whitesox61382

The one problem you have is that the lineup and starting pitching would cost over 50M, and that doesn't include the bullpen and bench. I don't think the Sox are going to get Pavano, but Batista is a guy I would love to see the Sox go after. He would probably cost under 5M/yr. I REALLY don't want to see Cedeno in a Sox uniform. I would MUCH rather keep Koch and have Rowand play CF. Everett is as good as gone. The Sox will either let Rowand, Reed, and Borchard fight for 2 outfield positions(if Maggs was traded) or a cheap replacement would be found in FA.

"Odalis Perez had a .500 record last year, but that isn't the telling story. Remember, his team is like one of the worst offensive teams in history - or damn near it. That guy had some bad games - every starter does. However, he could have easily been 16-8, 17-7, 15-9, etc. They didn't score jack s*** for him, or for ANY of their pitchers, for that matter." Judging pitchers by their win-lose record isn't a good indicator. The one thing that scares me about Perez is his home-away splits. His numbers away from the best pitchers park in baseball last year were terrible. Factor in the AL-NL difference and you might get a 5.00+ ERA from Perez, unless he reverts back to his 2002 ways. Perez definately has a red flag. I would do a Konerko for Perez deal, but nothing more. "i'd do Maggs for Percival and Erstad. that would solve two major problems -- left-handed hitting outfielder" Maggs for Percival - no Maggs for Erstad - hell no Maggs for Percival and Kennedy - maybe Maggs for Erstad and Kennedy - no Maggs for Percival and prospects - yes Maggs for Erstad and prospects - maybe Please no Erstad!!! The guy is a sub-.700 OPS guy, with decent but not great D, and a big 8M/yr contract. Couldn't we get similar production from Rowand at a minimum salary? "Just say no to Sidney Ponson, my guess is he is a rotator cuff surgery within next full season, supposedly it is already frayed." Do you have an evidence or is this just some BS of yours based on nothing? "Look for the Sox to get more then Percy, it would be a package of players and if I were the Sox I'd look for someone like Jeff DaVannon and a good prospect. Percy would be a horse in the pen while Davannon can play any position in the outfield and he's pretty solid all around and seems to be developing into a good player." I doubt that the Angels are going to trade DaVannon. I think the main reason that they let both Fullmer and Spiezio go was to clear room for DaVannon. "Erstad isn't much more then an overhyped Mike Cameron, albeit a lefty.' Cameron isn't overrated. How is a GG CF, with a .800+ OPS, great speed, ect. overrated?

While I don't think ANY player is worth over 20M+/yr, I think you can make the arguement that ARod is the best player in the game and if there was one player to that deserves that much money it would be ARod. I don't think you can blame Texas losing solely on ARod's contract, they still spend as much as the Sox excluding ARod, which tells me that their managements doesn't spend their money well to surround ARod(although his contract does prohibit them to some degree). His average season over the past 3 years has been .306/52/132 15 SB(80% sucess rate) 1.010 OPS GG defense(he has made 18 errors....the last 2 years combined with above average range). These numbers from a position like SS(opposed to LF for Bonds) to go with the defense makes him arguable the best single player in the game. I want to start off by saying that I think this is a bad trade for Boston. Sooner or later they will realize that pitching wins championships, and that improving the best offense in the game won't take Boston over the hump. The 10-15M that they would add with ARod could be better spent getting a top of the rotation starter and/or top of the line closer. Furthermore, they will have 45M tied up in 2 players. They were literally giving Manny away.....what happens when they pay 5M more for a better player? This deal really doesn't make sense for any of the teams involved(except Texas). Boston is wasting what little financial flexibility that they have on improving the offense instead of the pitching. Anaheim is getting a SS for maybe one year unless they are willing to commit about 15-20% of their payroll to Nomar. Texas would get the best out of this deal. They would pick up some pitching while giving themselves financial flexibility to fill other holes.

