whitesox61382

Uribe does have some question marks, but I have more faith in him compared to Harris, and I could live with Uribe starting at 2B or SS as long as someone besides Harris is starting beside him. One way that I look at it is that Uribe is an upgrade over Valentin for comparison(better BA, similar power, similar plate disipline, similar speed, better defense). I love Uribe's defense, and his ability to play multiple positions. I could live with Uribe hitting in the 7th or 8th hole. He has averaged 59 extra base hits in a full season(600 AB's), which is pretty good, especially for a middle infielder. He did show a mild improvement from a plate disipline standpoint(best career BB/PA and BB/SO). If he can post a .260+ BA, than I could live with Uribe as an everyday starter. The Sox aren't going to become the Yankees with an AS at ever position.

Here would be my lineup with Beltran(similar to the other thread) Trade Konerko to Atlanta for Furcal - I think they have similar trade value and a tweak here or there could get this deal done. The Sox would probably save 3-4M and they would get the high BA, OBP, speedster, SS that they need. Trade Garland and Crede to Seattle for Winn and Meche - I am tired of waiting on Garland and Crede to develop. Winn has quietly become a very solid and consistant player over the past couple of years. He is also signed for a reasonable price. Throw in a good young arm like Meche and it seems like a good deal for both teams. Trade CLee to LA for Penny - LA might not be willing to make this trade since they gave up a lot to get Penny, and because Perez is a FA and Nomo has really struggled of late. The Sox would be taking a chance on Penny, but when he is healthy he is a darn good pitcher and still young. The Sox would also save a couple of mil. Sign Koskie - The guy is a perfect fit. A solid complete player. Sign Beltran - The guy is the most complete player in the majors. Sign Morris/Perez - Sign the cheaper of these two guys as insurance if Penny gets hurt or Contreras really struggles(possible moved to pen as a closer). Pick up Everett's option as insurance against another Thomas injury or if Gload is a bust as an everyday player. Lineup Furcal SS Winn LF Beltran CF Thomas DH Koskie 3B Rowand RF Gload 1B Uribe 2B Davis C I would love this lineup. You add improved BA with Furcal never hitting below .275 in the majors, Winn hitting .285+ the past 3 seasons, Beltran with a career BA of .284, and Koskie with a career BA of .280. You add speed with Furcal, Winn, and Beltran all with at least 20+ SB at this point(and more importantly at a high sucess rate), plus Koskie and Gload have above average speed at their respective positions(Koskie on pace for his 4th straight double digit SB season). The increased speed would also be noticed on the basepads(not just stealing) and on defense. You add more plate disipline with Furcal, Winn, and Koskie all having at least 50+ BB at this point. You don't lose much/if any power since Furcal and Winn are both on pace to hit 15+ HR each, Koskie is a consistant 15-25 HR guy, and Beltran should give you 30+ HR. The lineup would have perfect balance with Furcal and Winn being lefties, Beltran a switch hitter, Thomas a righty, Koskie a lefty, Rowand a righty, Gload a lefty, Uribe a righty, and Davis a switch hitter. Finally, this is a great defensive team(maybe the best in baseball). You can make an arguement that the Sox have an above average defensive player at every position. The defensive outfield of Winn, Beltran, and Rowand might be the best in the game, and would cover some serious ground(since they are all natural CF). The improved D alone would probably help the pitching improve a little bit. Rotation Garcia Buehrle Morris/Perez Penny Contreras This would be a pretty darn good rotation, especially if Penny stays healthy and Contreras figures it out. It would be nice to finally have a consistant 5th starter. Plus you have a guy like Meche in the pen who could pitch in the rotation as insurance Bullpen Takatsu Marte Politte Meche Cotts Diaz/Grilli/Adkins This would be a decent pen and should be slightly better than this year. I really think that Meche could excel in the pen with his nasty stuff and give the Sox another quality right. Bench Everett Harris Burke Borchard Valdez The bench is pretty solid. The top 3 would be getting the majority of PT. Harris adds a speedster and defensive replacement to the team. I already explained Everett's importance. Burke has looked like a solid backup so far. Borchard would be a 5th outfield and get rare PT. Valdez is a bench warmer and will play a similar role as Harris. If my calculations are right, than this team would cost approximately 85M(give or take a couple of million). While it might be a little overbudget, I think this team has playoffs written all over it. With an increase in attendance this year and the excitement that an active offseason provides(highlighted by the signing of the most sought after FA in Beltran), I think JR would be wise to invest 85M in the above team. Unfortunately it isn't even close to happening and Sox fans will have to live with another mediocre team.

Here would be my dream offseason. Trade Konerko 1B to Atlanta for Furcal SS Trade Garland RP, Crede 3B, prospect to Seattle for Guardado LP and Winn LF Sign Beltran Sign Koskie Sign SP(in 4-5M range) Lineup Furcal SS Winn LF Thomas DH Beltran CF Lee 1B Koskie 3B Rowand RF Uribe 2B Davis/Burke C Rotation Garcia Buehrle FA Contreras youngster Bullpen Guardado Takatsu Marte Politte Cotts cheap FA I would love that lineup. You have 2 very good top of the order hitters. You have great balance(lefty-righty). You don't lose any power, but you add significant speed(Furcal, Winn, and Beltran all have at least 20 SB, plus Koskie is on his way to his 4th straight double digit SB season). You add BA(Furcal has never hit below .275, Winn has hit at least .285 the past 3 seasons, Koskie is a career .280 hitter, and Beltran is a career .284 hitter). This team would also be amazing defensively. Winn, Beltran, and Rowand would be one of the best defensive outfields in the game and would cover some serious group. The infield would also be very good(although Lee will have to get use to playing 1B). The Sox would need Contreras to figure things out, and hope that a youngster can come in and give them decent outings for the starting rotation to be good. The bullpen should be better with the addition of Guardado. The one problem is this team would probably cost in the 80-85M range, which is a little too much. Its a dream, but it gives me hope for next year. Its nice to see that the Sox are being mentioned with some of the top available FA.

