whitesox61382

I don't think this trade is as bad as people are making it out to be. Sullivan is a solid player who gives it his all, but lets not pretend like he is the best thing since sliced bread. For once I actually think this organization is starting to head in the right direction. Instead of filling the roster with overpaid underachieving veterans, it appears that the Blackhawks are set on building a strong young nucleus. There are some very talented youngster on the roster now and in the minors, and combine that with a solid draft(due to a bunch of draft picks) and the Blackhawks could become a solid team again. The key is to be patient and realize that this process will take a year or two to happen, but I would much rather lose with some promising youngsters than some overpaid veterans. The key will be to keep the young talent that does develop, which hasn't always been the case in the past.

ND starting to make a strong puch for the Tourny without Francis. ND 3 impressive wins in row with a win AT Syracuse(UConn and Seton Hall). The Big East COULD get 8 teams into the Tourny(although I think they will only get 7).

You beat me to the punch Critic.

The one issue I have with JR is that you need to take a chance every now and than to come out ahead. I am sure that he became wealthy by taking a chance here and there. Unfortunately the Sox are in an endless cycle in which JR says he will spend money if the fans support the Sox, and the fans say they will support this team if they are winning. Unless the Sox get a huge boost from the minor league system this is a cycle that will be hard to end, however, I saw a window of oppurtinity this year. With the Central being so weak I think the Sox could have put themselves over the top by adding 1 more starter(say a Maddux for example). The payroll would be around 70M(give or take a mil), but the Sox would be clear favorites to win the Central and that should help bring the fans back to some degree, especially if the Sox make the playoffs. I saw this offseason as a chance to end this dreadful cycle that the Sox are in, but instead JR stood still and might not get another golden oppurtinity. Thats my only beef with JR.

They also included another top pitching prospect Francisco Cruceta as part of the Shuey deal. Cruceta might even have a higher ceiling than Rodriguez, and is coming off another impressive year in the minors at AA(22 years old). 13-9 3.09 ERA 163.1 IP 141 H 7 HR 66 BB 134 SO Evans really got fleeced on that deal, and its probably one of the reasons why he is so reluctant to trade away top prospects like Miller and Jackson for 1 year players like Maggs.

I really don't like Rosenthal. While this article is nothing new for Sox fans and pretty accurate, he tends to be extremely negative, especially towards the Sox. Even when the Sox are doing well it seems that Rosenthal has something negative to say. He is the sportingnews version of Jay Mariotti IMO.

Rex, I would have to disagree with you to some degree. I live on the west coast, have multiple Dodger fans as friends, and have spent some time on the Dodger message board, and I can tell you for a fact that the overwhelming majority of Dodger fans are happy to see Evans go. I wouldn't go as far as calling him the worst GM ever, but he was pretty bad, and I am glad that the Sox picked KW over Evans. Evans did a decent job of building the minor league system, although I don't know how much of that was his doing, but the majority of his trades have not worked out.

I actually think that it was a good trade for the Knicks from a talent standpoint. I am not a big Keith Van Horn fan to say the least. I think he is extremely overrated, and his defense(or lack there of) is terrible. He has better overall numbers than Tim Thomas, but if given a choice, I would take Thomas over Van Horn. They also get a slight upgrade at center with Mahommad over Dolec. The Knicks have made some nice moves and have gone from boarderline playoff team, to a team that could go a couple of rounds into the playoffs.

Some different picks to say the least, but do you truely believe that the picks you made will occur? Baltimore winning the wild card? Are you joking? They are a slightly better version of the Texas Rangers. Good offense and no pitching. Have you seen their starting pitching staff? The BoSox have twice as much talent as the O's. I also think Toronto(my surprise team in the AL) is also better than the O's(much better pitching). I also think 3 teams from the West are all better than the O's. Seattle still has a solid core. The A's have the best starting rotation in baseball. The Angels are probably the most talented team in the West. My point is that there is absolutely no way that Baltimore even has a remote chance of winning the Wild Card. The Phillys not making the playoffs and the Marlins making the playoffs? There is little doubt that the Marlins will be similar to the 2003 Angels with a big dropoff after the WS. Most people feel that the Phillys have the most talent in the NL and I tend to agree. Not even a bad manager can prevent such a talented team from making the playoffs. If the Cubs get Maddux, than I think there is little doubt that they will be the favorites to win the NL Central. As much as that sickens me I have to admit that they have an amazing starting staff and the addition of DLee was one of the most underrated this offseason. Pittsburgh might be a surprise team, unless they deal Benson or KWells. My surprise team in the NL is the trendy pick: San Diego. This team has an underrated starting staff and a much improved offense. I just can't wait for the season to start.

