caulfield12

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 06:22 AM) Garza has been backlisted for criticizing the Twins organziation for making him change his style of pitching. Just call him Brian Anderson. It's kind of interesting. I guess he needs to work on the consistency of his breaking stuff, and he feels that he has the "stuff" to not be stuck behind Slowey, Baker and Perkins in the Twins' pecking order. from si.com Slowey looks like another version of a former Twins pitcher Brad Radke. He has a 50/5 K/BB ratio and a 1.76 ERA in eight starts at Triple-A, spanning 56 innings. Batters are hitting just .195 off him. He has had top-of-the-charts control ever since college. A guy that has good stuff and can locate it anywhere he wants at any time will succeed. Garza has a little more notoriety after pitching so lights-out in the minors last year that he got a late-season callup. This season he has a 46/18 K/BB in 49 innings with a 3.49 ERA. He had one bumpy start, but otherwise has shown more consistent command, which was his problem in his major league stint in 2006. He's keeping the ball down in the zone a lot better. They're coming, it's just a question of when, even if trying to predict exactly "when" occurs is sometimes difficult with the Twins

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 12:50 AM) Heres what Im thinking: C AJ Pierzynski 1B Paul Konerko 2B Eckstein 3B Joe Crede SS Juan Uribe OF Josh Fields - Feel he might be given a chance, if not him Owens assumin he stays consistent thus far OF Ichiro Suzuki OF Jermaine Dye DH Jim Thome BN Toby Hall BN Andy G BN Cintron BN Mack BN Owens SP Mark Buehrle SP Jason Jennings SP Jon Garland SP Javy Vazquez SP John Danks Bullpen: Jenks, Day, Lieber, Aardsma, Masset, Logan Crede does have an optinon for 08 I believe, I really think he stays next year, I dont see a trade for Figgins since Angels look to be set in the future at 3B with guys like Mcpherson/Wood/Aybar/Figgins. Figgins probably will be gone not to the Sox. Eckstein just fits our style of play, grindy. Been mentioned quite a bit in this thread and its grown on me that he could come. Id love to see Ichiro, he is in his last year. Would look good in a Sox uni leading off. Erstad obviously leaves, Ichiro or no Ichiro, hes gonna need to earn a spot next year, which Im sure alot of our OFs are gonna be given a fair chance for a spot on the team and he will leave due to the vast competition. Jennings would be a cheap replacement and has proven he can throw in a hitters park, solid option. Lieber would be spot starter for a sudden injury, his agent has good relationship with KW and its about time he comes back to chicago. Where are we getting the idea that any starting pitching would be "cheap" in any way, shape or form, let alone a pitcher close to his prime and possibly improving, in contrast to a Zito or Schmidt? Eckstein will be past his prime (if he's not already) by the time we are close to competitiveness.

QUOTE(BobDylan @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 02:50 AM) I'd find a way to get these players: Yeah, one is an ump, but I'm sure she can play a little 3B. Ummm....Denise Richards has proved she can "steal" Ritchie Sambora away from Heather Locklear. Neve Campbell's career is about as hot as our RH relievers. But she's available at least, and she's Canadian.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/10211270

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 10:50 PM) he defiantly doesn't have the worst farm system, its maso menos. pretty middle of the pack. We're supposedly 25th, I would say we're optimistically closer to 20, but we're still pretty close to a bottom quartile minor league organization. The ultimate goal is top quartile in winning pct. and 3rd quartile in payroll, which is what the Twins, A's and Marlins (once) pulled off