"And on the speculation that they will be weak up front, have you ever seen an Izzo team that plays anywhere near the way Indiana plays inside. Indiana plays soft inside and all of their big guys are afraid of contact, which has pretty much been true for Indiana for a long time. I am from Indiana (I actually went there for 2 years) and comparing Indiana last year to Michigan St this year is totally off base. While they may be inexperienced up front, they'll lead the Big 10 in rebounding as usual and grind it out against inferior teams like usual and also win their share against the big time teams. Mark it down, they will win the Big 10 this year and will be at least a 2 seed in the tourney." Take of the glasses and open your eyes to reality please. The system might be different but the talent and depth is very similar. Have you even taken a look at Michigan States roster? They have only 4 guys taller then 6'6. Furthermore, 2 of those guys are freshman that aren't that highly ranked and don't expect to see many minutes. The other is Andreas who is the defenition of a role player. The guy averaged 6 minutes last year. I will restate the fact that Michigan State has only 1 decent big man. I guarantee that they wont lead the big ten in rebounding this year(and making that assumption based on last year team with a MUCH MUCH better front court is plain stupid), while Izzo teaches crashing the boards, there are going to be a ton of times when Michigan State has only 1 player over 6'6 on the floor. Furthermore, if Davis struggles or gets in foul trouble they will have NO inside scoring. You simply can't win a championship with no depth and little talent up front. If you were capable of looking at things realisticly, which you clearly are not, you would see this obvious weakness up front. Factor in a true freshman PG and you have a team that is guaranteed not to reach the final 4, yet alone the championship. ESPN lists Michigan State as one of the most overrated teams this year, and it is for the above reasons. However, you can't aspect a Michigan State fan to look at his team realisticly(the same can be said for most fans). A big ten title is far from a guarantee(with talented teams at Wisconsin and Illinois), but I am sure that you guaranteed that the Sox were going to win the Central this year. It just goes to show that your bias is affecting your better judgement.

It pretty obvious that you are a Michigan State fans which blinds you from realistic opinions. In regards to the Brandon Cotton comment, yes I have heard of him(i follow recruiting religiously), but I am sure that you have heard of the constant struggles of relying on a freshman PG. The fact that you point to a guy that hasn't spent a minute on the college floor yet, and assume that he is going to pass with flying colors shows your blind optimism towards your favorite team. Great guards are nice to have, but with almost no front court talent(besides Davis) teams are going to focus their D on shutting down the outside game of Michigan State. Please refer to Indiana last year for a similar situation. They had Coverdale and Horsby returning(2 of the better shotting guards in the country) along with 2 top 30 recruits in SG Bracey Wright and PG Marshall Strickland, but had only 1 reliable big man(Jeff Newton). Teams continued to shut down the Hooisers outside game and forced them to beat them in the paint, which they couldn't. A similar thing will most likely happen in Michigan State. The point is that there are more balanced teams then Michigan State. Teams that don't have to rely on a freshman PG and have depth up front are more complete and have a better shot of winning it all. This is a realistic point of view with no bias(I neither like nor dislike Michigan State).

The biggest problem I have with Cedeno is his down right terrible defense, especially at an important defensive position like CF. I do think the Sox need to add speed, although I still believe that the SB is an overrated aspect in todays 3-HR oriented offenses. Furthermore, Cedeno has a sub-80% stolen base rate over his career, has seen his SB decrease drasticly over the past 2 years, and he isn't know as a SMART baserunner. I would much rather have Rowand in CF because of the drastic difference defensively, the better offensive numbers in a small sample size, the fact that he is making the minimum, and he has the chance to be a much more important part of the future/has more potential. The whole point with moving Koch is to free up money, and adding Cedeno doesn't do that. Furthermore, I hate the fact that the Sox will be stuck with Cedeno for 2 years opposed to getting rid of Koch at the end of this year.