Wackiest stats? They are the most common stats used to show the effects of each park(ie is it a good pitchers park, a good hitters park, or neither). Its a pretty simple, solid, and consistant way to compare parks, instead of your wacky, the Twinky Dome is a HR heaven(one of the funniest things I have heard in a while by the way)with nothing to support it. There is no reason to get mad because you don't understand these simple stats, and that they prove your BS opinion wrong. Furthermore, they are extremely easy to find. Just go to ESPN, MLB, stats, and park factor. It is that simple and doesn't require tons of reasearch or expertise. How can you say that you hope the Sox get Milton? Are you trying to make the Sox consistant losers? You might not like the park factor stats, but you can't debt the fact that Milton has the worst groundball/flyball ratio among major league pitchers that qualified(.62 out of 88 total pitchers). How can that not scary your, or do you not understand the simple groundball/flyball ratio either? Or the fact that he has a career ERA of 4.77. Or the fact that he has never posted an ERA below 4.32. Or the fact that he has posted an ERA of AT LEAST 4.80 in 3 of his last 4 full seasons. Or the fact that he has never given up fewer than 24 HR in a season. Or the fact that he has given up 35+ HR in 3 of his 7 full seasons. Or the fact that USCF is a good HR park(whether you use the park factor stats or your own opinion). Ortiz is not a great pitcher, is certainly not my #1 choice this offseason, and he is a risk(especially with his high walk totals), but I would take him and his 200+ IP, 14+ wins, and sub 4.00 ERA over Milton anyday of the week and twice on Sunday. I have shown why with the use of stats and common knowledge. What have you shown to support your opinion that Milton should be priority #1 for the Sox?

He is right when he says that the Twins have very fewer major league ready starting pitching prospects. Sure there are some prospects that slip through the cracks and don't get much attention, but develop into solid players, but the overwhelming majority of good players in the majors today were once top 10 prospects in their organization at some point. In Santana's case, he didn't exactly come out of nowhere. The Twins thought highly enough of him to have him in the majors full time by the time he was 21. While he struggled his 1st 2 years, you could see that he has the stuff(potential) to be a very good pitcher. By 23, he was dominating the majors, and has been doing so the past couple of years. Most 23 year olds are still in the minors, so I wouldn't say that Santana came out of nowhere. Besides, even in Santana's case, he struggled the 1st couple of years in the majors as do most pitching prospects, so the Twins(Sox) should expect the same from any pitching prospect that is used to fill Radke's spot if he leaves.

Butter Parque, I am guessing that you have no clue how park factor stats work, do you? Pack Factor meassures the difference between HR's hit at a specific park versus the HR's hit on the road. For example, you add the # of HR the Sox have hit at home plus the # of HR the opponents have hit at USCF, than divide by the total number of home games. You than divide that by the # of HR the Sox have hit on the road plus the # of HR the opponents have hit on the road, than divide by the total number of road games. If the number you get is greater than 1, than that means that your home park yields more HR's. If the number you get is less than 1, than that means that your home park yields fewer HR's than other parks. Here is the formula written out. ((homeHR + homeHR(allowed))/(home games))/((roadHR + roadHR(allowed))/(road games)) The point is that the team remains consist. It is a meassure of the Sox hitters and pitchers at home versus the Sox hitters and pitchers on the road, so it really doesn't matter if your team has more power than the other team or if the other team has better pitching. Here are the results: USCF 1.356 Philly 1.188 Minn .923 As you can tell by the stats, USCF is a great HR park, in fact, 1.356 is the highest total among all parks, including Coors. The Phillies new park ranks a little above average, but isn't that close to USCF. The Twinky Dome ranks below average for HR hit in their park, that means that the Twins hitters and pitchers have more HR's on the road than at home. So much for the idea that the Twinky Dome is a HR heaven. The fact is that Milton gives up a ton of HR no matter where he pitches, and he would probably give up 40+ if he played for the Sox. He is an extreme flyball pitcher. In fact, out of all the MLB pitchers that qualify, he has the WORST groundball to flyball ratio in the majors(.62), yet you want to put him in the best HR park in the majors(this year). Thats a smart idea.

Butter Parque, what are you trying to say? You most recent post is one of the most unorganized things I have seen in a while. You jump all over the map, talk about things that don't even relate to the topic at hand, and contradict yourself numerous times. Garcia hasn't been as effective as hoped, but his peripherals suggest that his ERA shouldn't be that high. Furthermore, 1 start(the Detroit start) is the difference between an ERA of 4.95 and 4.19, which clearly shows that 13 starts isn't enough to make an accurate assessment at this point. Everyone expected his ERA and HR totals to go up some, but the increase to this point isn't accurate(sample size is too small). We will have to wait until next year before we find out how good Garcia is in Chicago. Furthermore, how can you draw the conclusion that Ortiz will suffer the same fate as Garcia? By your messed up logic, does that mean that every pitcher with a similar ERA as Garcia is going to suffer the same fate, because that has to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. You can expect Ortiz's numbers to increase some, but a Garcia-like increase is not normal and for some reason you don't understand that(not to mention the fact that the sample size is too small to make accurate judgements). Based on the TYPICAL increase experienced from a move to the AL and a better hitters park you can expect an increase of approximately .25-.50. However, you also have to consider that a pitcher like Ortiz will most likely get more run support as well since his new offense would also be playing in the AL and in a good hitters park. I love how you expect Ortiz to suffer a significant increase in his stats, but you ignore Milton's terrible stats and attempt to suggest that he might be better in Chicago despite the fact that he would also be moving to the AL and to a better hitters park. Sure Milton's rookie year ERA brings up his career ERA some, but how can you still ignore the fact that he has never posted an ERA below 4.32, and in 3 of his last 4 FULL seasons he has posted an ERA of 4.80 or higher. You attempt to reach in your analysis of Ortiz and suggest that he would post an ERA around Garcia's 4.95(despite the fact that he hasn't posted an ERA above 4.02 in the last 4 years), and than turn around and ignore the fact that Milton HAS posted an ERA that high in 3 of the last 4 seasons. What kind of messed up logic is that? You expect me to take your response seriously when you use reasoning described above? PS. Please research your info before you try and use things that aren't true. For example, USCF is a SIGNIFICANTLY better hitters park than the Twinky Dome. It isn't even close. USCF averages 11 runs per game while the Twinky Dome averages abou 9.4 runs per game. For that matter, USCF is also a better hitters park than Citizen Bank Field(Philly). The HR difference is even worse, so please don't use that as an excuse for Milton. The fact is, Milton's groundball/flyball ratio is FAR worse than Garcia, Ortiz, and almost every single starter for that matter, but for some reason you don't understand this. Milton is going to give up a ton of HR's and post a high ERA no matter where he pitches. Why would you want that on the Sox? Are you trying to make them lose? Why would you pick a pitcher that has a history of failure(Milton) over a pitcher that has been consistantly good(Ortiz)? I would love to see the Sox go after 1 of the reasonable 4(Radke, Pavano, Perez, and Clement) or maybe take a chance on Morris if those 4 fall through.