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 10:54 PM) Yeah, that's his job title. What is his job description. And a better analogy would be Walker is your McDonalds Supervisor and under his watch you and 6 other employees have been taking regular afternoon s***s in the deep fryer. There is no real way for the restaurant to get rid of the lot of you due to cooperate and FDA regulations, so they're stuck with your miserable ass no matter terrible your fries are. In the past when fry cooks had acted up firing the Supervisor would give the whole group a little jolt and brought about some overall acceptable production in the french fry department. Really Walker isn't doing much as your Supervisor just kind of standing around watching his professional fry makers struggle to make a quality french fry so firing him would be no big loss in the grand scheme of things but canning his ass now could get the fry makers going and the McDonald's could once again start performing at the level excellence which is expected of it. Everyone in the world wants to be a major league player, but there's a finite number of quality replacements. Whereas McDonald's has lots of replacement options, but, at the amount they pay, they are bound to invest a lot of time and money in training them and replacing them, because of the low pay. The McDonald's question is more about pride and effort, whereas MLB bullpens that "try too hard" see diminishing results. Maybe the McDonald's manager gets better effort from properly motivating his "fry team," but I'm not sure that Cooper can do a better job "motivating" relievers that have serious endemic limitations.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:51 PM) Was Rowand ever on the DL with the Sox? No, but his motorcycle accident almost killed him (once again, part of his reckless nature), he really struggled that year, and KW felt he had to replace him on two separate occasions as CFer, the last time with Kenny Lofton.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:44 PM) Rowand got injured on a collision....not exactly the same type of injury frequency as Pods pulling a groin, etc. But isn't it all part of his "reckless" style of play that contributes to those type of injuries occuring? I don't think any Sox fan is shocked when they see Rowand is injured yet again, any more than Cubs fans are with Prior or Wood.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:10 PM) It's hard to tell....Thomas ended up having a fairly equal season to Thome. Our CF position was a disaster, so Rowand would have helped that. Rowand isn't great, but he's better than what we had last year. McCarthy very easily could have put up better numbers than Vazquez, especially given the run support that Vazquez received. But having AJ as our only lefty with any power, an injured Rowand and a 5-7 games over .500 record for April and May with Thomas instead of Thome, I don't think that Thomas' second half surge would have been enough alone to reverse 8 games under .500 to, let's say 20 games OVER .500, if you're willing to make the assumption that Thomas versus Thome in the first two months would have been a huge difference with the way the season played out. But we'll never know. And we still would have been without a CF when Rowand went down, which was just as likely to happen here as in Philly, just like man suspected Pods and Erstad, for instance, to go down.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 07:05 PM) We were no fluke in 2005 Then WHY did the GM get rid of one third of that team in the immediate off season? So if we had Rowand, Perez, Blum, El Duque, Thomas, Everett, Harris, Vizcaino and Marte, we would have won in 2006? I don't think so.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 06:45 PM) Didn't get to see the game today, and I guess I'm glad something got messed up with the DVR and it didn't record. Did Danks deserve to be pulled so early, how many pitches did he throw? Granted, if he leaves him in another inning the pen would have blown it in the 7th. 99 pitches through 5, he was taxed. The big debate seems to be not bringing in Logan to face Lind, and when a game is decided on something like that, we're in huge trouble. We had AJ thrown out, and runners that didn't score from 3rd on two separate occasions (including the top of the 9th)...overall, it was a predictable game, with all runners scoring off Masset with two outs and nobody on base in the bottom of the 6th. Everybody wanted Masset, and he, too, failed.

QUOTE(diegotony06 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 05:35 PM) What looks riduculous is this team, and what reeks of unintelligence is our hitting coach, manager, and GM. Anyone who think this team will even sniff coming close to the playoffs, now that is ridiculous and reeks of unintelligence. At some point people have to be held accountable for their actions. It's just the way life is. If you have a job, and you f*** up at it by not doing your job for over 2 months then most likely, you get fired. That's just the way it is. So since this team has been playing like s*** since last july, then I think it's time for people to be held accountable. As for people who don't agree, hey that's fine. I have no problem with that. But to start saying people are not intelligent or sound like teenagers, when they are just expressing their opinion, then to me that's ridiculous and unintelligent. You can't find the right people in the middle of the season. This is a September 07 through March of 08 project. I'm definitely not in any way for giving the job to Hahn. If we want to continue to be innovative, we should give it to Kim Ng, the Dodgers' ASST GM and a woman who graduated from Univ. of Chicago and started as an intern with the White Sox. However, I give KW and Ozzie one chance at this rebuild...they deserve that much for 2005. Firing them both would be not unlike the Schottenheimer situation in SD. It's just illogical. And compared to that particular situation, we all KNOW that Ozzie and KW can lead and produce a World Series-winning team. There are no obvious names out there to manage this team, and Girardi's definitely not on my list....let him replace Piniella on the North Side and blow out some more arms.

The Indians simply needed to address their bullpen, and they've done that adequately enough with Borowski and Hernandez. They've caught lightning in a bottle with Carmona, but Sowers has been as bad as Carmona has been good. The only thing the Indians (questionably) could have done besides the bullpen is bringing in a better manager than Wedge. They got rid of Boone and Belliard, Marte hasn't worked out like they had hoped, but they also added Dellucci and Nixon to their OF platoons, and they had the luxury of having "spare" players in Blake and Garko that have filled into the weak spots of the line-up. But there was no "core" under 30 player the Indians were going to trade...versus our entire core being OVER 30 and worth LESS in trade. Different situations. Plus, they had the "jump" in 05 to fall back on, we've had the exponentially increasing decline from ASB 2006 to get to the point where we're at now, stretching over two separate seasons of play.

Yay, two consecutive no-hitters. That's hard to do.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 01:39 PM) 71 pitches through 4 for Danks. Not good at all, and wow it's sad we are up 3-0 going to the 5th and i'd stil be shocked if we win since our starter is only going 6 or 7 tops. So who's our best option for the 6th or 7th inning right now, assuming we still have the lead? Masset? Logan? Do you stretch Thornton for two innings, or Jenks, more than one? EDIT: Have we reached two no hitters from the opposite bullpen? I think that's 52 at-bats without a hit.