If that first rumor is true, than Boston might have the dumbest management in the majors. When are they going to learn that they need pitching. They had the best offense in the majors, yet they are willing to waste what little financial flexibility they have to upgrade their SS position? Here is a suggestion, use that 10M+ and get a front of the rotation starter and maybe a good closer. I mean they thought Manny's 20M/yr is bad, what makes them think that 25M/yr for a slightly better player is any better? Boston fans wonder why it has been so long since they have won a WS, but they need to look no further then their management. Furthermore, if they have 45M tied up in 2 players the likelyhood that they can keep Perdo, their only good pitcher, becomes significanly less. Its good to know that someones management is as dumb as the White Sox.

"Cedeno meanwhile has shown ability to steal 50-60 bases, so you know the speed is there as he just turned 29." Stealing bases has to be one of the most overrated aspects in todays game, especially if you aren't sucessful on 75%+ of your attempts. Risking an out for base isn't a good risk, espciallt if you have a lineup that hits 200+ HR's. Not to mention the fact that a runner at 1B is good thing in some ways(pitcher shorting his delivery, big hole between 1B and 2B, ect.). The one HUGE thing that you are ignoring is the fact that Cedeno is one of the worst defensive outfielders in the game. He would easily be the worst defensive CF in the AL next year. Is that something you want out of one of the most important defensive positions on the field? In a small sample size, Rowand has shown that he is a better hitter and has more potential for improvement. "Lets save 3+ mill on the deal. Saving more would require actual cunning and negotiation prowess the like of which Kenny doesn't possess.' Where are you coming up with this math? Lets get it straight, Cedeno has 2 years left on his contract in which he makes a little more then 10M. That equals a little more then 5M/yr. Koch on the other hand makes a little more then 6M next year. The difference would be about 1M not 3M+, not only that but the Sox are stuck with Cedeno for 2 years. The fact is that Cedeno is nothing more then a 4th outfielder. Koch might not be a great closer, but he has proven to be a decent closer over the past couple of years. Koch's value far outweighs Cedeno, and the fact that the Sox only save 1M AND have to put up with Cedeno for 2 years makes this one of the worst possible moves that the Sox could make. There is a reason that no one agrees with either Brando or Jim, its because they look at this move with common sense.

Champ: Texas Final 4: UConn, Texas, Missouri, Florida I really think Texas is going to surprise some people. Sure losing Ford hurts, but they return a very good core and brought in a top recruiting class to compliment them. UConn is an obvious choice. Missouri should be very good. Florida could surprise some people. Most people are picking the obvious top choices like UConn, Duke, Michigan State, UNC, but you forget that few of the top preseason teams every make it to the final 4. I think Duke, UNC, and Michigan State are all overrated. Duke has an extremely young team with very few proven players. UNC has no depth whats so ever, and if May isn't completely healthy they might struggle to make the tournament yet alone the final 4. Michigan State doesn't have a true PG and lacks depth up front. It should be a fun season, and I don't see a clear favorite this year.

The 550 AB's was just a random number to show their numbers evenly projected over a full season. The fact is that Rowand has over 550 AB's over his career and has posted a respectible .743 OPS in those AB's, which is quite a bit higher then Cedeno's .717. IMO 582 AB's is a big enough sample size to start analysis on Rowand's stats. Furthermore, I believe the fact that he has put up those numbers in spartic playing time is even more encouraging. What is to lead you to believe that he is going to put up numbers that are worse then his career .743 OPS? At the very worst it is worth giving him a chance. The major reason I don't like Cedeno is his defense. IMO defense should be the #1 priority for your CF, and having the worst CF in the majors defensively makes me want to puke. Mark my words he is down right terrible defensively. Here is ESPN's profile analysis of Cedeno's defense. "Cedeno's difficulties with the bat carried over onto the field, which served as a major reason that the Mets had one of baseball's worst defensive outfields. He's an awful glove man who has more errors than assists in his career. He overruns balls to both his left and right, and the accuracy of his throws ranks among the worst in the game." This analysis is being generous. I have subscriptions to far more indepth analysis and it is even worse then the above. Cedeno makes Rowand look like Torii Hunter in CF defensively. The fact is that Cedeno is the following: a .260-.270 hitter no power(30 extra base hits is a great season for him) poor plate disipline terrible defensively great speed Is that not a description of a 4th outfielder? When you take of the rosy glasses you will see what every one else sees. Rowand has given the Sox a mid-.700 OPS and solid D in CF albeit in a small sample size(which is a lot more then Cedeno has shown), and deserves to start in CF over a career 4th outfielder like Cedeno. Mark my words, Rowand is a much better option in CF.

