whitesox61382

I am either way with a lefty bat in the middle. I don't think it will help as much as Sox fans think. Although if the Sox would trade for Beltran they could put him in the middle of the order and that would solve that problem while drasticly improving the D in CF. Why do you consistantly say that the Sox need a leadoff hitter? Jimenez is having a great year and is doing everything you want from a leadoff hitter. His speed is better then you give him credit for and is the only aspect that he is doing average or worse. He does have very good speed and if motivated, allowed to run by JM, and able to gain confidence has 20+ SB potential. So why do you constantly harp on the idea that the Sox need a leadoff hitter, and more importantly feel that it is a huge need that could take this team over the top? I think it can be argued that Jimenez is currently one of the top 10 leadoff hitters in the game(using this years numbers), so how much of an improvement do you really think the Sox could get. Lofton is not the answer. I am not giving up on this team, but trading a couple of propsects for an aging CF is not the answer. This is a team that will most likely rebuild in the next couple of years, so making a move like that will only hurt this team in the future. Burnitz is even a worse idea. He is the outfield version of Valentin only making 12+ million a year and a couple of years older. The only thing that he has done throughout his career is hit for power. He is a one dimension player. That type of player that the Sox have way to many of and need to get rid of and not add more of. Like Lofton it is not worth giving up a couple of prospects for a guy with no future on an organization that will be rebuilding. Jenkins is a little better idea. Still he is the left handed version of Lee. He is younger and cheaper then Burnitz, but still not a great option imo. Giles is a guy who I have always loved. He gives it his all and is one of the most underrated players in the game. I would love to add him, but his asking price is going to be extremely steep and maybe too steep. Ponson is also a guy that I really like. It appears that he is finally putting all of that potential together. He has been on the market before so he could probably be had. Baltimore would probably want Lee and a solid prospect for him. It might be an interesting trade. Edmonds is an interesting player, but if the Sox are going to go after a CF to build around why not go after Beltran? He is on the market unlike Edmonds, is 6 years younger, similar offensively, has way more speed, and is better defensively. Edmonds makes a lot of diving catches that look good to the fans, but that is because he has little range and balls that most CF catch without diving he has to dive to get. They will both make similar money when Beltran gets his no contract as well. It would also probably take a little less to get Beltran then Edmonds if he was on the market. So why not go after Beltran if you want the Sox to go after a CF to build around? "What part of "the future of this team prety much hinges on making postseason this year and the resultant increase in attendance/revenue/national exposure"-type statements don't you understand?" The majority of your posts in this thread are about the Sox adding payroll.

I just thought it was worth mentioning how good this kid is. In his 1st 2 season in the majors he has put up the following numbers: .310+/30+/125+ 40+ 2B 110+ runs 60+ walks .950+ OPS. He is on pace to put up an even better season this year. Even though he missed some games earlier in the season he is still on pace to hit .386/43/138 59 2B 138 runs 62 walks(with more walks then strikeouts for the 1st time) 1.165 OPS. Add to the equation that he is only 23, although I now question the age of kids from the DR, we could be watching the rise of one of the greatest hitters to ever play this game. He is putting up Frank-like numbers(when he was in his prime). He does get a lot of press, but still is a realitively unknown given his stats. This has nothing to do with the Sox, but I am just amazed by the numbers this kid is putting up and it only appears that he is getting better.

