witesoxfan

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 05:58 PM) More important than results, does Logan listen to spicy Latin music and fit into the clubhouse? If so, there's no doubt he'll be in the bullpen. F***ING SNAP I FINALLY REALIZED WHY ERSTAD IS GOING TO MAKE THIS ROSTER

If she doesn't know that this offense sucks because they try to pull that pitch on the outer half of the plate into the LF stands every time they go up to bat, I'm going to be very disappointed. Congrats man, great to hear all is well!

QUOTE(VAfan @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 07:33 PM) What is with 4.99 Let me start with Vazquez because I wrote a couple of posts on that long thread after we re-signed him. What I said was that it was irrelevant whether it was "market rate" on a mediocre pitcher. Who gives a crap whether it's more value than the Royals are going to get out of Gil Meche?? We wouldn't win the AL Central with Gil Meche either. The question is whether Vazquez is likely to give us much better than he did last year -- .500 record with an ERA near 5 -- during the life of his deal. His recent track record, and the way he melted down EVERY DAMN GAME IN THE SIXTH INNING last year -- what was that about?? Have you ever seen another pitcher do that??? -- suggest to me that he's not. He might. But I'd give him about a 30% shot. And unless he's going to start going 17-10 with an ERA in the low 4s, the contract is a waste of money. Because with all the supposedly great young arms KW brought into the system -- Floyd, Danks, Haeger, Masset, Broadway, etc., etc., etc. -- it shouldn't be too hard to get at least a .500 record with an ERA around 5 out of one more of them. But you'd save about $10 million/year by going with the young pitcher instead of Vazquez. (This isn't too hard to see. Just think how Brandon McCarthy would have likely pitched in the 5 hole last year. Don't you think he would have give us BETTER than .500 with an ERA near 5?) And with that extra money you could keep Jermaine Dye, the best player on the team. If Vazquez can replace what Freddie Garcia gave this club, then the contract will have been worth it. If he just gives us what he gave us last year, then it will be an anchor to the team. (And I'm still ticked that we gave up Chris Young to get this mediocrity. Young is the one outfielder we had in our minors that I thought was most likely to turn into an above average major leaguer -- another Mike Cameron.) So let me turn to Dye. The man made major statements in the offseason that he wanted to be back with the Sox and would take less money to stay here. I just don't get why we didn't take him up on it. He's the best player on the team. It wouldn't have taken $16-17 million/year to keep him. It might have taken $13-14, I suppose, but since he's been the best bargain in baseball during his current deal, that would be a fair price. (And he's not declining significantly as a defensive player. Among Pods/Estad/Dye, Dye is clearly the best at his position.) Instead, the message we're sending everyone on the team, through the way we're handling Dye, is that if you want market price now, SAYONARA. We were willing to pay market price in 2006. But come 2007, with new money being thrown around, we've gone back into trying to cheap out. Well, I just don't think it is a smart move to cheap out on the best player, especially when he's not even demanding a market salary. And it's not as if we can afford to lose him from the outfield. WE HAVE NO OUTFIELD PROSPECTS behind him, or at least our management apparently doesn't think we do. If they don't think our prospects are better than terrible players like Scott Podsednik and Darren Erstad, then why should I have have hope for them. (Frankly, I think management is making another wrong choice here. Not only would I re-sign Dye, but I would dump Pods and Erstad and go with Anderson, Sweeney and even Fields right now to see if we really do have anything in these guys. They really can't be any worse than Pods/Erstad.) Tony covered the ERA part I then ask you - would you rather have Lance Broadway in the rotation over Javier Vazquez? You can let Vazquez go, but then you are risking that you can build a rotation of the pitchers in your minors. That's just unrealistic. Vazquez is a proven mediocre commodity, has outstanding stuff and durability, and he's been well above league average in the past; Broadway - or any other minor leaguer for that matter - likely doesn't have the stuff nor durability that Vazquez has, and they obviously don't have near the track record. Vazquez's deal is one of the best deals in the league, and I really don't see how anyone can criticize that move as severely as you have. It's easily movable, it's market value with the potential to be more valuable, and it's short. Seriously, that's the biggest thing you can find to b**** about? That seems awfully petty to me. Podsednik and Erstad are playing because they are veterans and are being paid. If the situation arises, the prospect - whomever is called up - needs to be ready to take over and produce to get on Ozzie's good list. And I can almost guarantee that one of the two is gone next year. (and even while I think Ozzie is a complete tool at times, it seems atleast to me that there does actually remain a chance that Erstad will be a 4th OFer this year)

In my view, there is 1) Driving drunk (when you feel drunk) 2) Driving buzzed (when you aren't drunk but can tell you've been drinking and are close to being drunk) 3) Driving after consumption (when you have had a drink or two but are not even close to drunk) 1 and 2 are illegal and dangerous, whereas 3 can just be illegal. That doesn't seem right to me. To relate baseball and drunk driving, you should not use solely statistics, and you should not use solely judgement, but rather you should use both. A person can act drunk as hell if they want to, and be able to blow a .000. Along the same lines, a person can blow a .012 and be almost perfectly sober, atleast to the point where they can drive safely (and that's a point I know I won't get across, but it's true for some people, and false for others). If a cop pulls a person over, that person should have to pass both tests to get off scotch free. If they only pass 1, they are fined. And if they fail both, their license is taken away for a long time and you fine them some extraordinary amount. Those're my thoughts on it anyways.