I didn't mean potential/upside in regards to age, but in regards to reverting back to their better days. Before last year Koch was a solid, but not great closer. Opposed to Cedeno who was a very good 4th outfielder, but an average at best everyday outfielder. If both realize their upside(based on previous history), than Koch's value far outweighs Cedeno's. Thats what I meant. I disagree with your opinion on the money they make and the role they play. I don't think management will have any problem with a 6M set up guy, IF THATS WHATS BEST FOR THE TEAM. Just because you make a lot of money doesn't guarantee you any role. If he pitches well as a set-up guy, than maybe he can regain his closer role. The fact is that the Sox might be stuck with Koch, given his contract and poor play. If Koch is more valuable to this team as a set-up pitcher because he isn't pitching well enough to be a closer, than why would they put him in the closer role? They still have to pay him 6M no matter what role he is in so why not put him in the role that gives the team the best chance to win. I am sure management would hate paying a set-up guy 6M, but they do understand the concept of whats best for the team. Cedeno is a 4th outfielder because he has never had 550+ AB's in a season and only twice has had more then 500. Some of that is because of injury, but most of that is because he simply isn't that good. Better then Rowand? Here is Rowand's average season versus Cedeno average season(given a full year): Cedeno: 550 AB .275/7/49 42 SB .343 OBP .374 SLG .717 OPS Rowand: 550 AB .273/16/70 5 SB .325 OBP .418 SLG .743 OPS The only area where Cedeno has a distinct advantage is speed. Rowand has more power and is also much better defensively. I believe that Rowand is the better player at this point AND has more upside then Cedeno. Not to mention the fact that Rowand makes around the min. and Cedeno pulls in about 5M/yr. I will repeat this again...Cedeno is a defensive liability and would probably be the worst defensive CF in the AL. The 1st thing I want out of my CF is good D, so I wouldn't say that he address the CF need. Rowand wasn't given the CF job doing the stretch run because he struggled early in the season(I fully believe that this was a hangover from his offseason injury). If Rowand had performed like he did at the end of the season I would be willing to beat they wouldn't have gotten Everett. The way that I see it is that Rowand is a better offensive and defensive CF then Cedeno, with Cedeno only having an advantage in SB, which is drasticly overrated in todays game.

You were kidding about that .977 fielding percantage right? Considering it would have ranked 19th out of the 20 outfielders that qualified in the AL. I have seen Cedeno play quite a bit(going to school on the East Coast the past couple of year) and he is terrible defensively any way that you slice it. He misplays a ton of balls and his range actually isn't as good as you may think despite his good speed. I actually have confidence in Marte as a closer. Sure there is a different mentality when you closer, but when you dominate as much as Marte has over the past couple of years(versus both righties and lefties) I highly doubt that would change much just because he was a closer(he has done it before). I think he could get by just on his stuff, and who knows he might have the perfect mentality as well considering we really don't know at this point. I would rather the Sox go after someone besides Gordon. Giving his past history in regards to injury, his age, and his workload last year I think he will be a big risk next year and could get injuried(although I hope for the best even if he isn't on the Sox). Besides there are a ton of good relievers that have been solid closers before on the FA market, some that the Sox could get for less then they would have to pay Gordon. "I apreciate you repeating me." I haven't read the entire thread so I have no clue what other have said before me in regards to this issue. I guess great minds think alike though.