The Sox could always steal away the Twins left side of the infield. I think Guzman could be an option at SS(although I would rather try and trade for Furcal). The Sox could also sign Koskie for say 2 years(maybe with an option for a 3rd). While I would love to get Varitek, the price is going to be too high. He is by far the best catcher on the market, which means most big market teams will be after him. The Sox need to realize that you don't need an AS at every position. Besides, I like what I have seen from Davis and Burke in the 2nd half so far.

Let me get this straight, you don't want the Sox to go after guys like Ortiz, Pavano, and Perez, but you do want them to go after guys like Lowe, Milton, and Radke. I hope that you don't have a friend in the Sox management, because that is some of the worst advice I have heard. I do think that Radke would be a good option, and I think that he should be the Sox first choice, but Lowe and Milton are no-nos. Who cares that Milton had some of the best stuff you saw when he was coming up? The fact of the matter is that it hasn't translated to major league sucess. There are hundreds of pitchers with great stuff that never amount to anything. Should the Sox go after Scott Ruffcorn, because he had great stuff in the minors to? That is some of the worst logic I have heard in a while. You than pointing to his 3 starts at the end of the 2003 season to back up you point and simple ignoring the much larger sample size, that is his career, with his career ERA of 4.78, or the fact that he has never had an ERA below 4.32 in a season. Not to mention the fact that Milton is an EXTREME flyball pitcher, who allows almost 2 flyballs for every 1 that Garcia allows, and has never given up fewer than 24 HR in a season(including 38 HR this year). Who cares that Lowe is a groundball pitcher? For starters, the Sox don't have a GG calibur defense in the infield to take advantage of a groundball pitcher. The fact that a pitcher is a groundball pitcher is not reason enough to sign him. The Sox have their own extreme groundball pitcher in Garland, and look how effective he has been. Should the Sox go after Mike Hampton solely because he is a groundball pitcher? You also ignore the fact that Lowe's 2002 season was a fluke, and that his ERA has gone up the past 2 seasons(4.47 in 03 and 4.91 in 04). I don't care what kind of pitcher he is, an ERA approaching 5 is bad anyway that you slice it. You are telling me that you would rather have these guys instead of players like Ortiz, Pavano, or Perez? I am not a huge Ortiz fan because of his high walk totals and so-so peripherals, but you got to give the guy some credit. There is a pretty good chance that he could post 200+ IP, 14+ W, and a sub 4.00 ERA for the 4th straight season. I guess you can say that he is one of those guys that knows how to win and can pitch over his mistakes. While he wouldn't be my first choice, I wouldn't mind those above numbers in the Sox 3rd spot in the rotation, and would much rather have him over Milton and Lowe. I compare Pavano to Matt Clement. A guy who has always had good stuff, but who took a little longer to figure it out. The guy has followed his solid 2003 season with a breakout 2004 season, in which he has been one of the top pitchers in the majors. Furthermore, he is a groundball pitcher who has only given up 34 HR in 400+ IP the last 2 years combined. There is no way that any semi-knowlegible person would rather have Milton or Lowe instead of Pavano, unfortunately, his asking price will probably be a little too much. Perez would probably be my 2nd choice this offseason behind Radke. I was one of those people who questioned Perez after his so-so year last year, but he has rebounded nicely. This guy has some of the better stuff in the league, has great control, excellent peripheral stats, and he is a groundball pitcher. I think that he would be a great addition, and I hope that the Sox go after him this offseason. Some other guys worth taking a look at are Clement and Morris. I have always like Clement and think he would be a good addition. He is also a groundball pitcher . His price tag might be a little high, but it never hurts to ask. Morris could be had for a bargain thanks to his so-so season this year. If you are looking for a diamond in the rough who might rebound nicely, than Morris might be your guy. The guy had never posted an ERA above 3.76 before this season. His 33 HR allowed is significantly higher than his previous high of 20, and is a little misleading for one of the top groundball pitchers in the game. His peripherals are pretty good for a guy with an ERA in the mid 4's, and they suggest that he is better than his ERA and could see an improvement next year. Healthy concerns worry me a little, but the guy has had 27+ starts the last 4 years.

witesoxfan, I think you overestimate Crede's trade value. Sure he is still realitively young at 26 and has a chance to improve, but the demand for a .230 hitter, with no plate disipline, and terrible speed isn't that great. Furthermore, Winn is a pretty solid player. Which stats would you rather have on your team? .285/13/69 50 BB 86 SO 20 SB .783 OPS or .237/17/60 30 BB 77 SO 1 SB .699 OPS You honestly think that the Sox should get something else in return? I think this is a classic case of you overestimating the value of a Sox player. The way that I see it, if I was given a choice between Winn or Crede, than I would take Winn. Yasny, I think you overestimate Konerko and Garland's trade value. I think Konerko and Furcal's trade value is about the same. The saying goes that it is harder to find a quality leadoff hitter than it is to find a quality cleanup hitter. Furcal is more of a complete player, so once again, if I was given a choice between Furcal or Konerko, than I would take Furcal by a very slight margin. I was considering saying Cruz instead of a pitching prospect, but at this point, Cruz has more trade value. Garland doesn't have much trade value after regressing this year. How many more years are the Sox going to have to wait for him to develop? He has been in the majors for 5 years and shown no improvement, so getting a good major league ready pitching prospect is probably all the Sox will get for Garland. Not to mention the fact that the Sox would probably save about 5M in this deal. To think that the Sox would get much more than that is a clear case of you overrating the Sox players. You have to look at things from both perspectives. None the less, I would love to see the Sox with my projected lineup. Sure they sacrifice a little power(although 7 of the players have at least 13 HR at this point in the season), but the BA, OBP, speed, and defense of the team would be improved. This is what I think the Sox philosophy is and should be. A team of more complete players.