Brandofan, while I am with you on the idea of keeping most of the core together and adding some payroll, possibly trading for Beltran to give the Sox a true CF and hopefully push the Sox over the top you realize that you aren't being realistic. The chances are that the Sox have dug themselves to big of a hole to climb out of this year. If you think JR is going to add salary and keep players like Colon after a season in which the Sox underachieved and failed to make the playoffs(although I am not giving up on this season) than you don't understand baseball or JR. Its time to come back to reality. I am a huge fan of Loaiza, but how many 31 year old pitchers with a career ERA of 4.88 all of a sudden turn it around? I do think Loaiza is taking a step forward and developing into a better pitcher, but he is nowhere near as good as he has been the 1st 2 months of this season. It is almost inevitable that he will fall off some as the season goes on. While this isn't the stock market the basic concept of buy low and sell high can most certainly be applied to baseball. Loaiza's value is as high as it is ever going to be. He leads the majors in ERA, has 8 wins on a team that is 6 games under .500, and is making only 500K this season. Contenders would be drolling to add this guy, especially with him making what he is. The Sox could probabaly land 2 very solid prospects for him, which is very good for a team that is inevitable going to rebuild. What happens if he reverts back to his old ways? He becomes untradable and the Sox probably won't resign him. Then what do the Sox have to show for Loaiza? Nothing. I say give this team about 2 more weeks and if they don't show improvement, than trade Loaiza and others to start the rebuilding process.

My dad told me a kind of a cool story about that. He always had memories when he was little (8 or 9 or so) of watching his grandfather on TV right behind home plate of every single Cub game. He never knew how his grandfather got the tickets, but just knew they were his. Well a few (25) years went by, and his grandfather died. Then, at the funeral, who shows up other than Bob Kennedy, the former player for the Sox and Indians (among other teams) and later manager for the Cubs and A's. My dad, of course, being the baseball buff that he was at the time (still is, but doesn't follow nearly as closely) went up to him and asked him how Kennedy knew his grandfather. Lo and behold, it was Kennedy who had given his grandfather the tickets behind home plate every game for those summers he was the manager. His reason? He was approached by the Sox staff toward the end of the depression and was offered a pro contract, right as he had been accepted to college (can't remember where, but he would have been the first in his family to go to college, from what I understand). Everyone he asked said, "oh, you have to go to college. Get your education and get a job. That's what you need to do." Then he asked a family friend, grandpa Flannigan (my dad's grandfather). His exact words, "go for the pros! Are you kiddin' me? You can always go to college; you only get one shot at the pros!" He was the only person who ever told him that, and he was the only one Kennedy listened to. So, as I said again, f*** college. Sign with the Sox. I have to disagree with going pro over college. I am using a double standard because I hope all of the high school kids that the Sox drafted sign, but passing up turning pro to go to college is a very smart move. You pretend that if these guys don't sign they will never have a chance to turn pro again, but that is incorrect. Just like you can go to college later in life you can also reenter the draft from college, so going pro is certainly not a once in a life time opportunity. Playing D1 college ball is no different then playing in the lower levels of the minors(talent and development wise), so why not get an education in the process. These kids have been given a golden opportunity. What are they going to fall back on if they never make it to the big show? Save money while playing college ball? Do you understand how little most of those guys make in the minors? They barely have enough money to survive let alone save money for college. Most of these kids have been given full rides to play college ball, but if they turn pro they will have to end up paying for college and some of these kids don't have the money to do so. Not to mention the fact that it is much harder to go back to college after a couple of years layoff. The smart move is to go to college, because the cold hard facts say that very few of these kids will make the majors and they need something to fall back on. With that said lets hope the Sox sign their high school draft picks.

"whitesox61382, let's just agree to disagree. We both seem to be pretty set in our opinions and unlikely to change." Thats fine. I will state it again. I don't like Sosa as a person and I hate the Cubs even worse. Still I don't think a minor offense like a corked bat should tarnish what he has done for the sport both production wise and building up the fan base. His 4 year stretch between 98-01 is one of the most impressive baseball has ever seen. I respect those numbers and think that fans have been spoiled by seeing something that they might never see again(his offensive production during that stretch). I think it is crazy that people are trying to bring him down because of it. That is just my 2 cents on the matter and I will leave it at that. I will admit that I get a laugh when he does that little hop and the ball is caught.

