caulfield12

Myers seems to not be ready for prime time....or he's just not 100% healthy. Dave Wills bemoaning the late game walks from the complementary pieces (like McGee) in the Red Sox bullpen. Everyone's arguing that Berry was out there. Zobrist and Longoria are going nuts.

Why would the Dodgers throw in Pederson? If they're going to trade/subsidize Ethier or Crawford, they're not going to throw a top prospect into the deal as a sweetener. Because they don't have to...the main reason for the trade is simply as a favor or show of respect to a veteran player to send them somewhere they can play everyday, but, as this season has shown with Kemp's health, it's not the worst idea in the world to have four guys out there. They're not being financially forced or squeezed to make that deal, that's for sure.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 02:40 PM) Against lefties or righties? And 2012 Jeff Keppinger, that's a different story. Where did Maddon hit him that season when he was so effective? I bet it wasn't 3rd or 4th.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 03:52 PM) A classic Guillen move. If your regular leadoff hitter is out of the lineup, then you must bat your fastest player leadoff regardless of his ability to get on-base. See Juan Pierre leading the AL in outs.

Has to be burning the Royals' fans and brass that they let both Pujols and Trevor Rosenthal (Lee's Summit, MO) walk right out of their backyard to the hated Cardinals. Good god, we talk about our talented young pitching, but what St. Louis has rivals pretty much every young talented rotation since the A's, Braves or Rays.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 7, 2013 -> 03:14 PM) He WOULD want Maikel Franco, lol. What the **** is up this organization's obsession with guys that rip up the minors by swinging at everything and destroy inferior pitching? Is that KW or Hahn?

Kemp and Kipnis, lol...we're taking the wrong hometown player. In all seriousness, we should sign the scout who picked up Wacha for $2 million over 3 years. No to Garcia in CF. No to Granderson because you have to fear the power numbers he put up in Yankee Stadium in a protected line-up just won't stand up...unless he's getting Jermaine Dye's contract equivalent coming into 2005. You also have to be concerned about wear and tear from his playing CF for most of his career, all the steals, athletic players are breaking down now in early 30's rather than mid 30's now. Yes to McCann but only at the right price, and it's admittedly much more important to sign a catcher than an outfielder. If you're going to spend money on guys like Granderson, spend half the price and find players who will make our defense twice as good, not our offense incrementally better. I'd actually rather go with the upside of Jose Tabata for Alexei Ramirez...or even Travis Snider, than Granderson.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 08:48 PM) The last two guys that Sox really wanted were Dunn and Keppinger. Those two had historically terrible years their 1st year, but they fit a huge need for the team and the Sox paid a pretty penny for both. If the Sox bid $60-70 mill for Abreu, and come in 2nd, are you really telling me you'd be upset? The most they've ever spent on an invidual contract is Danks' $65 million, right? That's more than the last contracts that Buehrle and Ordonez earned with the Sox, right?

If Granderson's asking for more than $10 million per year and more than 2 years, I'd pass. They could have gotten guys like Coco Crisp for a lot cheaper price. On the other hand, Michael Bourn got $48 million over 4 years...so it's a wash, between Granderson at say 3 years and $33 million and Bourne's deal. However, Granderson's not the ideal leadoff hitter that Bourn is, and he doesn't give you the same range/defense, either. If you're going to spend that kind of money, you should get close to an everyday player or value for that price.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 08:57 PM) My impression of the Sox fanbase on this board (not everybody, but general consensus) is people on here don't want Jerry to spend big bucks to get the payroll up where it should be for a city the size of Chicago. I get the feeling the consensus is save the money and spend it all on international scouting and the draft and all this sort of stuff. Really, people ... I hate bad contracts as much as anybody (Rios, Dunn, Peavy) but cmon, the Sox have to improve the product. Let's believe for a moment we have a much better GM than Kenny and Mr. Hahn knows WHO to spend it on. In that case, spend, spend, spend. The Sox have to replace a TON of players in the lineup (pitching is fine) and one way to do that is to SPEND. Do you all agree with me there's a reluctance to spend money on here, as if we should give a flip about Jerry and his money??? I say SPEND IT. As far as a trade, package Beckham, DeAza and either Q or Santiago and we should be able to get something of interest. Ask how that philosophy is going for the Mets and Angels, for example. It has worked, to an extent, for the Dodgers, Rangers, Giants, Yankees, Phillies and Red Sox (spending intelligently, they recovered from a terrible season). But look at the Cardinals (best organization in baseball), Braves, Reds, Rays, Pirates, Indians, A's.....they've spent on one or two free agents, but they're not overspending. 80-85% of their players are being developed internally, by their farm systems. The thought is sure...spend on one or two players, but don't give out those huge contracts to guys like Choo, Ellsbury, Greinke, Josh Hamilton, Pujols, Cano, etc. That's it. Spend, but spend wisely and intelligently...and don't put yourself behind the 8 ball because of stupid/crazy spending. Spend, but also realize you have to trade Santiago/Quintana and maybe Reed to get some other parts for your offense that make sense.