I agree with Ozzie's philosophy. They do play in a small stadium, since the fences were moved in a couple of years ago, but this team needs to find more "complete" players instead of these "one-dimensional" power hitters. My REALISTIC suggestions for next year, in regards to personal, would be as followed. Trade Konerko(1B) and Garland(SP) to Atlanta for Furcal(SS) and a pitching prospect I can't take credit for this idea since it was mentioned in a previous thread, but I think this trade has some potential. I have a feeling that the Sox are going to move either Konerko or Lee, especially if they want to get some quality talent that matches their philosophy. Atlanta does this trade because they need power at 1B, and because they will probably need some cheap starters since Ortiz and Wright are FA's. The Sox do this because Furcal is the high BA/OBP speedster that they need at the top of the order. Throw in a major league ready starting pitching prospect and you have yourself a pretty fair deal. The Sox would also save a little dough in this deal as well. Trade Crede(3B) to Seattle for Winn(CF) In another thread, I suggested a possible trade for Ichiro, and while that idea might be a little far fetched I think this could be a possibility. Seattle is in the process of rebuilding, and one position that they don't have any quality major league ready prospects/youngsters is 3B. Seattle has shown interest in Crede before, and it seems like a good fit for a team that is rebuilding. Winn gives the Sox another high BA/OBP speedster at the top of the order. Sign Koskie(3B) I think there is a pretty decent chance that Crede could be traded this offseason, and that the Sox could sign Koskie as a short-term solution. Koskie is a very solid complete player that does everything well and could sign for a reasonable price. 2005 Lineup 1 Furcal ss 2 Winn cf 3 Thomas dh 4 Lee lf 5 Koskie 3b 6 Rowand rf 7 Gload 1b 8 Uribe 2b 9 Davis c I think this would be an improvement offensively. Furcal has never hit below .275 in a single season, has a career OBP of .350, has stolen at least 20+ bags in every season(including 49 in 55 attempts the last 2 seasons combined), and he even has a little pop(on pace for his 2nd straight 15+ HR season). Winn is the model of consistancy even in a pitchers park like Safeco. For the 3rd straight year, he is on pace to hit, at least .280+, hit at least 10+ HR, 30+ 2B, and 75+ RBI, post an OBP of at least .345+, an OPS of at least .770+, and steal 20+ bags. Despite a subpar season from a BA standpoint, Koskie still has a career BA of .280, has hit at least 14 HR the last 4 seasons(and is usually good for 30+ 2B), has averaged about 70 walks the last 5 years(including this years projected total), is on pace for his 4th straight double digit SB season, and he has never posted an OPS below .815 in a full season. These are the type of complete players that the Sox need to add, even if it is at the expense of a little power. This would also be an above average defensive team as well. I would love to see the following lineup next year, and I don't think it is too unrealistic.

You make a good point. In this day of age, it is hard to predict which players will develop and which won't. Wright has a better chance of being a Torbart in the college game, than a 2nd coming of CAnthony. I have seen Julian Wright play multiple times(since I use to live in HF), and he hasn't impressed me to say the least. He is your typical 6'8 althetic foward who can dominate smaller players and throw down nice dunks, but he does little else well. These are the type of players that often never live up to the hype at the college/NBA level, so don't declare Wright an All American just yet. Not to mention the fact that in this day of age, a so called top 10 recruit is as likely to jump straight to the NBA as he is to step foot on a college campus. Besides the 2005 recruiting class is one of the weakest in the past decade, as someone else pointed out. My boys, IU have gone the smarter route for 2005, and that is getting proven transfers, who aren't going to jet for the NBA, that will be eligible in 2005, and save your schollies for a much better 2006 class.

As a ND fan who follows the Big 10, I think Purdue is the team to beat. Granted, they have beat two bad teams(Syracuse isn't that bad), but they have done it in dominating fashion, and the young D(which was suppose to be a weakness), has been very good. I really think that Orton is the best QB in the college game. Some of the throws that he has made are throws that half the NFL QB's can't make. There have been a couple of 30-40+ yard throws in which he puts it right over the receivers shoulder, right in his hands, and were the corner has no shot. Its about time that Joe Tiller got some credit as well. This guy has taken Purdue to a bowl game each year he has been there. Moreover, he does it with hardnose, hardworking players. You won't see Purdue among the top 10 in regards to recruiting classes, but they always contend, and I think that Tiller should get credit for that. Illinois better come to play, or it could be 3 blowout wins in a row. Michigan - Has looked very average. They were very bad against Miami(OH), and are getting beat by an average ND team as we speak. There D has looked suspect against a poor ND offense. They don't have a good running game(I realize that Underwood is out). Based on the 1st 2 games, Michigan looks very flawed. Ohio State - They are like New England, they don't win pretty, but they always seem to find a way to win. They have looked a little suspect, and Marshall is currently giving them a good game. Wisconsin - If Davis can ever stay healthy, than they have a shot with the talented defense that they have. Without Daivs though, this team will probably be a middle of the pack team. Iowa - They are like Ohio State, but to a lesser extent. They have just not impressed me much, and had to squeeze out a victory today at home. They have a good defense, but the offense has some holes. Minnesota - Has looked impressive so far, and they deserve some respect. That power running game they have is hard to stop. There are a few question marks on defense, but Minnesota is for real. Finally, I have to praise my Irish. I realize that Michigan isn't as good as usual, but ND has looked like the better team today. I love the way that this RB Walker looks. He looks like a legit feature back, and you have to wonder how he would have affected the BYU game last week if he would have played. Quinn still looks a little off, but the Irish have a very good receiving core that just needs a chance to make plays. The Irish defense looks like the strength of the team and are playing well for a 2nd week in a row. They actually look like a top teir program(in this game) with a balanced attack. I think that BYU is better than people give them credit for, especially at home with that unusual defense. Lets hope that ND hold on for the win. PS Where are all those guys that were saying that ND had no chance?