I agree that Kellerman is much better than the statboy, but I must say that the only reason I watch the show is because of Woody Paige. IMO he is the star of the show and the reason why most people watch. He is extremely funny and I love the way that he takes cheap shots at Marrioti. Woody Paige is the man. He is usually good for one great quote each week. Quote of the week from Woody Paige: "Not only does Michael Holley know what he is talking about, but the idea of a turtleneck and nose jewerly, fabulous."

Steve boy, take off the glasses because it is blinding you from reality again. MSU did NOT blowout IU. MSU won by 12, were down by 1 at the half, and it was relatively close until about 5 minutes left. Illinois did blowout MSU. Illinois won by 24, were up by 15 at half, and the game was never close. I am sorry but even your bias opinion can't compare the MSU-IU game to the MSU-UI game. MSU has helped their cause of late, and went from out of the Tourny(about 6-7 games ago), to one of the last teams in right now(IMO), but MSU still has a tough schedule and getting a quality win or two would really help.

I don't know if I have seen as many IF's in one post. Your whole arguement is IF this, this, and this happen, THAN this could happen. That doesn't make for a strong arguement, and isn't going to convince me to change my opinion(which is possible). KC has the best bullpen by default??? Are you crazy??? Have you even looked at the stats??? Do you realize that KC had the worst bullpen, by far(2nd worst bullpen ERA in AL was 4.84), in the majors last year? - KC 2003 bullpen ERA 5.55 Key Additions Sullivan(Cincy/Sox) 64 IP 3.66 ERA 0 SV Leskanic(full year) 52.2 IP 2.22 ERA 2 SV with KC: 26 IP 1.73 ERA 2 SV Cerda(Mets) 32.1 IP 5.85 ERA 0 SV Key Subtractions Levine 21.1 IP 2.53 ERA 1 SV Analysis - The Royals bullpen should be better, if for no other reason because it can't get much worse. They have made some decent personal improvements. Adding Sullivan will give them a solid right handed set up pitcher. They also get a full year out of Leskanic, however those two alone won't make the majors worst bullpen into the strongest in the AL Central. If I had to make a prediction, than I would guess their bullpen will have an ERA in the high 4's, with the best case scenerio being the mid 4's. - Sox 2003 bullpen ERA 4.13 Key Additions Takatsu(Japan) Politte(Toronto) 49.1 IP 5.66 ERA 12 SV Santiago(Cleveland) 31.2 IP 2.84 ERA 0 SV Person/Jackson/Varensbourg Key Subtractions Gordon 74 IP 3.16 ERA 12 SV Sullivan 14.1 IP 3.77 ERA 0 SV Glover 35.2 IP 4.54 ERA 0 SV White 47.2 IP 6.61 ERA 1 SV Analysis - The lose of Gordon will hurt, but I have a feeling that Takatsu and Politte will do a decent job replacing him. Furthermore, I expect Koch to be better next year and the back end of the bullpen to be strong with more depth and talent(no more White posting a 6.61 ERA for 47.2 IP). I expect the bullpen to be similar to last year and post an ERA in the low 4's, worst case scenerio is that they post an ERA in the mid 4's. - Twins 2003 bullpen ERA 3.84 Key Additions Nathan(SF) 79 IP 2.96 ERA 0 SV Silva(Philly) 87.1 IP 4.43 ERA 1 SV Fultz(Texas) 67.1 IP 5.21 ERA 0 SV Crain(top prospect AAA) 26 IP 3.12 ERA 10 SV Key Subtractions Hawkins 77.1 IP 1.86 ERA 2 SV Guardado 65.1 IP 2.89 ERA 41 SV Fiore 36 IP 5.50 ERA 0 SV Analysis - The Twins bullpen did take a hit with the lose of Hawkins and Guardado, however, people are quick to overlook the fact that they brought in 3 decent arms in Nathan, Silva, and Fultz to help counter the lose. They also have top closer prospect Crain ready to contribute as well. The Twins bullpen will probably be a little worse, but I expect them to post an ERA in the low 4's, worse case scenerio the mid 4's. Do you honestly believe that Sullivan and a full season of Leskanic will make up the 1.50 ERA difference between the Royals and the Sox/Twins? The fact is that despite the minor improvements, the Sox and Twins still have the best bullpens in the Central. I suggest that you look at the stats before you make a statement that has no backing. IF Sweeney and JuanGone can stay healthy. Here are some numbers. Lets see if you can guess what they are? 00' 618 01' 559 02' 471 03' 392 Give up? Those are Sweeney's AB's the past 4 years. Notice a trend? The fact is that a back/neck injury can never be truely cured, and that Sweeney will probably have that problem for the rest of his life. I highly doubt that he plays a full season again. JuanGone hasn't had over 350 AB's the past 2 seasons, has a history of injury problems, and at 34 is no spring chicken. If the Royals get 400+ AB's out of him, than they should be very happy. IF Beltran improves, if Stairs continue to hit righties, if Berroa and Guiel continue to improve. You sound like a 3rd grader. Can make a list of IF's as well, but I like to stick to the facts and make a strong arguement. However, what IF Beltran regresses after posting career highs across the board, what IF Stairs struggles against righties, what IF Berroa falls into that dreaded sophmore slump, what IF Guiel plays like plays like the 31 year old career minor leaguer that he is? It goes both ways. The point is that in reality it will probably be somewhere in between, in which case the Royals will still see a dropoff in both BA and OPS with runners in scoring position, especially since BA and OPS are closely related. I love how you downplay injury prone, 30+ year old players like JuanGone and Sweeney, but are quick to point out possible injuries to players that have no history of injuries and are in their prime(health wise). It's things like this that make your arguement weak/elementary. If you took the time to compare the Sox and Twins offense, than you would see that they are relatively similar. The point is that any of the 3 teams could win the Central if they get some breaks/luck. On paper, I think the Twins have a razor thin advantage and that KC is overrated to some extent. It should be a good race and I can't wait for spring training to get started.