I miss Juan still. Despite his maddening propensity to K on low and outside sliders and curves.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 04:14 PM) Guess it all depends on what the market is like for Loney. My personal strategy is improve the offense and defense for next year or longer (Kendricks 2 yrs, Loney hopefully not more than 3 )while keeping as much of the starting pitching as possible .So,yes ,I'm looking to compete next year so I'm not worried about how much Beckham/Rienzo contribute to the Angels as long as we get an upgrade at the position with a decent contract. Kendricks , Loney are big upgrades defensively and running the bases and adds a much needed LH bat. To upgrade talent you have to give up something and if thats Beckham and Rienzo futures , so be it. Rienzo may end up a releiver or never make it at all while Beckham has disappointed for 4 years while Kendrick is top ten 2nd baseman in baseball with a very good all-around game. You just take your chances with trading young talent .Now with Loney and Kendricks you're improved in 2 areas without breaking the bank with still plenty of room to do more and kept our top 5 or 6 starters intact. A more rangy infield also improves the starting pitching so those are other reasons for those 2. Kendricks is 30 ,Loney turns 30 in May so both still in late stages of their primes. With all the 1 run games the Sox played this season small incremental improvements in 5 or 6 areas may pay big dividends in the next 2 years if Avisail turns into the real deal. Those 2 moves actually improve you in starting hitting, starting defense, team speed, starting and relief pitching and balances the lineup without adding a pitcher. But then Loney's coming off a career revitalizing year, and he's going to get (arguably) at least three years. Not just because of Keppinger and the "Rays Factor", but you have have to be leery about rewarding anyone in that situation, buying high, so to speak. At some point, you have to do your risk assessment and pull the trigger on someone if you ever want to improve...but my belief is we're more likely to use our financial flexibility to take someone coming off a down season or someone who's redundant on another roster (Andre Ethier) in a similar way to Thome with Howard pushing him out of a starting spot.

Balta, where are you on the "Beltran for HOF" debate? And, good God, the Cardinals have a ton of talented young pitching. But maybe this is just the Pirates' year. However, you can never EVER count out St. Louis.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 03:25 PM) That's not true. Gammons tweeted last year that Sox bid of upwards of $25 million was right there with Atlanta competing for the 2nd highest bid on Soler. Sometimes I wonder if the White Sox (KW) wanted that put out there intentionally just to create the perception "the Sox were in on the bidding" but yet they realistically weren't going to finish first. There was a big firestorm in the media in Toronto about this, I think it was over the Darvish bidding process. Somehow, the White Sox almost always finish 2nd/3rd. In the end, "almost" doesn't count.

Kendrick's a complimentary piece. Like Balta said, he's probably an incremantal upgrade (arguably when you look at the cost/benefit analysis AND you also consider the difference in cost and then also giving up Rienzo)....but that's only a logical move when you've added say, McCann at catcher, Abreu at 1B and someone like Lawrie at 3B (for Santiago and Keppinger, let's say, or Quintana and Gillaspie for Lawrie and a pitcher).

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 11:30 AM) I don't know why anyone would think to compare Robin Ventura and Dusty Baker, short of the fact that they both have managed Chicago baseball teams Do you think Ozzie or Ventura is/was more "friendly" with his players? Isn't that the biggest tightrope for any manager these days...to either be a disciplinarian/tightass (see Bobby Valentine in 2012) and run the risk of burning of burning out your players or losing their respect, or running "too lose a ship" and also losing their respect? (See Terry Francona in Boston his final season). For example, it seemed Ozzie always tried to be "friendly" with his veteran players, but struggled more in his relationships with younger players like Brian Anderson, Beckham and Viciedo. It wasn't really a specific comparison more than one of Baker's weaknesses being compared to what is perceived to be a Ventura weakness...too soft, not committed enough, team isn't playing disciplined enough baseball defensively or fundamentally, too hands-off, delegates too much authority to his assistant coaches, etc. He lost the team's attention. In other words, the White Sox don't fear Ventura enough. We have no idea...it's been a running argument between Balta and Dick Allen for the last 2-3 months about the varying performances of this year's team and the 2012 version with almost the same exact players being the common denominator from 2011-12-13 but obviously something went drastically wrong THIS YEAR, so we're all trying to get a grasp on exactly what that is. It's just to spark or provoke a discussion...it could just as easily be comparing Ventura and Sveum, and why Ventura deserves to keep his job but Dale doesn't, when both teams had huge talent gaps with their competition. Did Ventura "overachieve" in 2012 and "underachieve" in 2013...? And Sveum "underachieved" in both seasons, so he's more at fault for his team's performance? Can that fairly be said, when everyone knew the Cubs were tanking these last two years deliberately?