My semi-realistic lineup for 2005 would be as followed. Trade: Crede(3B), Garland(SP), and 2 propsects(not named McCarthy, Anderson, Sweeney, GGonzalez, or Fields) to Seattle for Ichiro(OF) Before people start telling me to come back to reality, hear me out. I think this is possible. Ichiro has been mentioned in trade rumors before(when Seattle was trying to negotiate a new contract with him), and it appears that Seattle is heading towards a long rebuilding phase. Losing Ichiro would be losing their one marketing tool during the expected struggles of rebuilding, however, they have had sucess in the past trading/not resigning superstars(RJohnson and ARod) and adding depth and youth in the process. While Crede and Garland have struggled this year, they still have the talent to be good major league players, are still realitively young, and will be realitively cheap over the next couple of years. Throw in two solid prospects, say Young and Cotts(for example), and I think it is a fair trade for both sides. Ichiro is EXACTLY what the Sox need. A high BA, high OBP, GG-calibur defensive, speedster. He is the best leadoff hitter in the game, and maybe the best since Rickey. Putting him at the top of the order in front of the power hitters that the Sox have would probably make the Sox offense one of the tops in the game. Sign: Koskie(3B) I think this will be a perfect fit. Although he has struggled a little this year(from a BA standpoint), he is still a solid, consistant, complete player. He does a little bit of everything(hit for BA, hit for power, runs well, solid plate disipline, good D) and would add a lefty bat to the middle of the order. Sign: Radke(SP) This might be a little bit of a stretch, and the Sox might have to settle for a cheaper(less effective) option, but he would look good in a Sox uniform. He would complement the power starters(Garcia and Contreras) nicely. KW said that pitching was going to be the #1 priority, and that the Sox would be in the market for a "good" starter, so Radke might not be that unrealistic, although they will probably settle for someone else(my gut feeling tells me Russ Ortiz). Sign: Palanco(2B) I think this guy could slip through the cracks. There is a very good middle infield FA market(Kent, Garciaparra, Renteria, Cabrera, Walker, ect), and Palanco could be had for a bargain. He is a solid all-around player and he can play multiple positions. I think he would fit in nicely in the #2 hole behind Ichiro. Sign: Urbina(RP) The Sox have been interested in this guy before. He is having a so-so season, but he still has a great arm and the Sox could really use another quality right handed reliever. Scott Williamson might also be an option if he is completely healthy. 2005 Lineup Ichiro(RF) Palanco(2B) Thomas(DH) Lee(LF) Konerko(1B) Koskie(3B) Rowand(CF) Davis© Uribe(SS) Bench Harris(2B/CF) Burke© Borchard(OF/1B/DH) Gload(Of/1B/DH) Valdez(IF) Rotation Garcia(RH) Buehrle(LH) Radke(RH) Contreras(RH) Diaz/Munoz/McCarthy(maybe by the AS break) Bullpen Takatsu(RH) Marte(LH) Urbina(RH) Polite(RH) Wunsch(LH) Adkins(RH) This is what I would like to see if JR and KW are truely dedicated towards winning. In all likelyhood, you won't see an Ichiro trade, the Sox will settle for a middle of the pack starter(like Ortiz) instead of Radke, they will probably sign a cheap relief option instead of a big name guy(see Polite last year), they will probably stick with Harris at 2B, I think they might go after a short-term option at 3B(see Koskie/Randa), and I wouldn't be surprised if either Konerko or Lee is traded(possible Garland and/or Crede as well).

The Randy Johnson for Garcia, Guillen, and Halama trade is one of the few examples of a trade in which the team that got the prospects "won", but you need to understand that there were about a dozen other trades similar(not quite as big) as the Johnson trade in which none of the prospects amounted to anything. In all seriousness, keep an eye on ESPN.com because they usually put out an article that shows the fact that the majority of trades involving prospects are usually not "won" by the team getting prospects. My point is that we should at least wait until the prospects make the majors before we start saying that the Sox gave up a future HOF. You are not understanding Old Socks, Reed never had superstar skills, he had a great 200 AB stretch of overachieving. Average players have great stretches all the time, but that doesn't mean they are great players. It is like looking at Loaiza's numbers from last year, and ignoring his career history. As far as the Kotsay comparison goes, that is who the majority of scouts compare him to. I think you have a clear case of overrating Sox prospects. Being fooled by a 200 AB stretch into thinking that Reed is the next Ted Williams. The fact is, that Reed's talents project him to be a HEALTHY Kotsay type player, ie .290-.300/10-15/75-80 15-20 SB, high OBP with solid plate disipline. I am sorry to break this to you, but Reed will not be a star in the majors. He will be a solid top of the order hitter, but thats about it. Here is an interesting game, look back at the Sox top 10 prospects(according to BA) from 5 years ago, and than 10 years ago. You will notice that half those guys aren't even in the majors, and maybe 1-2 of them are solid major league players. The point is that very few prospects develop into solid major league players, yet alone superstars(even top prospects like Reed). Old Socks, you are not understanding how a trade negotiation works. The Sox can't push off their so-so prospects and hope to get a front of the rotation pitcher in the prime of his career. You have to give to receive, and if you look back on those top 10 prospect lists, than you will see how few "top" prospects ever develop into decent major leaguers. So the M's are taking a risk as it is by getting possible no major league talent for a darn good pitcher. You said that you wouldn't trade Reed for 10 Kotsays, but would you trade Kotsay and Olivo for 3.5 years of Garcia? Because 3 years from now, that is probably how the trade is going to look, unless Olivo sees the light and learns how to hit righties, Reed is that 1:10000 player that develops power in the majors without losing anything else(like Palmero), and Moore turns into a Jose Valentin type SS. The odds off all that happening are none. Wait a couple of years before you pass judgement on this trade, and watch Reed play a few times before you call him a superstar in the making.