I am not saying that they will suck next year. I expect them to win about 82-84 games, and back-back winning seasons for an organization like the Royals is a nice accomplishment and step in the right direction. Furthermore, in the near future(with some luck in 2004) they could win the Central, but when the casual fan sees that the Royals won 83 games last year, are young and should improve, made some nice minor additions, and the 2 main competitors lost some key players they assume that this team is going to run away with the Central. In this case I think they are setting themselves up for a letdown. I think it will be a 3 team race(with any of the 3 winning the division), and at this point I don't see a clear favorite(although I give a slight edge to the Twins). 20 minutes??? Try 20 seconds. Its very easy to get/understand a stat if you have half a brain. If they move the fences back, than wouldn't that have a negate affect on the hitters? I don't see the point that you are trying to make with the fence arguements. It might help the pitchers, but it will hurt the hitters, so its not going to make the Royals a better team. I hope that you don't live your life by this "assume the worse and hope for the best" statement, because that is a sad way to live and not a good word of advice for baseball or life. How pathetic would the world be if everyone assumed the worse? If this is how you truely view baseball(and more importantly life), than you need to get some help. I think you misunderstand how drastic an affect that a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position would have. Lets assume that it falls to about .285, which is still well above average. A decrease of that much would result in 5-10% fewer runs scored. Over the course of a season that is a drastic change that can't be negated by 1 individual player. Furthermore, you assume that Sweeney is going to be healthy, but take it from someone who has seen their dad deal with back/neck problems their entire life(cut his college football career short), Sweeney's injuries really can't be cured and is reoccuring. The fact is(unfortunately) that Sweeney might not ever play a full season of baseball again(his AB's have gone down each of the last 3 years). JuanGone is also unlikely to stay healthy. The guy hasn't had over 400 AB's the past 2 years. Furthermore, you assume(incorrectly) that JuanGone's production is added to last year production, but you neglect the fact that he has to make up for the loses of Ibanez, Tucker, and White. Those 3 combined to post the following stats: .286 BA 169 runs 59 2B 11 3B 35 HR 166 RBI 16 SB JuanGone will be lucky to put up half of those numbers. Harvey??? Have you seen Harvey play? The guy is terrible, including one of the ugliest swings I have seen. The Royals think so highly of Harvey that they brought in Stairs to platoon with him. The fact is that KC really hasn't improved their offensive talent, and that a possible 5-10% decrease in runs scored due to a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position is going to have a significant affect like the Angels from 2002 to 2003 or the Sox from 2000 to 2001(which is why I think the 2003 Royals are more similar to the 2000 White Sox than the 2001 Twins), 2002 Angels .290 BA with runners in scoring position(851 total runs scored) 2003 Angels .269 BA with runners in scoring position(736 total runs scored) 2000 Sox .301 BA with runners in scoring position(978 total runs scored) 2001 Sox .281 BA with runners in scoring position(798 total runs scored) Sure there were other factors besides a decrease in BA with runners in scoring posiition that lead to a significant drop off in runs scored, but that was probably the main reason and shows how much of an affect it can truely have. The Twins pitching staff was better and more stable then the Royals current staff. That was the only point that I was trying to make, although Radke, Milton, and Lohse are all solid middle of the rotation starters. Below average offense? Me thinks that Brando should check the stats first. The Twins had a very underrated offense that didn't get a lot of attention because it had no starts. 6 regulars with a .275+ BA, including 2 with a .300+ BA 8 players with 10+ HR's, including 2 with 25+ HR's 9 players with 47+ RBI's, including 3 with 74+ RBI's Overall 8th in runs scored 4th in BA 9th in HR 7th in OPS 4th in SB They had an average, but underrated offense. KC has the best bullpen in the Central??? You do realize that they had the worst bullpen in the majors last year. Sure the addition of Sullivan and Leskanic(for a full season) will help, but they certainly won't have the best bullpen in the Central.