QUOTE (joeynach @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 01:12 PM) The White Sox will not be fixed with a spending spree on FA's without a young talented core in place first, similar to how the current Nationals have been constructed. I think most Sox fans think like the Sox front office, most larger scale FA contracts, especially for players over the age of 30, are viewed as mistakes in hindsight. Certainly they have to be in the post-PED's environment. Paul Konerko's regression at age 36/37 should serve as yet another warning, along with Adam Dunn. Alexei Ramirez. Jose Contreras. Scott Linebrink. Alex Rios. We got away with it on the Thome deal, which was also subsidized, but generally not a wise move. AJ and Dye performed well, too. It's another reason to be careful with DeAza going forward.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 09:22 AM) September collapse of 19 and 12. It felt like a collapse that one morning when you woke up and they'd lost to the Royals after having a huge lead. Because we blew through the last week....but that 19-12 is quite misleading as just a number in isolation. And the Indians were white hot...it did have the feel of choking/desperate time before Crede hit that bomb off Riske and everyone could finally breathe a bit easier.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 09:47 AM) Not really. There's lots of movies I enjoy. I don't need alien penis in my movies, and I kind of expected more from that crowd. Honestly, thought he second half was brutal, Neighborhood Watch was better. If you say AFTER EARTH was better, those will be fighting words.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 09:42 AM) And guess which one has demonstrated he has a clue at the plate. And can make contact regularly. Oh, wait, that's definitely NOT Viciedo. MLB Averages: O-Swing = 31.0%, Z-Swing = 65.5%, Z-Contact = 87.0% Anthony Rizzo: O-Swing = 30.0%, Z-Swing = 66.5%, Z-Contact = 89.1% (102 wRC+) Dayan Viciedo: O-Swing = 42.5%, Z-Swing = 73.5%, Z-Contact = 82.9% (96 wRC+) One of those lines looks like a Major League hitter, the other looks like a minor leaguer being challenged by stuff way above his skill level. And Puig has one of the three worst swing and miss percentages in the majors...he's doomed, too?

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 09:15 AM) I'm not sure how anyone would know where teams stand other than Abreu's agent. It's a blind bid process and I'm pretty sure bids were all due at roughly the same time. This thing is ultimately going to come to the money, with other factors like Cuban presence (players or fanbase), weather, and ability to win serving as possible tie-breakers. So if the Sox weren't planning on making an offer in the $50 to $60M range, they never had a chance to begin with. Will be interesting to see what he ends up getting and where the Sox came in (assuming that figure leaks). Just from the comments in the last 24 hours....but then, look what happened with the A's shocking the world and winning the bidding for Cespedes. Still, I would put the odds at 5-10% but I would love to be pleasantly surprised and see that's we posted the highest bid.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 09:08 AM) I have no interest whatsoever in racing, let alone Formula 1. That's why I'm in no RUSH to see it. Hey...I've never even watched a Formula One race in its entirety in my lifetime and still really enjoyed it. Formula 1 is part of the medium, but it's so much more than that...just like The Wrestler, The Fighter or The Warrior are more than boxing, professional wrestling or MMA. It's well worth seeing. Rush is raking in serious money overseas. Ron Howard's F1 drama has already grossed $30 million outside of North America, with exit polls coming in around the 90s in the United States, Canada, the U.K., and France. Rush will go into Italy as the #1 film in its third week of release, already enjoying a $6 million showing in the territory. Distributor StudioCanal is expecting a long run in the United Kingdom after the film broke $11.5 million in its third week. Rush opened in France last weekend and is currently reporting a $1.3 million cume. The film is expected to surpass $1 million in Mexico over the weekend. Rush kept the #2 spot in New Zealand for a $500k cume. The film opened in Australia on Thursday with a $300k bow. The Middle East territories combined for a $600k cume. Rush will open in the Netherlands, Portugal, Norway, Sweden, Peru, Colombia, South Africa, Pakistan, Croatia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Indonesia this weekend.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 08:18 AM) http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/...-baseball-show/ David Price is such a (I got a lot of words, but most of them are offensive to some people). I'm starting to not like the Rays. But I do admire Longoria's "clutchness." I hope someone will step up and prove he's actually not clutch, haha.

QUOTE (flavum @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 08:18 AM) http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/...-baseball-show/ David Price is such a (I got a lot of words, but most of them are offensive to some people). I'm starting to not like the Rays. But I do admire Longoria's "clutchness." I hope someone will step up and prove he's not clutch, haha.

QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 6, 2013 -> 08:02 AM) THIS IS THE END was fine to me. Not the great comedy most people seem to make it out to be and it's about 20 minutes too long. It's because there haven't been very many good movies in recent months...so ANYTHING that's not terrible or derivative seems better by comparison. It can make 2 Guns or even Grown Ups 2 look decent....playing tricks with your mind, haha. Then movies like RUSH and Gravity come along and seem almost amazing in comparison. I'm at a complete loss for why RUSH hasn't done better, but I'm sure it's mostly because of the unfamiliarity of the subject matter (mid 70's Formula 1 racing), the presence of Daniel Bruhl (not a name star as Niki Lauda)...it even has a super cute Olivia Wilde. Befuddling, really, why that movie hasn't done better. Was the marketing campaign there weak or too late? Along with Pacific Rim, that's the second movie that's come out this year that has kind of been a dud in the US Box office but will end up with much better results outside of the States.