There are a couple of flaws in your logic Old Socks. 1) You are missing a key figure in the Alomar and Everett(part 1) trades. You mentioned that the Sox got them for free(from a salary standpoint), and because of that, the Sox had to give up much more in the way of talent. In other words, KW hand was forced, by some degree, to give up a lot of young talent in order to acquire both Alomar and Everett. If JR would have been willing to pay the remaining 1/3rd of both players contracts, than the Mets would have probably only gotten the two scrubs(Almonte and the other guy), and the Rangers would have probably only gotten 1 of the 3(Webster, Francisco, and Rupe) along with a lower prospect. So whos fault is it? Answer...JR for being cheap and FORCING KW to give up more talent than he should have. You need to understand that money is worth almost as much as talent, and when a team is dumping a salary the percentage that is picked up by the other team determines what the team doing the salary dump gets in return. 2) You are ignoring the large sample of historical data that completely disagrees with your opinion on deadline deals. Watch ESPN.com over the next week, because they usually put out an article about previous deadline deals involving prospects, and the overwhelming conclusion that they draw is the majority of prospects involved in these traded amount to nothing. You mentioned a few trades in which a prospect turned into a good player, but you ignore the hundreds of trades involving prospects that amount to nothing. You are complete wrong when you say that the team getting prospects usually win the trade. It is like an iceberg, you only see the top(the prospects that turn into good player), which is only a small portion. What you don't see is the fact that the iceberg under the water is significantly larger(the prospects that you never hear about because they amount to nothing). So you are arguing against years of historical data that clearly show that the overwhelming majority of prospects dealt in deadline deals amount to nothing. The point is that you should wait until(if) they make the majors before you claim that the Sox gave up the second coming of Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. I don't care is Webster hits .400 with 50 HR's in the minors, or if Rupe throws 10 perfect games in a row in the minors, the only thing that matters is major league production, and at this point they have done absolutely nothing. 3) Calling Reed a future superstar gives me the impression that you have never seen him play. The chances that Reed becomes a superstar in the majors is slim to none. Even the scouts that think Reed will hit his upside don't think he will be a superstar, unless you think Mark Kotsay is a superstar? Reed is a player with limited natural talent, which means he has limited upside potential. You can't be fooled by the .400 BA he put up in AA in 200 some AB's. The .280-.290 average he has been hooving around in AAA is much more indicative of what to expect from Reed in the majors. He has limited power potential. Sure he could be the next Palmero(singles hitter in minors and HR hitter in majors), but that is slim to none. The only way that I see him increasing his power output is by subtracting BA or plate disipline(probably both). Otherwise he will probably be a 15 HR guy in his prime(give or take). His speed is drasticly overrated. People look at his high SB total and think that he has great speed, but that is far from the truth. What people don't see is the fact that he gets caught stealing a lot. I hold the believe that if you aren't sucessful in at least 70% of your SB attempts, than you are doing the team more harm than good, and Reed is an example of a guy below that 70% mark. One of the funniest things I read was when Starks(on ESPN) compared Reed's defense in CF to Mike Cameron(another clear case of someone who has never seen Reed play). The fact is that most scouts think Reed is a liability in CF(was a 1B in college) with average range and a below average arm. They feel that his best position will be LF. He does have good plate disipline and should be a high OBP guy, but he is far from a future superstar. To think otherwise is a clear case of overrating Sox prospects(past or present). 4) Garcia is a much better pitcher than you give him credit for. You can not judge a pitcher by his wins and loses(we have had this arguement a thousand times). If you think that the Sox could just give the M's peanuts for a front of the rotation starter in the prime of his career, than you have no understand of how baseball trades work. It doesn't take a pro scout to realize that Garcia has the goods. In fact, I think an arguement can be made that he is one of the top 5 pitchers in the AL from a stuff perspective. I love the fact that the Sox finally have a dominating pitcher on their staff. A legit front of the rotation starter. An interesting comparison that I found was between Garcia and Schmidt. If you compare their stats(Garcia up to this point and Schmidt before the past year and half), than you will notice that their stats are almost identical(Garcia being 28 and Schmidt being 29 at the time). I am not suggesting that it is a guarantee that Garcia will becoming a dominating ace like Schmidt, but it is very possible. These are 4 flaws in your logic that you need to consider.

Come on. If the Giants want to give the Sox Schmidt and Bonds for Anderson, than of course you would make that deal, but it isn't worth giving up Anderson for a 2 month rental, especially if it was for a marginal player. Realisticly, almost every team has a prospect or 2 that they consider untouchable, whether you choice to believe it or not. At this point, I would have to say that Anderson is untouchable. The Sox outfield doesn't look as bright as it once did, and because of that Anderson is untouchable. Like I said, the Sox were willing to trade one of their top outfield prospects, but it is highly unlikely that they will deal another. The Sox brass is EXTREMELY high on Anderson. It is that simple.

Actually, I have seen NUMEROUS untouchable prospects. In fact, almost every team has what they consider an untouchable prospect, or a player they just won't give up, especially for a rent-a-player. Watch and learn as the trade deadline approaches. You will see multiple deals get nixed because one team is unwilling to part with a top prospect. Your above statement is simple incorrect. Lets just say the word on the street is that the Sox are really high on Anderson(much higher on him than Reed, which is why Reed was traded), and won't trade him.

The simple point that I was trying to make, in the section that you quoted, was that the Sox will not trade Anderson, especially now that they have traded Reed, Borchard is looking more like a bust with each passing day, and Maggs becoming a FA at the end of the year. That was the simple point I was trying to make. The Sox had enough outfield depth to trade ONE of their top outfield prospects, and that guy turned out to be Reed. I would bet 1,000 dollars that Anderson makes his major league debut with the White Sox. Call it a hunch or call it common sense, but Anderson isn't going anywhere.

I think Anderson has more upside for 3 reasons. 1) He has much more power potential. Anderson could be a 25+ HR/30+ 2B calibur player(like Torri Hunter). I doubt that Reed will hit over 20 HR's in a season, and I highly doubt that he will do it consistantly. 2) Defensively, Anderson is a GG calibur CF with a great arm. Reed is a so-so defensive CF with a below average arm, and is better suited for LF. One of the funniest things I read is when Stark(on ESPN) compared Reed's defense in CF to Mike Cameron. It makes me wonder how guys like Stark get paid to write articles, when it is clear that he has never seen Reed play consistantly, and is drasticly overhyping him based on word of mouth. 3) Athletism and speed. Reed is a classic case of a hard worker who is making the most of what he has been given, which should be considered a positive. Anderson is the type of guy that has potential/talent/athletism oozing from his pores. Reed might have a higher SB total, but the fact that he gets caught stealing so often goes unnoticed. I hold the opinion, that if a player is only sucessful in roughly 67%(or fewer) of his attempts, than he does the team as much harm as good. The risk of an out(and lose of a baserunner) is not worth the risk of moving up one base if this is the case(IMO). So Reed's 70% sucess rate last year and 67% sucess rate this year tell me that his SB are almost irrelivent. Anderson on the other hand has more pure speed and appears to be a better baserunner, and a much higher sucess rate. While he might have a few less SB, his higher rate makes him a much more effective base stealer. I figure that they will put up similar BA. Reed will probably have a higher OBP due to the amount of walks he draws. I think the comparison of a healthy Kotsay is accurate for Reed. I think the comparison to Torri Hunter with a little better BA is accurate for Anderson. Given the choice, I would take the Torri Hunter with a little better BA. PS It would take a crowbar to pry Anderson away from the Sox. He is probably as close to untouchable as you can be. There is no way that they will trade Anderson after trading Reed.