Cedeno just isn't that good. He really hasn't had sucess anyway including NY. He is simply a good 4th outfielder, nothing more nothing less. He is a .260-.270 hitter, with no power(you will be lucky to get 30 extra base hits out of him in a full season), below average plate disipline, great speed, and below average D(he is very bad defensively and might be worse in CF then Everett was). The guy has been in the prime of his career the last couple of years and has seen his number go down, so I don't understand why you think his better days are ahead of him? I got a feeling that KW and company might see him as a sparkplug, similar to Pierre in Florida, but the big difference is that Pierre is a .300 hitter, and Cedeno is a .260-.270 hitter. I really think Rowand is a better player then Cedeno and should be starting in CF. I also think that Harris is a better 4th outfielder, considering his D and speed advantage(only slightly in the speed catogory), which are the 2 most important aspects off the bench IMO. So I ask what role would Cedeno have on this team that can't be filled by a younger, cheaper, more talented player? I am not suggesting that Koch should close next year, in fact I would really hope that he doesn't, however I do think he will be better and a solid guy to possible set up, if not eat a bunch of innings in the pen. IMO that is more important then a 4th outfielder, and thats why I feel Koch has more value. Not to mention the big upside difference. There is a chance that Koch could get back to his previous ways in which he is a solid closer type reliever, opposed to Cedeno who at his best is a very good 4th outfielder/spot starter. I believe the contract issue works in Koch's favor. While both are being overpaid, the fact that Koch only has 1 year left is a good thing. IF he gets back to his old ways and the Mets like what they see, than they can resign him probably for less then he is current making given the current market. Conversely, if he struggles, than they can let him walk and get his contract off the books(opposed to having to put up with another year of Cedeno). The Sox would be stuck with Cedeno for 2 years at a ridiculous price, opposed to being in the situtation discribed above. IMO having only 1 year left on his contract is an advantage, and not a disadvantage. I am sticking to my belief that this trade straight up would be terrible for the Sox, however, if the Mets include a good prospect or 2 it might make it interesting.

Straight up this would be a terrible deal for the Sox. The whole reason for attempting to trade Koch is to free up some money, but if they take Cedeno they would only save about 1M AND would have to put up with Cedeno for 2 years opposed to getting Koch's salary off the books in 1 year. Not only that, but at best Cedeno is a good 4th outfielder opposed to Koch who at best is a good closer. Koch has much more valuable, even after his sub-par season. If the Mets don't include a very good prospect or 2, than this is a terrible deal for the Sox.

That is a one sided trade once KMart and Wally are healthy and back. My advice would be to stay away from Howard. He is an overrated players that isn't going to get much better. Team 2 is getting ripped off, especially when you factor in that BJackson is probably one of the best 6th man in the game. When Wally comes back he will start at SF. I hope that you are team 1. Find cheap replacement on the FA market for injuried players, because you will regret it in the long run if you trade more talented players at this point because they are hurt.

At this point Iowa will probably need some turnovers to win this game. I only hope that Purdue doesn't get too conservative and runs the ball for 3 and outs. This is a game that Purdue should win. IMO they are the second best team in the Big Ten(behind Michigan).

I am a Purdue fan, and it should be a great finish. Iowa is shotting themselves in the foot with penalties and missed opportunities(missed FG, overthrowing an easy TD pass twice). I actually hate when Purdue plays this run oriented offense. I feel they personal is better when the open it up with 4 or 5 receivers. The Purdue D looks good so far, except for those missed coverages that should have cost them. It should be a close game, but I think Purdue will pull it out at home.

Its not so much about him being a fan of the Cardinals as it is him PUBLICLY stating that he wanted to pitch for the Cardinals right in the middle of new contract talks. You can look at it with your rosy colored glasses on, but any way you slice it that is disrespectful toward the team your currently play for. As long as he is in a Sox uniform his loyality and commitment should be directed exclusively towards the Sox with no questions asked(that means at no point should he come out and say he would rather play for another team). Most players that make statements like Buehrle are severely fined or traded. IF you were ever a former athlete at a high level you would know that it is a no-no to say you want to play on another team while still on your current team.