QUOTE(29thandPoplar @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 11:57 AM) I sense it's the logistical issues of them being in Canada and possibly them wanting to make sure the replacement arm is fresh and ready to pitch. It will be interesting to see who doesn't pitch for Charlotte today. Don't they also collect taxes on the game checks (from the Canadian government)? I know that's not the primary consideration, I just thought it was funny...I didn't realize, until I worked for an NFL football player, that they were taxed in each of the 8 cities they played (for 1/16th of their season salary) and also by the that particular state as well.

It would be ONE thing if we were replacing our 5/6/7 guys out of the pen constantly. Our problem for most of the first half was the primary set-up guys, specifically, Cotts and Politte. It then morphed into problems where we used our 4/5/6 guys in any game that we were ahead significantly or down just a run or two. You're not only asking a Gio or Russell to become 7th and 8th inning guys, you're doing it when the season is still relatively young and the pressure's high (well not quite as bad with the Cubs' soap opera in town). To recap, we don't need a mop-up righthander, or a long man to get his feet wet like McCarthy (although Ozzie did try him in the 7th and 8th too when he began to feel he had no other options, which seemed to really put Brandon out of his comfort zone and started his "downfall" last season in the 2nd half). Ozzie has remarked he's not confident in Masset in that role ("too inexperienced"), so why would we possibly use Russell or Broadway or whoever? Gio is our best "strikeout" arm down in the minors (along with Day, who obviously is lost at this level), and yet we don't need another LHP. Which leads to Prinz, Bukvich, Oneli Perez, Vazquez, etc. Then maybe you try Floyd, since he at least has experience relieving. Heck, Sierra throws hard too, even though he has no control and can't get anyone out. Maybe they'll try to catch lightning in a bottle with him, like they did w/ Jenks? I know, I know, Jenks was a legit prospect...but this is one huge mess without a solution in terms of talent surrendered or money. The best option might be to trade two struggling relievers with comparable guaranteed contracts...there's always the Jose Mesas, LaTroy Hawkins and Felix Rodriguezes of the world, but betting on that, we might as well bring back Jose Paniagua. Finally, our starting rotation is still VERY good, and that causes the guys like Masset (and Jenks), that are at the end and front of the bullpen, to stultify from lack of work, which is the last thing you'd want to do to Gio or Russell or De Los Santos. Of course, there's always the MacDougal-Rowand trade, which I almost wish would happen just to quiet all those who feel like Rowand is some mixture of Jack Sparrow, Spiderman and Maximus from Gladiator and will save our team, no matter what.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 11:26 PM) I'm all for change, but the Sox wouldn't have been any worse had they kept all the players from the world championship team instead of the tinkering they've done. The players we've acquired with the exception of Jim Thome haven't done squat. And as much as I like Thome, don't you all agree he's no longer capable of carrying a lineup? He's getting older and definitely hasn't hit many homes in bunches this season. I'm surprised anybody would want Oz and/or KW fired however. Again ... they led us to a World Series title. This franchise and this city hasn't done squat with the exception of the Oz-KW led title season. But nobody we've traded has done anything either, and therein lies the dilemma. Did you really advocate at the time for keeping Frank Thomas and Carl Everett? Seriously? Essentially, McCarthy and Young are the only talented players we've lost that we would still want to have in 2-3 years. We've gained Danks, Masset, Gio, Vazquez and Thome. Vazquez > Garcia Danks > McCarthy Gio + Masset = Chris Young (I'm sure this could be debated, but most scouts would take young pitching) Thome > Rowand QUOTE(zimne piwo @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 11:36 PM) Couldn't have said it better myself. For better or worse, one of the by-products of winning the World Series in '05 is that we've raised the bar substantially higher, and with that the overall tolerance level of the fan base is going to be much lower than it has been in years. Right, otherwise this would look exactly like every White Sox season the past 20+ years, with the exception of 1983, 1990, 1993/94, 2000 and 2005/06. Of the past twenty five years or so, we've had 7 very good to great seasons, or 28%. If you eliminate the late 80's and late 90's duds, most of those non-contending teams have all fallen into that 75-85 win range.