QUOTE(kane0730 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 02:01 PM) Didn't KW hint (I want to say on an radio interview) that they offered McCarthy for Soriano? I might be mistaken on that. But I think the Sox are in a much better position to deal this deadline, compared to last July. No, Bowden wanted McCarthy and Broadway - or something close to that - and KW said he wouldn't give up McCarthy (and then had very high praise for Broadway as well, but that seemed more fluff to me than anything else). And the Sox are going to deal at the deadline this year, it's just a matter of what they are dealing.

QUOTE(IowaSoxFan @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 01:35 PM) The difference between Crede, Garland and Anderson is the organizations outward perception. With Crede and Garland the team kept telling us to be patient and showed the confidence they had in them, with Anderson there has not been that. If Anderson misses the 25 man roster, I think there is a good chance he will be moved if her performs well enough to earn some value. That would leave Sweeney as the backup option to Erstad, something that would make a lot here cringe. The organization isn't dumb. Right now, Sweeney is slated to take over in LF or RF, Anderson in CF, and Fields at 3B. I really don't think it's that hard to figure out.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 11:33 PM) 6. Why did we devote $11+ million a year starting next season to lock up our worst starter from 2006? It seems to me that Javier Vazquez's contribution (or lack thereof) to our pitching staff would be the easiest to replace from among our young arms. So why not take the $10 million difference between JV's deal and what we'd have to pay a rookie pitcher and use it to keep Jermaine Dye? Then you could have traded Vazquez == now, or in mid-season -- to get some real outfielders to play alongside Dye. (Like Chris Young -- the one outfielder in our system that actually had major league talent.) so 4.99 Look at the numbers before you make assertions. And resigning Dye really is not the best idea simply because he'll be 37 or 38 making $16 mill coming off the best two seasons he's had since like 2002. It's simply not worth the risk. He's getting slower and slower in the OF and will soon be relegated to solely DH, and there's nothing to suggest whether he'll keep this up or he'll decline slowly or sharply. And finally, KW resigned Vazquez because that's a great value deal. To get a guy like Vazquez - a league average starter with the potential to be much better - for a shorter period of time and the same amount of money as guys like Gil Meche and AJ Burnett. It's called playing the market, and it's something you obviously don't understand.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 01:42 AM) First of all, Quinn might end up the best QB, but it won't be because of talent. Russell has more raw talent with a blindfold on and throwing lefty than Quinn does. Second, Quinn in his career didn't have a single good game against legit competition. Every single standout game he had was against garbage, and I've never seen a prospect like that, hence my concern. And if you haven't concluded Michael Vick sucks as a QB yet after all these years, I'm sorry. He's a great tailback, and the best athlete in the NFL, but he can't throw. There is a reason every single WR to ever play with him has looked bad outside of maybe Brian Finneran. I was wrong in saying Quinn has more potential. That doesn't change the fact that he does have the potential to be a top 5 QB in the NFL. And if you're suggesting I think Vick's a good QB, you're putting words in my mouth. Vick's a horrible QB, but his teams win because of the double threat he presents. He can throw a little, and he can run like a madman, and that's all he needs to do to become a top 5 player in the NFL. All I was saying was that they didn't win last year because the defense was horrible. The last time their defense was good, the Falcons made it to the NFC Championship. And you don't have to be a WR to catch a ball. Alge sure as hell loves Vick.

QUOTE(WHITESOXRANDY @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 07:55 AM) The Sox have one good outfielder and if they added Brady Clark, they would still have only one. I would LOVE to see the Sox add another serious player for the outfield - and, no Erstad, Pods, Anderson (right now) and Sweeney (right now ) are not. I'm not even sure that Rowand is enough of an upgrade to make a deal worthwhile. Get someone really good ! I could live with any one of the above guys in the OF but not 2 of them. It's just wrong and will probably, by itself ,be enough prevent the Sox from a post season berth . If they trade Mackowiak, I think they should just go for the best prospect that they can get. Getting someone really good would require a combination of Danks, Sweeney, Gio, Anderson, and Fields. It's not realistic at this point.