Has anyone actually seen a copy of the offer that was made to Mark? I'd be curious to see it, since I missed it and am not EXACTLY sure what was offered and what was not. An actual copy, no. But it was widely reported that the deal was 3 years $11.5 mil guarenteed with upto 5 years $26 million possible if incentives and options were all met. A 3 year 11.5 M deal is more then fair for Buehrle(Valentin's deal not considered). And if you actually check out Zito's stats versus Buehrle's you will see that there is a pretty drastic difference across the board(not including this year). Zito is clearly the better pitcher. You also have to be cautious about giving young players BIG contracts, because they are still unproven to some degree and it could turn out to blow up in your face. The fact that Buehrle's ERA has increased each of the last 2 years along with an increase of H/IP, BB/IP, and fewer SO/IP isn't a good trend, and I think it could be wise to wait and see what happens before getting stuck with a HUGE contract and a pitcher that is regressing each year. As someone pointed out you really have no idea what is going on behind the curtain, but if it is try that the Sox OFFICIAL offered Buehrle a 3/11.5 deal then it is HIS FAULT for not accepting a fair deal. I also hate the fact that he came out and said he wants to pitch for St. Loius, but you never mention that. That is disrespecting your current team, and I lost respect for Buehrle after that. I still think he is a good pitcher and would like to see him here long-term, but if he doesn't accept a fair deal thats HIS FAULT and not the managements. It is clear that your opinion on this matter is significantly influenced by your bias towards Buehrle. With that said, I have supported the management for years, but accepting Valentin's offer leaves me speachless. My only hope is that they bat him SOLELY lefthanded(in which he has an impressive .860+ OPS over the past 4 years) and that his solid defensive year is a sign of things to come.

I am certainly for trading Koch. The fact is that even before last year he wasn't a great closer. He may have won the Rolaid Relief Award, but ask Oakland(and Toronto fans before that) how many heartattacks he would give them or how many cases that they would go into the 9th with a 3 run lead and end up pulling out the game by 1 run with the bases loaded. This year Koch got burned and wasn't lucky in those situtations like past years. He is a 1 pitch pitcher who has lost that 1 pitch. There is a chance that he could regain it and revert back to his days as a decent(but not great) closer, but IMO 6+M/yr for him is still way too much. If a decent trade presents itself where the Sox can get rid of all his salary and pick up 1 or 2 decent players on the way, than management would be stupid to pass up such a deal. The bad feeling that I get however, is that Koch might be traded to the Mets and the Sox will get Cedeno(maybe something else) in return. That would NOT be an ideal trade, and if that is the purposal that the Mets suggest then I say keep Koch. With Thomas, Loaiza, and Valentin getting their options picked up and the Sox needing to add a solid starting pitcher they need to move payroll and Koch is as good a choice as any.