Its also ignorant to think that every team that improves will continue to improve. There are significant differences between the Twins of 2001 and the Royals of 2003. The only similarity is that they both came out of nowhere, but don't pretend that alone will guarantee that KC will be better in 2004, because it seems thats what you are basing your opinion on. In fact, I think there are far more similarities between the 2000 Sox team that overachieved and the 2003 Royals team. For every Twins team(2001) that builds on their strong season, there are 5 other teams that overachieve only to come back to reality the next year. Differences between 2003 Royals and 2001 Twins 2003 Royals -31 run diffential 2001 Twins +5 run differntial 2003 Royals .304 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but down) 2003 Twins .252 BA with runners in scoring position(nowhere to go but up) 2003 Royals questionable starting rotation and closer with Anderson, Mays, ?????? 2001 Twins proven rotation and closer with Radke, Milton, Mays, Lohse, Santana and Guardado These are just some of the differences. People question the Royals rotation because of the following reasons: - Hernandez is out for the year after surgery. - Affeldt has reoccuring blisters that might not ever heal - Anderson had a career year last season; ERA before 2003: 4.72(solid every year???), ERA in 2003: 3.78 - May had a career year last season also; ERA before 2003: 5.67, ERA in 2003: 3.77 - Appier is coming off major surgery and has been inconsistant the past couple of seasons(5.40 ERA in 2003). - Synder is also coming off major surgery and might not be ready by ST, he has a career ERA of 5.17. - Gobble has a grand total of 52.2 IP in the majors with mixed results - Greinke, their top prospect, has a grand total of 53 IP in the upper minors(AA or AAA) and had mixed results(58 hits in 53 IP at AA) - Asencio has really struggled in the majors, especially with his control(85 BB in 171.2 IP with a career ERA of 5.14). Now do you understand why people question their rotation? You should probably look at the stats/facts first before making comments that have no support.