Diaz is a guy I really like. Some scouts compare him to Pedro, but if I had a penny for every scout that compares a prospect to Pedro and didn't become a solid major league pitcher, I would be a millionare. With that said he has a good fastball in the low-90's with some movement to go with a good change and curve. He also has solid control. The only question is his health and stamina, because of his Pedro like size(5'10 160). Diaz turned 23 a little more then a month ago, so he is still pretty young for a AAA player. I think he has a chance to be a good starter in the majors and look forward to seeing him in the near future. Like I said I think he is 2nd of the depth chart of starting pitching prospect likely to make it to the majors(behind Rauch).

Thanks for starting this thread, Mr. Bullock. As an athlete who'll never make it to where you guys are (currently playing D-3 hockey), I admire all that you guys down in the minors go through to get to the big leagues. The fact that you guys on the Barons come over here and care what the fans think of you and care what the fans think of your teammates speaks volumes about you guys. I (on behalf of us athletes who don't have the opportunity you do) wish you all good luck on the rest of the season and on your quest to get to the big leagues. JTC, what school do you play D3 hockey at? After high school I was torn between going to Bryant College(RI) to play D2 football and baseball or going to Babson College(MA) to play D3 hockey. Even though Babson was the better academic school I decided to go to Byrant. When I transfered to the University of Arizona my football and baseball career came to an end, but I ended up playing for the club hockey team there. We finished 6th for D1 club teams and were comparable to most D3 hockey schools. A couple of teammates are leaving to play D3 hockey at Conn College(CT) and Colby(ME) or at least tryout. Just curious which school you play at.

If you are really Bullard, than I have some words of advice. 1) Learn to take negative remarks. The Sox fans on this message board are diehard fans that only want the best for this organization. Their negative remarks should almost be taken as constructive and should be taken with a grain of salt. If you get angry over Sox fans making negative comments, than you are going to be in for a rude awakening if you make it to the big show. You will soon find out that most sports writers rather write negative articles because thats what sells. You are going to receive far worst remarks from big name writers who get paid to do so. My advice is to not read to much into these remarks and don't get worked up over a few fans expressing their opinions. 2) Don't lash out at the people on this board for making assumptions and then you come right back and make assumptions on your own. You assumed that the rankings were based solely on stats, and while I can't speak for the people that created the article, it appears that some of the people on this board have in fact seen you guys play in person, and also use scouting reports from people who are paid to judge and make analysis on propsects. Don't assume that the people on this board are stating their opinions as facts. This is the USA were people are free to express their opinions, negative or positive, my advice is to see the above paragraph in how to react. 3) Just because some people on this board have never played upper level competitive baseball doesn't mean they don't have the right to critique. For example, if you go to a restaraunt and get bad service you complain about the cook, waiter, ect., yet you have probably never worked as a cook, waiter, ect. Does that mean you don't have the right to form your opinions and critique those people because you have never worked those jobs? Of course not, so take it easy on some of the poster. You don't need personal experience in order to formulate an opinion, although it helps. And just for the record I played 2 years of D2 college ball, and thought about trying to walk onto the University of Arizona team after transfering there this past year, although I knew that I had no chance of making it. 4) Learn to appreciate the opportunities you have been given. I am sure that all of you guys had to work extremely hard to get to where you are now, but you are in a privledged situation. For must of us the future holds/already holds a boring 9-5 job that we hate. Most of us would give anything to be given the chance that you have be given. You get to play baseball and get paid to do so. I know that the minors aren't fun, a lot of travel, poor hotels, small towns, ect., but if you ever make it to the majors it is something that you should appreciate and enjoy. With that said, I wish you guys the best of luck. You guys are the future of this organization and the more prospects that develop into solid major league players the better. If you really are Bullard, I appreciate your opinion from someone currently in the system. Please keep us updated and we encourage you guys to keep posting here. Tell us if the stats are deceiving. For example, if West gives up 5 ER and we assume that he had a bad outing, but the fact is that he was victomized by poor D and some fluke hits tell us. Or if a player goes 0-4 and we assume that he had a bad game, but he was hitting the ball hard and just got unlikely by hitting the ball right at someone then tell us. Its good to hear from you and good luck the rest of the way.