"Setting someone up in favorable matchups can also affect said record. But that is called good managing. You are putting guys in a position were they can succeed." Yes, but I showed that Ponson WAS NOT given ideal/favorable matchups to boast his stats so he could suceed as southsiders conspiracy theory would suggest. Both Baltimore and SF threw him into the fire against the top offenses and opposed by some of the top pitchers of the game and I proved this with stats. In 42% of Ponson's 31 starts he faced an offense that finished in the top 10 in runs scored, and for comparison in 41% of Colon's 34 starts he faced an offense that finished in the top 10 in runs scored. Southsider tried to tell me that Ponson starts were repeatedly skipped against the good offenses to boast his stats, but as you can see he faced the same percentage of top offenses as Colon. Should we then discredit Colon's ERA because he was skipped versus the top offenses? Of course not. He also complained that he only faced the great NYY and Boston offenses 3 times despite playing in the same division and facing each 19 times over the course of the season. If southsider would have checked the Baltimore schedule he would have found out that Baltimore only played Boston and NYY a grand total of 8 times before Ponson was traded, so Ponson started in 37.5% of Baltimores starts against the 2 teams before he was traded. Is that an example of a manager holding back his top pitcher to boast his stats? Of course not, southsider simply ignored the fact that Baltimore played 14/19 games against Boston and 16/19 games against NYY after the July 31 deadline, AND THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE LOWER NUMBER OF STARTS AGAINST BOTH BOSTON AND NYY. He complained the only 40% of Ponson's starts were at home, but neglects the fact that Camden Yards was a neutral park in which neither the pitcher nor the hitter has a distinct advantage. In fact OPPOSING offenses ranked exactly 15 out of 30 in runs scored there, so the idea that the manager skipped some of Ponson's home starts because Camden Yards is a great hitters park holds no water. Finally he complained that Ponson was constantly matched up against other teams 4th and 5th starters, but he didn't bother to check out the list of opposing pitchers that Ponson went up against. Some the names include Sabathia, Loaiza, 2 vs Hernandez(from KC in the beginning of the year when he was leading the AL in ERA), Colon, Maddux, Pettite, Clemens, Willis, Schilling, Peavy, Oswalt. Thats a pretty impressive list of 4th and 5th starters that Baltimore's managerment place Ponson against to put him in an ideal situtation. The fact is that southsiders conspiracy theory that Baltimore managerment purposely put Ponson in ideal/favorable matchups to boast his numbers holds no water and gave straight forward stats to support it, while southsider has given no STATS/FACTS/EVIDENCE to counter this arguement. "Black Jack McDowell may give up 5 runs but he'd beat you 6-5, or he'd beat you 2-1 if necessary. The point is, he would beat you. That, my friends, is a winner." Is he a winner when the Sox offense would give him 10 runs by the 5th inning and he would give up 9 and be out of the game by the 3rd inning? Because if I remember correctly he did that quite a few times, and that IS NOT a sign of a winner my friend, that is a sign of an offense that bailed out their starting pitcher. Or is the pitcher that is on the other side of the 2-1 lose a loser? With no offensive support should he be considered a sub-par pitcher because he lost? What if both of those runs came off a defensive error in which he has no control over? Should he be held accountable for the lose even though the control was taken out of his hands? Of course not and that is the major point that I am trying to prove. Wins and loses are a team stat and I wish they wouldn't include them with pitchers. You don't judge a QB in football based solely on his wins-lose record. Why? Because it is a team sport and the QB is only one person on that team. Should wins-loses be given to a RB or a RF? Of course not, but over the course of a season they might have more of an impact on wins-loses then a QB or starting pitcher, yet we only give wins-loses to the QB(as a secondary stat that is looked at after a bunch of other more important stats) and SP. That doesn't make sense. Since there is so many things that a pitcher can't control in a win or a lose(run support, defense, bullpen pitcher, to name a few) you can't use win-lose record to accurately judge the talent of a pitcher or say that he is a winner or loser for that matter. I bet that around 75% of the pitchers in the league would consistantly win if they were on the Yankees, and about 75% of the pitchers in the league would consistantly lose in they were on the Tigers. Does that make either a winner or a loser based on the talent of the team supporting them? I AM NOT suggesting that Ponson is the greatest thing since sliced break, but I do think people should recognize the solid year that he had and not try and discredit it with some lame conspiracy theory. Furthermore, I think he would be a good investment at around 7M and a good replacement for Colon(while saving 4-5M/yr), especially considering that they put up almost identical numbers. Sure Colon has been more consistant over his career, but Ponson is still realitively young(27) and has begun to show the signs of consistancy based on his last 2 years. He has the stuff to support his solid numbers and give hope that more great things are to come in the future.

Its not a complicated process. The areas with " " around them are quotes and the areas without them are not. My post happen to be long, but if you don't want to decipher because it gives you a headache(poor baby), THEN DON'T READ MY POST. Its that simple. This is how I do things whether you/anyone else likes it or not, so get use to it

Sorry to break the news to you Illinios fans, but there was just an insider article confirming that Livingston is going to Duke. This hasn't been a good offseason for Illinios fans. They lose Self and a bunch of top recruits, including Livingston from their own backyard.