Will you guys stop saying that Miles is better than Uribe? Miles is a nice player to have and you have to love his hussle, but the fact of the matter is that he isn't that good. You first need to take into consideration the park they play in. Not only is Coors friendly to the HR, but its spacious outfield is also friendly to singles hitters. Miles average is very good at .326(thank Coors for some of that), but if you look past that you will see that he isn't very good. He has almost no power(13 extra base hits in 233 AB's is down right terrible in a place like Coors). He has no plate disipline(11 BB in 233 AB's is down right terrible in general). He has almost no speed for a middle infielder(4 SB in 7 attempts). He is also a liability defensive with almost no range at 2B(he would probably be a DH in the AL). So while the average is good(boosted by Coors), he is below average in every other catogory. Uribe is better in every catogory except average, since he is 3 years young, and has much more talent, his upside is far greater than Miles. Those are the facts.

Baggio, everything isn't as black and white as you make it appear. When you grow up and learn to think critically about issues you will understand. The 2000 team was a fluke. It is that simple. As someone else pointed out, look at the rotation from that 2000 team. Sirotka - hasn't pitched 1 inning since the 2000 season Baldwin - is currently pitching in AAA after struggling in the majors over the past couple of years Parque - has since retired after getting light up in a few major league apperanced Eldred - missed almost the entire 2001 and 2002 seasons and is currently a struggling middle reliever for the Cards(5.22 ERA) Garland - is still with the Sox and has yet to live up to his potential KWells - is currently struggling with the Pirates Let that sink in for a second. All you have to do is look at that 2000 rotation, look at where those guys are now, and understand that 2000 was a complete fluke. Here are some names from the bullpen that were key in the Sox 2000 playoff season: Howry - has been struggling in the majors and has spent a good portion of time in the minors. does anyone remember the Howry for Gagne rumors that floated around in 2001. imagine if KW would have been able to pull off that deal. Simas - I could swear that I had a Simas siting in the majors although I can't remember for which team. He has either been injuried or in the minors the past couple of seasons. Lowe - Struggled for the Pirated after being traded there and has been in and out of the majors ever since. Barcelo - Injuries have brought an end to his career. Beirne - Who knows what has happened to him. Pena - Haven't seen him in the majors since. Eyre - Has been a decent reliever in for SF over the past couple of years. Biddle - Is currently the worst releiver in the majors Sturtze - Has been one of the worst starters in the majors over the past couple of years. The only pitchers from that bullpen who are still solid major leaguers are: Foulke - was used to acquire Koch and Cotts Buehrle - KW has locked him up for the next couple of years. Wunsch - Is still in the Sox orgnazation. Bradford - Was used to bring Olivo over, who was used to get Garcia KW kept the top offense intact(Konerko, Valentin, Lee, Thomas, and Maggs). How can the Sox be on the verge of a dynasty when the majority of the pitching staff isn't even in the majors today? Have you ever taken this into consideration? To the rational mind it is pretty obvious that the 2000 team was a fluke. Not even the great Billy Beane could have turned the 2001 team into a winner. For the most part KW kept the same team from 2000 in 2001, so how was it his fault that they struggled. Was it his fault that they showed their true selves? RS knew that the 2000 team was a fluke and got out of a sinking ship on a high note. Was it KW fault that injuries hurt the Sox in 2001? Was it KW fault that the #1 ranked minor league system never developed? You need to come to grip with reality and understand that 2000 was a fluke that KW could not help in 2001. He is responsible for putting the talent on the field giving his limited resources, and he has done a good job of that. The payroll did increase in 2001, but that wasn't from KW signing the top FA. It was from internal raises to make sure that the 95 win team stayed in tact. What would you have done different Baggio since you know everything and have the luxery of seeing how things unfolded? KW couldn't tear apart a 95 win team or he would have been run out of town, so tell me what you would have done all great one.

