caulfield12

I think the consensus around the league right now is that Phil Hughes is more likely to settle into the major leagues as a 4/5 starter and that 1/2/3 was being a bit unrealistic/overhyped. Still, you could have said the same things about Gavin Floyd or even John Danks heading into 2008 and been correct...or that nobody expected Jose Contreras to go from an ERA of nearly 5 in NYC to the best pitcher in the game of baseball in the span of 18 months.

Okay, Cortes/Torres, whatever the hell his name is...if he's rated 50-something in the entire minors by MLB, then somebody out there likes him a lot, not just Sox minor league fanboys and Aaron Miles/Aaron Rowand groupies.

I'm not sure that A. Lopez was really ever in consideration as a closer. He was pretty decent with the Blue Jays...but never as someone that would/could be considered the rival of either Rodney or Zumaya in terms of raw stuff and strikeout ability. Don't forget, we not only have Nunez, we also the Jimenez signing (former Blue Jay set-up guy with a power arm), too. Lopez won't get much consideration by KW.

Some might argue NOW is the time you have to "attack" and take advantage of the DET economic situation and the fact that Minnesota and Cleveland (Kerry Wood move notwithstanding) are more sensitive "mid-market" teams to seize control of the division by the throat. The White Sox are the team most "cushioned" for the downturn/recession in terms of their ability to generate revenues, and coming off a playoff appearance. Does everyone not agree? CLE, DET are very vulnerable cities...OH/Cleveland because of the auto industry, and Ohio has been hardest hit by the foreclosure bug, particularly cities like Cleveland. I'm certainly not saying go out and spend Burnett or Lowe money here. I do think they really have to look hard at the second tier (Garland, Brad Penny, Andy Pettitte, Oliver Perez, Randy Wolf and a couple of others like Paul Byrd) and solidify that starting rotation with an additional pitcher. I can see NOT adding a leadoff hitter/CFer, I get that, or maybe just adding Taveras on the cheap, but to not cushion the blow to our starting rotation and have to make a move out of desperation in mid-season seems to be putting us behind the eight ball. Surely there's no desire for a repeat of 2007, and we have better depth now than having to go to an Andy Gonzalez or Wasserman for large stretches of the season. HOWEVER, even if there was a major teamwide system failure, having a veteran pitcher signed for only 2-3 seasons SHOULDN'T be a difficult piece to trade at the break if everything just falls apart....I'm thinking the only back-up plan right now is Jose Contreras, and that makes me really nervous at this point. Still, we have two months to wait it out, and pitchers like Ben Sheets might not get what they want. Certainly, Burrell/Dunn/Grifffey/Rivera/Abreu/Bradley will be under considerable stress to get over 2 years and over $10 million per season....this both works for and against the White Sox both trading Dye and/or acquiring a LF option on the "cheap" simultaneously. Same with the "diminishing" closer's market moving against the Sox and Jenks.

I think it's safe to say with Ramirez, Duckworth and Torres all on the outside looking in, they have a lot more depth than the White Sox in their rotation. If Torres=Poreda, they also have Davies/Hochevar for the 4th/5th spots and Ramirez and Duckworth as insurance. We don't have anything approximating that now. Egbert and Van Beschoten? Broadway?

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:33 AM) Lead off hitter gets on. Hitter two decides to sacrifice himself to move the runner to 2nd. Now you have a runner on 2nd, with 1 out. Hitter 3, usually the teams best hitter, is now up to plate, with 1st base open. You have now taken the bat out of your 2nd and 3rd place hitters, as well as giving up an out in the process. All attempting to score 1 run. But the other team doesn't want to give up a big inning....so they walk David Ortiz in the first to face Manny Ramirez with runners on first and second? Not wisel

The Royals will surprise some people. Gil Meche, Greinke, Bannister, Davies and Hochevar/Torres is going to be a very formidable rotation, and they have Soria at the back end. Didn't they just bring back Horacio Ramirez for depth (along with Duckworth) or am I imagining things? They could also be a player for Furcal if they can dump Guillen on another team, somehow.