My first actual guess, and final guess is Rocky Biddle

QUOTE(zimne piwo @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 06:50 PM) Believe it or not, there's actually a "White Sox Fan" who disagrees and actually thinks it's a "disgrace" and a "despicable move" to honor the two greatest home runs in White Sox history with the blue seats. http://media.www.pucchronicle.com/media/st...e-2726651.shtml Of course this knob also talks about how the rest of the seats were "painted green", he downplays the importance of those "playoff" home runs and he misspells "old Commisky Park". If this tool really is a Sox fan and is truly embarrassed, maybe we'll all recognize him by the paper bag over his head. So, just curious of course, how is breaking the longest World Series drought in the history of the MLB not historic? (and of course, I am talking about droughts that have actually been broken. If and when the Cubs win a World Series, the White Sox record will be second to the Cubs) Furthermore, is it not acceptable or cool to take other's ideas and use them? I don't believe the White Sox have taken credit with coming up with the idea, nor are they looking to copyright it; the Red Sox DID come up with the idea, but they didn't copyright it. If they did, the Sox would have been sued already. Finally, I don't get the Pods and Konerko comparison to Williams. It just really holds no ground; in the minds of White Sox fans, Podsednik and Konerko are legends and will be legends. I guarantee as much as we hate Podsednik on here, every person on here will remember what he did in late October in 2005 about 30 years from now. Ted Williams is a legend too, but for different reasons. All 3 will be remembered, and that's all that really matters. (and Ted Williams isn't arguably the best player to ever lay foot on a baseball field, you have to be a goddamn f***tard to even suggest that, seriously. Ruth, Mays, Bonds, and Aaron all come to mind well ahead of Ted f***ing Williams. Taking nothing away from Williams - he was a great hitter - but those guys are a step above him, and I really don't think there's an argument)

LETS TRADE FOR EVERETT AND ALOMAR

QUOTE(Jeremy @ Mar 22, 2007 -> 12:26 AM) Is this team just completely incapable of learning from its mistakes? The Boone Logan experiment wasn't exactly a huge success last season. The track record of teams falling in love with players based on a several weeks in the thin Arizona air is quite poor. I entered the spring believing that Haeger is the organization's fifth best starter and that Sweeney and Fields are two of our four best oufielders and my opinion hasn't changed. Obviously the organization disagrees with you. Esteban Loaiza was discovered in Arizona's thin air, and he was outstanding. These guys have trained eyes and know the difference between good and bad, regardless of numbers. Boone Logan is a year older and more acclimated to success at this point. Not many guys go from the bottom of the barrel to the top in a matter of 6 weeks, and that type of change needs time to accept. He didn't have it, and his confidence went with him out the door after Hafner parked one. I bet he'll be fine this year. I also question whether or not you've ever seen Fields play the outfield, probably because he's not an outfielder.

QUOTE(ptatc @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 04:49 PM) No kidding. How many remember when Doug Drabek was a Sox prospect? *shrinks back in seat slowly* lol, I was of course making my comment in jest; if you're old if you remember Barcelo and Myette, then you are displays in a museum if you remember guys like Aparicio and Fox

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 03:07 PM) Quinn completely sucks, so that would be just as dumb. But yes, they are committed to Vick long term, which is great news for the NFC South. I disagree with like every thought in this post. 1) Quinn is easily the best QB in the draft in terms of both being NFL ready today and potential. Arm, accuracy, size, leadership, some mobility - what does he have that teams should be afraid of? 2) Even as a RQB, if you will, Vick is dangerous as hell. And beyond that, Vick isn't the reason the Falcons didn't win last year, it was the defense. 22nd in TYPGa, 29th in PYPGa, and jacks*** for turnovers won't help you win many games. If Petrino can fix the defense, they will be good. If he can't, they won't.

I actually vote for Hollis Thurston. That's awwwwesome

PadillaPadillaPadilla - THATS NOT ALL FOLKS Texans also give up their 2nd rounder next year and they swap positions in the 1st round this year. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6594578 So in the end, it's a swap of the first round draft picks, a 2nd rounder this year, and a 2nd rounder next year for a guy who has been a backup his entire career. That's just flat out dumb for Houston, and I like Schaub.

there's gotta be something. Water kills the Wicked Witch of the West; a stake to the heart and sunlight kill vampires; bullet(s) to the head kill zombies; sandpaper kills grinders? How about you just pull out some voodoo magic and eat a taco grinder sandwich?

Beyond that, you get the sense that the organization does not really care for Haeger, and while Ozzie has very apparently been impressed by Russell and Danks, both will be better served starting in the minors than in the majors. (and in case you couldn't tell, I think Floyd will stick)

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 02:06 PM) If you ever question me again, so help me god . . . I'll question you again, but never on a factual basis. The facts are always right duh

I'll add another Balta Charlotte Knights: Ryan Sweeney is a great RFer, and Owens could be a Podsednik clone. But unless they plan on having Terrero taking over in CF, Anderson may fit the job description very well. that's my guess for his ultimate landing spot.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 01:41 PM) Just as a fun fact, Timo Perez now has 2 rings and has played for 3 teams which have made the Wold Series. Alex Rodriguez World Series appearances? 0 I was almost certain that was incorrect, but I had no idea that Timo was purchased by the Cards in April of last year. I thought he was with the Reds the entire year. Silly me

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 02:22 AM) I remember when he and Wing were the big time arms in our system. Damn I'm getting old.... No, that's only if you remember Aaron Myette and Lorenzo Barcelo

There is no hole at the end of the rotation

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Mar 21, 2007 -> 03:10 AM) Thome's such a great guy. rumor has it Ozzie furiously scolded Buehrle for not brushing Thome back in his next AB