Baggio, please read the entire thread(especially the arguement between Brando and me) before you make a comment, because it is clear that you are confused. The ESPN profile quote was in response to Brando's comment about Ritchie not reaching the mid-90's. It served no other purpose. Maybe I should have made a new paragraph after that, but I thought most people would understand that I wasn't comparing Ritchie and Perez based on their raw stuff, but instead their numbers(mostly). You got confused(it happens a lot with my posts ), but the point I was trying to make when I said the similarities are remarkable between Ritchie and Perez are the points that I made in my previous post.

I really think people are overrating Harris. He was always hyped since he came out of high school, but he never put up good numbers. Sometimes the top players don't put up big numbers, but I think people are overrating him, especially since he is only 280 lb, which is not ideal for a DT in todays game. I really don't see Harris going any higher than the mid-1st round unless he really impresses at the combine. I think the Falcons will take either Andrew(to protect Vick) or Williams(to give Vick a go to receiver).

KC was a fluke last year and few people would disagree. If you can't see it with your own eyes, than I will show you some stats. To begin with, they had a negative 31 run differencial, which suggests that they were lucky to be above .500(won a bunch of close games). Their pyth. theorem based on their run differencial suggested that they should have won only 78 games last year. They also gave up the 6th most runs in all of the majors last year, including the worst bullpen ERA. They hit an astounding .304 with runners in scoring position, which accounted for the relatively high run total. I did a little research and found out that KC was the only AL team the last 3 years to hit over .300 with runners in scoring postion(showing how rare it is), and that very rarely do teams post similar BA with runners in scoring position(which suggest that BA with runners in scoring position has a certain percentage of luck). For example, look at the Angels in 2002 and the Angels in 2003. One of the major reasons why they went from WS champs to a below .500 team was that their BA with runners in scoring position took a significant hit in 2003. The chances that KC duplicates that .304 BA with runners in scoring position is slim to none, and a significant decrease in BA with runners in scoring position, which is likely, will probably have a similar effect that it had on the Angels in 2003. These are just a few of the stats that suggest that they were a fluke last year. Furthermore, their pitching staff is down right terrible. They could rely on as many as 3 pitchers coming off major surgery next year(rarely do pitchers coming off major surgery pitch similar to their pre-surgery selves in their 1st year back). May and Anderson are coming off of career years and will probably regress some next year. And one of their better young arms(Hernandez) is out of the season. Beltran missed 2 weeks, so that isn't a huge gain. The unfortunate fact is that Sweeney might never be completely healthy again. My dad suffers from contrant back/neck problems and it cut his college football career short. Sweeney has the same problem and will probably miss large stretches of games over the coarse of the year(which is unfortunate because he is a great hitter when healthy). JuanGone is all but a guarantee to end up on the DL for some part of the season. He has failed to get 400 AB's the past 2 season, and I think it is highly unlikely that this year will be any different. KC was a fluke last year, but the casual fan might not notice. The casual fan might also read too much into the minor improvements that they have made and think that this is only a sign of better things to come. They will set their expectations too high(running away with the division), and when KC struggles to reach .500 they will be let down and considered the overrated/underachieving team in 2004(taking the title from the Sox). I still believe that Minnesota is the team to beat. I think people are reading too much into their loses. They did lose Hawkins and Guardado, but they did get Nathan and Silva and have a strong upper minor league system to help replace the loses. BY the way, the name of that top pitching prospect that witesoxfan was thinking of is Crain. He is suppose to be their closer of the future. I also think that Mauer will come in and post decent numbers as a rookie. Not as good as Pierzynski, but respectible numbers that will help negate the lose. Furthermore, no one mentions that they resigned Stewart who helped them drasticly during their stretch run. I really think Stewart is a solid player and that having him for a full year will improve their team. Any of the 3 teams can win it and the race might come down to the last week. I will be surprised if any of the AL Central teams win over 90 games.