Joe Crede will be lucky if the rest of his career (30+) goes like Joe Randa's career trajectory.

And those "average" statistics for such situations don't take into account the tremendous amount of GIDP's lurking in the middle of the White Sox order when there is a runner at first vis a vis a runner at second that might be advanced by a ground ball instead of being doubled up. How many GIDP's do the White Sox have as a team in this decade, or just 2006-2008, compared to the rest of the American League?

I can see the Indians and Twins being ahead of us, but Detroit? Based on what, exactly?

But the most intriguing free-agent starter left might be John Smoltz, who had seven teams looking at his medical records this week amid rumors he's open to leaving Atlanta. Smoltz has been a Brave for so long that he was once a teammate of Bruce Sutter and Ken Griffey Sr. So can he really leave? Can Atlanta really allow him to leave? Might be the most riveting story line of the whole offseason. from espn.com

QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ Dec 14, 2008 -> 12:22 AM) But in all fairness, bunting the leadoff man to 2nd base is part of the goal of bringing the runner home in that inning. It's all about teamwork, and that's what the White Sox needs, more teamwork and stringing along a timely and cohesive attack as a team rather than having 9 batters swinging the bats as individuals. So if the best way to drive a runner in is by bunting him over, for the more powerful batters behind the #2 batter to do their jobs, then everyone did their jobs, everyone served their purpose. Then what difference would it make if a bunt was used if it ended up satisfying the singular goal of the team to score runs? Not because Hawk creams his pants, but a team executing against the opposition can be very demoralizing. Remember the ending to the 2000 ALCDS against the Mariners with Carlos Guillen laying down the bunt to push across the winning run? I think teaching players situational baseball, putting team wins over individual statistics...the Japanese attitude of fundamentals and execution, it just makes for a better clubhouse and atmosphere around the team. Compare this with the teams that had D'Angelo Jimenez, Lofton, Carlos Lee, Ordonez, Thomas...there were some pretty selfish or "me first" players on those teams, and that's why the Twins' approach blunted our superior talent, because they waited around for the White Sox to beat themselves, they played better defense and they had a consistently reliable bullpen.

So I guess Dunn, Bradley, Griffey, Jr., and Hermida would all be given some consideration...although it's VERY difficult for me to imagine a player like Dunn in that Angels' line-up, maybe he'd be exactly what the doctor ordered.

Mets owner Mr. Wilpon, who also owns real-estate investor Sterling Equities, often raved about Mr. Madoff's investment prowess and invested tens of millions of dollars of both his own money and the team's with his company, say financiers who have worked with him. Mr. Madoff handled investments for the Judy & Fred Wilpon Family Foundation, which distributed about $1 million a year in 2005 and 2006 to charities, according to its most recent federal tax returns.. Mets spokesman Jay Horowitz declined to comment Friday. Mr. Wilpon's Sterling Equities said in a statement: "We are shocked by recent events and, like all investors, will continue to monitor the situation." from wsjonline.com Wonder how/when/if this will have an affect on the team?

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 07:11 PM) 1.Giving up outs any time before the 7th inning is stupid and unnecessary. 2.No bunt is ever "safe". The only guarantee with a bunt is you are guaranteed to take the bat out of a hitters hand. 3. More specific to the Sox, like it or not, the core of the offense is still built around power. Play to the strength of the team. 4. The Cell is a bandbox, and the Sox play 81 games in it. Why not take advantage? There are certain times for a bunt. When you use the bunt, you are playing for the one run. Playing for one run in the 1st inning is beyond idiotic. Oh, and save the "Getting into the head of the other team in the 1st is a must". I'm pretty sure a 3 run jack in the 1st will do the trick just fine. But then why does the first team to score first in baseball win a huge majority of the games, even if that first inning run is only ONE run? All you need to do is look back to 2005 and 2006 (first three-four months) to understand why...whether it's with "small ball/execution/fundamentals/stolen bases" or by pounding the opponent into submission with the big boppers. You need balance, and we haven't had enough of it recently. I really think had we lost to the Twins in 2008, had their "Piranha/Twins' Way" philosophy once again "won out" over ours...that many more fans would be open to this, instead of the Earl Weaver-ish three yards a cloud of HR's approach. That would have given the Twins five AL Centrals in the span of eight seasons. As it is now, they have 4/8 and we have 3/9. But 5/8 versus 1/8 would be very difficult to argue with in terms of needing a change in offensive philosophy, especially considering the disparity in payroll. And, the "trump card" often cited, 2005, that year had ALMOST nothing to do with offense and much more to do with spectacular/consistent starting pitching. Yes, you will always need to be overweighted towards sluggers playing in USCF, but to be completely overloaded or one-sided results in 2001-2004 and 2006-2007 campaigns more typically, especially without the pitching to fall back on.

Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright being the prime examples after the 2004 season.

old friend Jon Garland much higher on the list than I expected...as well as Buehrle (#11), Contreras and Javy Vazquez. If nothing else, this is just one of many stats that really validate Mark Buehrle as an even better pitcher than many Sox fans give him credit for being. This is for pitchers with at least 700 IP over the last four seasons. http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/cjez Some pitchers from the list we could target... Oswalt, Pettitte, Doug Davis (obviously after a health check) and Jamie Moyer Pretty surprised to see E. Santana so low on the list. Bottom 4 of Robertson, Marquis, Livan Hernandez and Carlos Silva.

If they don't want to pay Ramirez or Furcal, I think Young is much more logical. They have Kemp and Ethier, with no plans whatsover to start Andruw Jones or Pierre. Broxton wouldn't be a closer with MIN. He'd be the primary RH set-up man and closer in waiting, allowing them to move Nathan eventually. That was the biggest problem for Minny last year, going through Crain, Guerrier, Bonser and Bass. They're the Twins. They always have some good prospects. They're not going to deal Aaron Hicks for a stopgap...though...and Beltre just added the Twins to his new "non-trade" list, so that might complicate matters. The Mariners want pitching, and they'd have to part with Blackburn or Perkins (at a minimum) to get Beltre, who might turn into a one-year rental and has Boras as his agent. Dangerous territory for the Twins to venture into. It's quite hard to be a defensive downgrade from Harris, fwiw. The Twins have Cuddyer, Kubel, Young, Gomez and Span for four positions...and they have five quality (and young) starters. They're in a much better position at this point than we are for 2009. With Morneau, Casilla and Punto, their IF is more settled than ours at this point too. Huge advantage at the catching spot, obviously.

Definitely has to stay away from McDonald's, Wendy's, Burger King, Taco Bell, any pizza place and the local KFC/Church's/Popeye's/Brown's.

But most of MacDougal's success was as a reliever, not as a starter. Second, being named an All-Star as a Royal is about as significant over the last decade as being named to the Big 12 Honorable Mention All-Offense list. That list over the last ten or so years includes the unforgettable Ken Harvey, Mark Redman, Dean Palmer and Jose Rosado.

8:44 am: According to Bill Shaikin of the LA Times, the Angels are "believed to have offered at least $160MM." This would match the Washington offer and put pressure on Boston to match or exceed the offer. 12:03 am: Angels GM Tony Reagins said this evening that he has made an eight-year offer to free agent Mark Teixeira. Yesterday we learned the Orioles are around seven years, $140-150MM and the Nationals are at eight years, $160MM. We're not sure about the Red Sox. There goes the Konerko for Figgins deal!!!

Cabrera has much more of a major league track record (not great, albeit) than putting him in the same area code of conversation with J. Sisco. He's thrown at least a one hitter and has shown the ability to dominate at times. Sisco showed that for BRIEF flashes during his rookie season in KC. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if they tried MacDougal as a starter again...although I'm sure he and his agent might balk at the idea, due to his injury history. Just because we can name two former Royals prospects who failed doesn't mean much to me. JP Howell looked like he couldn't get a high school line-up out when he was unceremoniously dumped by the Royals, but he's become a great find for the Rays. Sometimes a change of scenery can work wonders. Even with the second tier pitchers (Wolf, Perez, Penny, Garland, etc.) you're not getting anything resembling 100% certainty....except you're paying $10-13 million a season for the priviledge of biting your fingernails...instead of $4-6 million. And I know you're not proposing we go out and sign Lowe to a 4-5 year deal.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2008 -> 09:50 AM) I don't think Miles is a target or should be, but if these other guys are more versatile, it would be an upset. Miles played 2b,ss,3b,lf,rf,cf and p last season. I mean "quality" versatility. Lillibridge legitimately can play all the infield and outfield positions....so I didn't mean "Chone Figgin-ish" or Joe McEwing versatility with that comment. Betemit is pretty bad defensively wherever you stick him...but would you really rather have Aaron Miles than Betemit? Maybe some here would.

