit .300 in the majors with his power, that's definitely useful, but his OBP seemingly won't ever be better than league average. You can get that kind of production from a lot of corner infielders and it's not too difficult to find better for cheap on the free agent market (Huff, Laroche, Luke Scott). So I hope he's not untouchable. As has been mentioned, he seems to have very good pitch recognition. He's also quite aggressive at the plate, as he's swinging at 60% of pitches thrown. FanGraphs says he's swung at 42.9% of pitches outside the zone (opposed to 28.6% for the average), but he's also swinging at 79.6% of pitches within the strike zone (opposed to 64.2% for the MLB average). With his bat speed, I think he can be a .300+ hitter in the majors with the power to come eventually. However, what is yet to be determined is what he will do with pitches thrown outside the strike zone. If he continues to beat pitchers when they challenge, him, they will start pitching around him a bit. If he can, in fact, lay off pitches outside the zone as time goes on, he will be a very dangerous hitter, even if he still remains his free swinging self.

I assume it was the touchdown to what'shisface against the 49ers. That was a pretty marvelous play.