Yes, sometimes the best option is to stand pat and build from within when you have a strong minor league system. The fact is that you are overestimating the options that the Dodgers have, especially if they are unwilling to part with either Jackson or Miller. There are no Guerreros, Tejadas, IRods, Sheffields, ect left on the market, so I would spend about 2-3M to bring in Travis Lee to play 1B, a stopgap until top prospect Loney is ready in about 2 years or so, and hope that improvements from within and a strong pitching staff will be enough. Next year is when I would start spending. I would use the money that I don't waste this offseason to bring in Beltran to play CF and Nomar to play SS. Adding those two with Lo Duca at C, TLee at 1B, Izturis/Cora/Thurston/ect at 2B, Beltre at 3B, Encarnacion in LF, and Green in RF should provide enough offense for one of the strongest staffs in baseball(hopefully Jackson and Miller are both ready). Thats what I would do if I was the GM of the Dodgers and had time/money to build a contender.

Baggio, one again you missed the entire point that I was trying to make. I wasn't suggesting that Ritchie and Perez had similar stuff. I simple pointed out that they both had decent stuff. The similarities that I was trying to make are in regard to their numbers mostly. For example, here are Ritchie's numbers before being traded to the Sox and Perez's numbers from last year. Ritchie(01') 4.47 ERA 5.38 K/9 2.40 K/BB .259 BA .715 OPS 1.30 WHIP 1.00 HR/9 Perez(03') 4.52 ERA 6.85 K/9 3.07 K/BB .267 BA .753 OPS 1.28 WHIP 1.36 HR/9 Perez averaged more SO, and had a better K/BB ratio, but Ritchie had a lower OPP BA, lower OPS againgst, and gave up fewer HR/9. The point is that their overall numbers were very similar. Furthermore, both pitched in a good pitchers park, and a move to Commisky would mean a better hitters park. Both had to move from the NL to the AL. When the Ritchie trade occured everyone said that he would take advantage of a weak offensive AL Central(similar to Perez). Everyone said that Ritcher would have the advantage moving to the AL since most of the players hadn't seen him pitch(similar to Perez). Both had 1 very good year, and suspect numbers besides the good year. I can keep going with the similarities, but I think you get the point. I am not suggesting that Perez will suffer the same fate as Ritchie, but you definately have to take into to consideration, and make sure that you don't give up that much for a player that could pull a Ritchie.

I didn't say that Maggs was a one-dimensional player. Hello! You put words in my mouth in order to make an arguement against me. I said, in general, that this team has been filled with one-dimensional power hitters, so adding a player like Winn that doesn't hit for much power, but does other things well would be a nice change. You know that you have reached an alltime low and are really grasping at straws when you use Mariotti to defend/support your arguement. If they play like they have the last two years, than the Sox will most likely be the favorites to win the Central. Winn has been very good the past couple of years and is an instant improvement at the top of the order(unless you think sub-.300 OBP Willie Harris is a better option). Even if Garcia doesn't return to previous form, a 4.50 ERA from your 3rd/4th starter isn't that bad, unless you think Schoeneweis and his 5.25 ERA(his average ERA as a starter) would be a better option. Not to mention that you have a phone book worth of options for the 5th starter spot and the final 2 spots in the pen, which should help improve those situtations, especially if Soriano duplicates his previous sucess(as either a 5th starter or set up guy). The pitching staff would be drasticly improved with this trade, and would outweigh the offensive downgrade. This team would be better with this trade and improve their chances of winning. In the end the casual fan cares more about winning then individual players. Perez is 1.8M cheaper and 1 year younger, so don't hide behind those things and pretend that it makes a huge difference. I realize that you are running out of things to support your arguement(as evidence by the Mariotti statement), but you are really spliting hairs in this example. I think Garcia will be better. Call it a hunch. You are clearly underestimating Winn and thats fine. I will agree that how Garcia performs will determine how good this trade would be. Come on. You say that the 3.5M could be given back with a bad start, but the same can be said if the current team gets off to a bad start. The difference is that the team after the trade would have a little more talent and would be a little less likely to get off to a bad start. PS The feeling must be mutual because you keep responding to me and calling me out. I am also flattered, but I am taken. Sorry

Wait a second, the original rumor that I read was Maggs for Garcia, Soriano, and Winn(although I did think it was one-sides and had to be more too it), but Maggs WITH Koch, Cotts, and Rowand for those 3. No thanks. That trade favors the M's.