Our luck (or talent) has been much better with pitchers, FWIW. Gavin Floyd Esteban Loaiza Contreras Thornton Danks (although hardly on the scrap heap) Takatsu (for awhile at least) Marte Hermanson Politte Cabrera at least at one point (as recently as 2008) had #1/2 starter ability. Does Jeff Marquez have the same type of stuff as Homer Bailey or even Cabrera? I think not. You're right, Van Beschoten is a low risk, low expectation pick-up. Brad Penny might fall into this same mix. Ledezma has a quality arm. Would he be better than DJ Carrasco, Wasserman or Jhonny Nunez or Adam Russell? MAYBE! Yes, the 2006 bullpen experiment turned out to be a failure and also cost us Mr. Cortes...eventually leading to our becoming one of the most expensive bullpens in the majors with the signings of Dotel and Linebrink. However, that's not simply about KW's 2006 gamble, it's more about the complete lack of development over a five year period in the White Sox minor league system...combined with trading away pitchers like Frank Francisco. Look at the last couple of years. Names like Sean Tracey, Agustin Montero, Franklyn German (never appeared), Sierra, Wasserman, Russell, etc.

Raul Ibanez will turn 37 during the first year of his new three-year deal with the Phillies and finish it at age 39. He's very similar to the player he's replacing, Pat Burrell. But Ibanez is four years older, is a far worse defensive player and -- outside of a blip in 2008 -- does not hit left-handed pitching. (His OPS against left-handers was .868 in 2008 but was .650 in 2007 and .661 in 2006.) If the Phillies were willing to give this contract to Ibanez, they should have offered it to Burrell, who at least is less likely to fall off a cliff offensively and would have kept their lineup a little more balanced. The difference in 2009 will be slight, but by 2011, there's a good chance Ibanez will be just an albatross, both financially and defensively. The most absurd part of this signing is the fact that the Phillies decided not to offer arbitration to Burrell, who also had a Type A designation, meaning the Phils could have either brought him back on a one-year deal or received two high draft picks if he signed elsewhere. If Burrell had accepted (the deadline was earlier this week), the Phillies would have had Burrell on every general manager's favorite Christmas gift, a one-year contract, which limits the team's downside risk and might even provide a boost by putting the player into another walk year. If Burrell had not accepted, which seems likely for a number of reasons, the Phillies would have been set up to receive two draft picks, a compensatory pick and probably a late first-rounder or early second-rounder. It would have been a win either way, so signing a very similar player to a three-year contract without getting the picks for Burrell is plain ol' mismanagement. And to make matters worse, the move cost the Phillies their own first-round draft pick. We're talking about the scouting staff that drafted top prospects Michael Taylor, Dominic Brown, Jason Donald and Lou Marson in the past few years, as well as Adrian Cardenas and Josh Outman, both of whom were used to land Joe Blanton in a midseason trade. The goal should be to give the scouting department more picks, not fewer, unless the move makes the big league club better, which the Burrell-for-Ibanez tradeoff does not. The signing of Ibanez gives the market for all-bat-no-glove hitters a benchmark for future negotiations, which might ease the way for Adam Dunn, Burrell and Bobby Abreu to sign over the next week or two. The Mets, Nationals and White Sox are known to be interested in at least one of those players, and the Dodgers could jump in if they don't sign Manny Ramirez. It also clears one more player out of the market if the White Sox do wish to trade Jermaine Dye, whose defense has gone from plus to minus over the past few years. keithlaw espn.com