No offense, but your an idiot. - There is no way to positively spin the Ritchie trade. Everyone thought that he would be a solid middle of the rotation starter(at the worst) and time was running out for KWells and Fogg in the Sox managements eyes. Losing KWells was the only big lose from that deal. He has been very good the past 2 seasons, however, it is worth noting that he has really struggled this year(4.66 ERA and 1.61 WHIP). Don't get me started about Fogg. That guy was a fluke in 2002. He has since seen his ERA climb to 5.26 in 2003 and 6.18 so far in 2004. This was not a good trade, but it isn't turning out as bad as it originally appeared. - You can put a positive spin on the Koch trade. While Koch has cost the Sox many games over the past year and a half, and Foulke has been lights out over the past year and a half, you have to take other things into consideration. First, Foulke was all but gone after the 2003 season, so it was better to get a longer-term solution. No one knew that Koch would be THIS bad. Second, you have to take into consideration the other players involved in the trade. There is still a good shot that Cotts will become a solid major leaguer pitcher. You also have to consider the Valdez kid that they got from Florida for Koch. While he isn't going to be a star, it appears that he has turned a corner offensively, and with his great D and speed, could be a solid major leaguer or utility infielder. The point being is that this trade wasn't as bad as it appears, and the Sox could actually end up "winning" the trade if Cotts and Valdez develop into decent major leaguers. - For starters, the Sox didn't sign DWells, they traded for him. Secondly, they ended up giving up absolutely nothing to get him since Sirotka has never pitched in the majors since. Finally, if you look at DWells stats before and after he was a White Sox, you will see that his numbers are pretty impressive. The fact of the matter is that the Sox were simple unlucky that he wasn't healthy, because he was and still is a very good pitcher(that the Sox got for almost nothing). - As someone else pointed out, there is no way that you can consider that Colon trade a bad trade. Once again the Sox gave up almost nothing to get him, and he gave the Sox a great season in 2003 that almost lead them to the postseason. Biddle has developed into one of the worst relievers in the game. He is sporting a rather impressive 8.13 ERA as we currently speak. Liefer has turned into a career minor leaguer. Osuna is a decent right handed reliever, but those come a dime a dozen. This was a very good trade, and to top it off, the Sox got compensation for Colon leaving, and received a couple of good looking youngsters in the draft. This is a good trade any way that you slice it. - The Alomar trade is a draw in my book, unless Ring develops into a good reliever in the majors. Alomar didn't really help the Sox, but the trade didn't really hurt the Sox. The Sox have a very deep minor leaguer system when it comes to left handed pitchers, so the lose of Ring wasn't a big deal. - The Everett trade is also a draw in my book. Everett was a great player for the Sox for the 2+ months that they had him, and almost singlehandle helped the Sox reach the postseason. The Sox did give up some pretty good prospects to get him. Webster's star has fallen some and he has gone from a top prospect to simple a "good" prospect. Francisco is pitching well in the majors, but we should wait and see if he maintains it before we call him a big lose. Francisco could never get above high A ball(and pitch well), so it is a huge surprise that he has pitched so well in the majors so far, and leads me to believe that it is a mirage. Rupe was the one prospect that I really hated to see go. I think he really has the potential to be a solid starter in the majors. While this trade is a draw right now, Texas has a good chance of 'winning' this trade in the long-run. - You have to make sure that you don't confuse monetary decisions with KW. While KW does have a hand in the players that are signed or not, it is JR decision whether he wants to shell out the money. So you really can't blame KW for Gordon not resigning. Furthermore, KW did a very good job of signing decent replacements(Takatsu and Politte) with the limited resources that he had. You also had to figure that signing Gordon was a huge risk considering his age and his history of injuries. - How can you say that the Uribe trade was bad? Are you smoking crack? They guy has arguable been the best player on the team in the 1st half. Please don't tell me that you are on Miles jockstrape as well? Miles is a utility infielder on a good team. He is a Rey Sanchez clone, in other words, a guy who can hit for a good average, but does everything else below average. Uribe is 10x the player that Miles is, and his upside is much higher, not to mention the fact that he is 3 years younger. This was a good trade any way that you slice it, and to think otherwise is just plain stupidity on your behalf. - The Sox still have a chance to resign Maggs, albeit a slim chance. Has it ever occured to you that maybe the Sox are better off not giving Maggs 14+M/yr? Have you learned nothing from ARod? History has shown that very few teams can contend with large portions of their payroll tied up in 1 player. Assuming that the payroll remains relatively constant, Maggs would get roughly 20% of the total payroll. While Maggs is a very good player, he is not an elite player that deserves that kind of money(see Bonds, Puljos, Vlad, Arod). Do you not think the Sox would be better off giving Garcia(9M) and someone like Finley(5M) instead of giving Maggs(14M)? Furthermore, in case you haven't noticed, the Sox are actually averaging more runs per game since Maggs went on the DL. That isn't to suggest that the offense is better without Maggs, but that this team could survive without him and would be better off investing his 14M in other places(mainly pitching). Please think this things through before you make comments. There are numerous other deals that you have left out of the good section. What about the signing of Takatsu for the bargain price of 1M? What about the fact that KW tied up Marte for the next 3 year at an extreme bargain? What about the trade to acquire Olivo? What about the trade to acquire Marte? Ect. When you look at things realisticly, you begin to see that the goods far outweigh the bads, which is usually the indication of a good GM. PS. That 2000 playoff team was a fluke. Even if Shur stayed on the Sox would have fallen back to reality in 2001. I am beginning to think that Shur knew that the 2000 team was a fluke and got out on a positive note, and let someone else take on a sinking ship. So please don't pretend that KW was the reason for the fall in 2001.

Actually, I think Anderson and Reed are completely opposite players. Reed is the type of player that doesn't have THAT MUCH natural talent, but his work ethic and hussle allow him to be a solid player. Anderson on the otherhand, has natural talent and potential coming out of his pores. Reed doesn't have a huge upside, and he is a what you see is what you get type of player, while Anderson's upside is amazing. Reed is an average at best defensive CF, with a so-so arm, who is better suited for LF. Anderson is a GG calibur defensive CF, with a cannon for an arm, who is a natural CF. I doubt that Reed ever consistantly tops the 20 HR mark, while Anderson could easily be a 30 HR type of guy. Both have above average speed, but Anderson is the better base runner from what I have seen and the stats(CS %). Reed is a guy with great plate disipline and will fit perfect at the top of the order. Anderson has questionable plate disipline(although it has looked solid so far) and will fit better in the middle of the order. When you look at it realisticly they are almost complete different players. The only thing they really have in common is that they are both putting up good overall numbers. Personally, I think Anderson will be the better major leaguer. I think some people overhyped Reed because of an impressive 200+ AB's at AA. He has come back down to earth to some degree this year, and I really think the healthy Mark Kotsay comparison is accurate for Reed.

I think you underestimate Hunter offensively. Please tell me that you realize that Hunter has hit AT LEAST 30 2B, 25 HR, and 90 RBI the last 3 years. How many CF in the majors could claim those guade numbers over the past 3 seasons? I do think that Anderson will hit for a little better average(.270-.280 range). I think their plate disipline will be similar. Both have above average speed, but neither are big base stealers. Look for Anderson to be in the 15-20 SB range. Now tell me that a .270-.280/25+/90+ 30+ 2B 15-20 SB player is overrated and scares you(especially when he plays a defensive position and is above average defensively). I am sorry but you guy REALLY need to come back to reality. You guys(once again) are drasticly overrating the Sox prospects. If you gave me a choice of the above numbers(similar to a typical Hunter season) or the option of Anderson taking his chances and seeing what happens, than I would take the above numbers 10 out of 10 times(because 9 out of 10 times the prospect will never put up numbers similar to the once shown above). Odds are that Anderson will be LUCKY to consistantly put up the above numbers, and this is a concept that continually escapes your comprehension. Unless you are happy with the sub .700 OPS that the Sox CF have been putting up over the past couple of years, than I think it is fair to say that you need to pull you head out of your ass and understand what an improvement a CF that put up Hunter-like numbers would be. Anderson has the potential to be a star and put up better numbers, but odds are that Hunter-like numbers are much more realistic and Sox fans shouldn't complain if that is the case.