They had better cite me as a source for these predictions. They are almost identical to my prediction that I made about a week ago. The ONLY differences are that I had the Sox and Royals switched, Atlanta and Florida switched, the Reds in 4th, Pirates in 5th, Brewers in 6th, and the Dodgers and Arizona switched. The playoff are the EXACT same in every round including my WS prediction: Boston over Philly. I better get some credit from them since they copied my predictions . I find it kind of weird that the Sox are average or better in every catogory, yet they only rank 19th overall. I also think that KC will be one of the most overrated teams in baseball next year. They were a fluke team last year that drasticly overachieved and have only made minor improvements, but to the casual fan they see a team on the rise that has made drastic improvements and are therefore setting themself up for a let down.

1) I don't put much faith in the media, but is it any more or less untrue than you or me and are opinions? I am simple pointing out that other people are suggesting that Konerko for Perez is a reasonable trade. 2) "Ritchie is a classic power pitcher with a 93-94 MPH fastball and a hard slider" - ESPN profile. Ritchie can most certainly get it up to the mid-90's, however, he has the same problem that Navarro had. He throws hard and harder without a consistant breaking ball. That allows hitters to gear up for one speed. The fact is that there are remarkable similarities between Ritchie and Perez that you choose to ignore(a golden rule - learn from past mistakes to help prevent similar future outcomes) and your only counter arguement is that Perez has more potential/talent, which is completely subjective and certainly debatable. Please learn to read my post a little more carefully so I don't have to repeat myself. At no point did I compare Konerko to KWells, however, I did mention that it is a bad habit to trade players when their value is at an alltime low. I compared Wright to KWells, which might be a little bit of a reach, but none the less is relivant. KWells was coming off a terrible 2nd half in which he posted an ERA of 7.53(after a great 1st half). Sox fans began to jump off of the KWells bandwagon and pointed out that he was going to be 25 next year and had yet to show anything at the major league level(similar to Wright). I am then comparing Pacheco to Fogg, which as has remarkable similarities. Fogg was an aging minor leaguer, coming off a terrible season(the one major difference between Pacheco), with average stuff at best(Pacheco probably has better raw stuff), and most people thought that he was just a worthless throw in. The similaritites between your purposal and the Ritchie trade are very similar. 3) I didn't write the article so don't look at me. I believe it is still on the first page of the board so you might want to take a look at it. 4) Once again, bias subjectivity pushed off as fact. You need to edit it and say "You" don't give a s*** about Wright and Pacheco. I am sure that there are many pitcher hungry teams that would love to give Wright and Pacheco a chance in hope of finding a diamond in the rough. 5) As would I. 6) I did humor you. Go to that thread to read my response.

If I was the Dodgers GM, than I would stand pat and live with another .500 season(sign TLee to play 1B), and build this team for the future(I am not sure if Evans has that luxery though). I don't mind trading prospects since they are unproven potential, and the only thing that matters in the majors is production at the major league level. However, I don't think I would trade pitching prospects of Miller or Jackson calibur, especially if it doesn't guarantee me a division title. If we(speaking from the Dodgers GM perspective) could get Maddux signed, than I would think about trading someone like Perez and prospects(not named Jackson or Miller) for an instant impact bat. I wouldn't really want Konerko, but what other options do I have this late in the offseason. This is why I would stand pat unless there was an offer that I couldn't refuse. The point is that Evans(if he is still the GM) probably doesn't have the luxery to stand pat and live with another .500 season while building for the future. He is on thin ice right now, and with a payroll approaching 100M I doubt that the new ownership will be happy with another .500 season even if it is better for the organization in the long run. This is why I think the Dodgers have a little desperation on their behalf to get a difference making bat, which doesn't exist on the current FA market, so they are going to have to trade for one. Konerko wouldn't be the first choice, but this late in the season there aren't many other options, especially if they aren't willing to part with either Miller or Jackson. This is my opinion on the Dodgers current situation, and why I don't think they have the upper hand.