Here are the facts that will finally shut you up with this conspiracy theory. 1) The main reason that he had starts against 22 of the 30 teams was because he played in both leagues. 2) If you would have checked the schedule you would have seen that Baltimore played 14/19 games against Boston and 16/19 games against NYY AFTER PONSON WAS TRADED TO SAN FRANCISCO. Its hard to pitch against them when you aren't on your team. Ponson pitched 3 of the possible 8 starts against Boston and NYY, but you are right its a big conspiracy. Baltimore knew a few season before 2003 that they were going to trade Ponson so they made sure to schedule all their games against Boston and NYY after the July 31 deadline to hide Ponson's flaws right southsider? You continue to throw statements out that have nothing to support them. Maybe if you would have checked the schedule you would have seen this and quit your b****ing about him never facing NYY or Boston considering he pitched 37.5% of the possible starts against both when he was in Baltimore this year. 3) In 13 of Ponson's 31 starts he faced a team that finished in the top 10 in runs scored. For comparison Colon pitched 14 of his 34 starts against a team that finished in the top 10. So if you are going to discredit Ponson's ERA because you feel he hasn't faced/skipped most of the top offenses then you better do the same for Colon considering an equal percentage of both pitchers starts have come against top 10 offenses. 4) Finally, here is a list of just some of the pitchers that he went up agianst in 2003: Sabathia, Loaiza, 2 vs Hernandez(from KC in the beginning of the year when he was leading the AL in ERA), Colon, Maddux, Pettite, Clemens, Willis, Schilling, Peavy, Oswalt. Some of the teams he faced didn't have a true ace, so its hard to determine if he went up against their ace. I would say that is a pretty impressive list of opposing pitchers for a guy who Baltimore was pitching against other teams 4th and 5th starters. Here are 4 straight forward facts that are backed up by stats. Opposed to your conspiracy theory that has NO FACTS/STATS/EVIDENCE to support it. I normal don't tell people that they are wrong because they are welcome to their opinion, but the FACTS AND STATS show that Ponson is a very good pitcher, who has pitched against the top offenses, and the top opposing pitchers in the game. "You ask what I have shown you? Conspiracy theories? Try common sense. Open your eyes and think outside of your little box. Did you ever play connect the dots as a kid? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together. As good as Sidney Ponson was, he will never be that good again. If he had faced real competition he wouldn't have put up anywhere near the numbers he did." See the above 4 facts and then eat your own chow!!! Damn it hurts to be right all the time. Keep coming up with those conspiracy theories though with nothing to support them it makes for interesting arguements until someone actually brings the facts to your attention. "Baltimore had a terrible offense, which sure makes the runs scored at Camden Yards go down. I mean geez they were only 10th in runs scored in the AL, could that possibly have anything to do with how many runs get scored at Camden Yards??? (more flawed stats )Camden Yards is a notorious hitters park no matter how bad the Orioles are." Camden yards is NOT a great hitters park. It is pretty much right in the middle. Maybe 20 years ago it would have been considered a great hitters park, but with all the new parks that resemble Babe Ruth League Parks it is no longer considered a great park. You can say that the O's offense isn't that great, but the fact that OPPOSING offenses ranked 15/30 in runs scored only helps to prove that it is right in the middle, which makes the fact that Ponson only pitched 40% of his starts there a nonfactor.

JR and KW didn't want to show up Guillen so they resigned Valentin to guarantee that the Sox will have a SS with a lower BA then he had. Does anyone have a site that confirms that Valentin's option was picked up? I have been supporting KW, but if he is behind picking up a 5M option of a .230's hitter with sub-par D, than I will be mad at him(not that it will have any affect), especially if the Sox end up with a payroll under 60M.