I have to mention how dominant Contreras was during the final two months of the season...how he turned everything around, after being fairly average, slow working/methodical and uncertain whether to pitch with FB or forkball first. He became the dominant pitcher in the AL, and the only indications of that were his first 1/2 year in NY. McCarthy might not have been the difference in us making the playoffs or not, but those starts against the Red Sox, Rangers and Twins (even though he lost to Santana) also helped to stem the tide. Our offense that last six week stretch was very comparable to this year's version...Everett and Rowand, in particular, were lousy.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 08:58 PM) It was a fluke in terms of how everything came together with guys having career years and other teams, besides the Indians, having a lot of issues in the AL. However, for about 80 pct of the season, the Sox were clearly the best team on the field. If you want to point to a team that fluked it's way to the WS, the Cards last year is the best example. Then you add in the Graffanino error, AJ's strikeout versus Escobar (and the time he was tagged without the ball by Escobar), Pods' homer off Lidge, Blum's homer...seemingly every possible break went our way. Of course, we had to take advantage of the opportunities we were given, but we did that too. Good teams have a way of creating their own "breaks," the tried and true sports cliche.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 07:40 PM) All you ever do is talk about "smallball," "2005" and Rowand. Two things: Thome for Rowand is an absolute steal, Gio included. Rowand isn't very good. I know he's lighting it up, but he's not very good, overall. PS: the Sox needed to acquire offense for 2006. You know why? Because Kenny knew that the pitching staff wouldn't be good enough again to do what it did in 05 and you can't be competitive once they regressed because they were the ninth best offense in the AL, I believe. So let's not pretend that acquiring Thome for "proven fan-favorite cheerleader" Aaron Rowand was a bad deal. ESPECIALLY since the Phillies are paying for some ofi t. Hermanson was flukey. Garland's first half was flukey and overall ERA was flukey. Cotts and Politte were flukey. Everett was sort of flukey. Listen, there's nothing wrong with being flukey. That's baseball sometimes. But also: the 2005 team was excellent. Very good team, and everything clicked. That doesn't mean it wasn't kind of flukey. Every team has to have flukes here and there to succeed. I think you would have to say that last year's Cardinals (at 83-78) were much more flukey than the White Sox, and the 1997 and 2003 Marlins for that matter. KW, as mentioned, hasn't presided over a losing season from 2001-2006. That's a pretty impressive record for a GM who worked with "mid-tier" payrolls for most of that tenure. He won the World Series in 2005 with a $75 million payroll. Once again, not flukey. It would have been flukey had last year's team ended up like the 2003 Anaheim Angels, but I don't think they were flukey...or were the Red Sox flukey when we wiped them out in the 2005 playoffs because they didn't repeat? Oh, gee, it's actually difficult to repeat? You don't say! I do fault Guillen for being a different style of manager since the Mariotti debacle...he's lost some of his spunk and fire, and he has to say ever more outrageous things to get everyone's attention. That can eventually lead to getting tuned out, and it's happened to almost every big league manager recently (when they overstay their welcome), with two notable exceptions, Torre and Bobby Cox. Gardenhire might belong in that group, I'm not willing to put him there quite yet. The Twins were also very fortunate...1) not to have enough money to sign Prior if they wanted to, 2) that Mauer was a hometown boy, if anything, that was very "flukey" how that whole situation turned out. They would be lucky to be .500 without Mauer and a broken down Liriano and Prior. 2000 Yankees $108 million 2001 D-Backs $85 million, which led to their near-bankruptcy 2002 Angels $63 million 2003 Marlins $63 million 2004 Red Sox $125 million 2005 White Sox $75 million 2006 Cardinals $89 million If you adjust the Marlins and D-Backs payrolls for inflation, they're very close to the 05 White Sox. The Yankees, D-Backs, Red Sox and Cardinals weren't even close. That's impressive. QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 08:30 PM) 2005 was not a fluke. The Sox won because the other teams were not as competitive as they are now. Detroit was putting their pieces together, Cleveland was still young, and the Twins weren't the piranhas yet. Also, the Sox bullpen was lights out. That is the one thing that is missing this year, even with this anemic offense. Each of those Twins' teams from 02-04 grew progressive weaker, "bottomed out" at 83-79 in 2005 and then obviously they were fully "reloaded" for 2006. If only we could be so lucky to go through one 83-79 season before winning 96 games the next season. That would be almost as rewarding as winning the World Series.

The only thing making this somewhat tolerable is the Cubs' implosion, but that's actually shielding KW from scrutiny from the media for the time being, when the Cubs and Yankees are being dissected every day by the national media.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 02:45 PM) ... Not to mention Politte and Cotts last year and Marte in 2005. Because the options Ozzie was provided were a washed-up Riske, a near the end Nelson, Montero, Politte and Tracey. You can't make filet mignon out of mince-meat.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 02:44 PM) So out of curiosity, how many blown games for our bullpen this year so far? I think that's 10 or 11

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) Send f***ing Aardsma and MacDougal down to AAA, they both suck. Macdougal actually can't be sent down, so f***ing release his ass, i dont care what he has done in the past or that he is signed till 09, he needs to go. Prinz and Vasquez should be called up. Because Prinz and Vazquez are going to be a part of our future? Do we really need three lefties? Seriously? Last appearance for Aardsma until September? Well, there's always Riske, Politte, Montero, Tracey and Jeff Nelson.