Maggs faster then Rowand??? Are you serious??? Apparently you didn't read the Rowand article in which it mentioned that his 60 yard time(I believe) was well above league average. Rowand actually has pretty good speed. Maggs on the otherhand is a good baserunner that gets away with average speed. There is no way that Maggs is faster then Rowand. Rowand would be a pretty drastic improvement over Maggs. Maggs has below average range and the only thing that saves him are those little mini sliding catches that he makes. Rowand has above average range and has shown that he can even play CF. Furthermore, Maggs arm is average, but it is very accurate(which is just as important). Rowand has an outfield arm that scouts drool over. Rowand in RF over Maggs is a pretty drastic defensive improvement, and yes Rowand might actually be a GG calibur RF, especailly if Ichiro moves to CF(with Winn traded). Brando, I like how you use stats that help your agruement instead of stats that more accurately portray the type of hitter that Winn is now(selective use of stats means you are reaching buddy). The fact is that the last 2 year he has been a very productive player, and it gives a much better indication of things to come then his career averages. The last 2 years he has posted the following numbers: .295+ BA 85+ runs 35+ 2B 10+ HR 75+ RBI 20+ SB .345+ OBP .425+ SLG .770+ OPS Keep in mind that he has also produced those numbers in two pitchers parks(Tampa Bay and Seattle). I don't know about you, but thats some pretty solid production out of your CF. More importantly he is ideal for the leadoff spot. He hits for a high average, he has some pop, he has above average speed, and he gets on base at a realitively high rate. Why do you keep bringing up the fact that he makes 10x what Rowand makes since it has nothing to do with the topic at hand? Brando sometimes you mention the most random things. The trade is Maggs for Garcia, Soriano, and Winn. How much Rowand makes, especially in comparison to Winn is completely irrelavant. I like how you use rhetoric to make it sound worse. 10x more sounds much worse then simple saying that he makes 3M, which isn't bad at all. If you are going to compare salaries, than you should say that Winn makes almost 1/5th of what Maggs makes. Is Maggs production 5x better then Winns? Actually it nets you about 11M(not including Garcia and Soriano who make about 7M combined) and gives you someone who will be around for a couple more years. The fact is that if the Sox keep Maggs to the end of the year they will likely get nothing for him(very unlikely to offer him arbitration and get draft picks) and probably won't resign him with his recent contract demands. The Sox would have Winn and Soriano to show for Maggs after this season, which is MUCH better then nothing. They can free themselves of Garcia if they want, or they can offer him a long term contract if he returns to previous form(for less then it would take to resign Maggs). I love how you make up random speculation. The Sox will lose 1M because fans will be pissed about losing Maggs. Well what about the fact that this trade makes the Sox a better team and that they will have a better shot of winning the division. Wouldn't winning the division and making the playoffs more then negate the lose of fans because of Maggs being traded. Casual fans like to see winning, and this trade will make the Sox better now and in the future, so I think your random speculation is a little off. I also love how you downplay the possible increase in ERA that Perez might have when moved from Chevez(by far the best pitchers park in baseball), but the 1st thing you bring up is the possible increase in ERA that Garcia would have if moved from Safeco. Once again it is the selective use of stats that makes it hard to hold a conversation with you. One instance you neglect a stat because it hurts your arguement only to turn around and use the exact same stat to try and prove a point in the next arguement. Pick a side and stick to it, and don't use stats selectively because it only weakens your arguement. With that said, the major difference between Perez and Garcia, is that Garcia's numbers are pretty similar away and home(3 year average - 3.76 home ERA versus 4.14 away ERA), which suggested that moving to a better hitters park won't have much of an effect. Perez on the other hand posted a troubling difference(03' 2.73 home ERA versus 5.59 away ERA). Even in his great year in 2002 he posted a difference(2.75 home ERA versus 3.31 away ERA). So I ask, how can you downplay Perez leaving a great pitchers park, but it is the first thing you bring up for Garcia? If that isn't selective use of stats and a clear case of bias, than I don't know what is.