AAA Charlotte won 4-2 - Diaz pitched a solid game 6 IP 4 H 2 ER 1 BB 4 SO. I really like this kid. He got off to a slow start, but has pitched well of late. I think he is 2nd on the list for starting pitchers called up to the majorrs behind Rauch. The only questionmarks about this kid is his health and stamina, bot because of his lack of size. - Ginter continues to give the Sox a reason to release White. Pitched another scoreless inning 1 IP 1 H 0 ER 0 BB 1 SO. I don't know how many innings he has gone without allowing a run, but he has seen his ERA drop from the high-3's to the mid-2's during about a 2 week stretch. - Miles went 1-4 with his 8th HR. I have never been a big fan of this kid because of his age and lack of plate disipline, but it seems all this kid does is hit. - Gload and Brumbaugh each were 2-4 in the middle of the lineup. AA Birmingham lost 7-2 - Pacheco suffered one of his worst outings this year only lasting 2 IP giving up 6 H 5 ER 2 BB 1 SO. His ERA is still only 2.70 and we can hope that the Pacheco of old will return in his next start. - Hawkins, Maldonado, and Shaffer were all 2-4. - Ingram hit his 7th HR. High A Winstom Salem spilt a double header 0-2 and 6-0 - An pitched great in the 1st game going 6 IP and giving up 4 H 2 ER 1 BB 5 SO. But the other pitcher was dominating giving up only 2 H in 7 IP with 1 BB and 10 SO. It was An's 3rd lose. - Offensively there wasn't much to talk about. Welsh and Rosa gathered the only hits. - They got another great pitching outing from Francisco in the 2nd game. He went 5 IP giving up 4 H 0 ER 2 BB 8 SO. He won his 4th game of the year. Stumm came in and pitched a scoreless inning as well. - Offensively the young middle infield lead the way with 2nd baseman Yan going 2-4 with a double and SS Morse going 2-4 with 2 doubles giving him a team leading 18 for the year. Spidale chipped in going 1-3 with his 3rd triple of the season. Top prospect Reed struggled going 0-7 with 2 SO. Low A Kannapolis lost 8-2 - Tracey struggled going only 4.2 IP and giving up 8 H 8 ER 3 BB 2 SO. He lost his 6th game of the year. Pitching prospect Deininger was solid in relief pitching 2.1 IP of scoreless ball only giving up 1 H. - Offensively CF prospect Webster went 1-4. Gonzalez continued his hot week by going 2-2 with 2 walks. 2nd base prospect Lopez chipped in with a 2-4 day and Ciraco was also 2-4. Not a great day in the minors. Looking forward to seeing rookie ball start up soon and seeing how some of the Sox top draft picks fair.

"HOWEVER, knowing how many homers Sosa hits to opposite fieds...well the stadium factor (420 feet to RF gap was not uncommon in those days) alone would probably take away a dozen of Sammy's homers (and with them a bunch of RBI's), turning them into mere flyouts as Mr. Schmidt pointed out long time ago.... I am not even gonna go into the juice/liveball/watered down pitching/etc aspects..." I don't know a ton about the history of most older stadiums, but I am pretty sure 420 ft to the gap was the exception and not the norm for most stadiums during that time. If you look at the older stadiums that are still in existance they are no smaller then the newer stadiums. Sure some of them have changed over the years, but I think you are being a bit drastic if you assume a majority of the parks power alleys were 420. "As for his 138 rbi thing, check out Jimmie Foxx's 1931-1938 numbers and then adjust for amount of atbats (they played less games then, right?)...suddenly Sammy's 5-year run looks more mortal, doesn't it?" 138+ RBI's 4 straight years mortal? You are going to get a lot of arguements from experts on that. The first thing you mention is how hard it is to compare eras and most of it is spectulation, yet you use speculation in your next paragraph to downplay Sosa's production. Instead of speculating why don't you compare Sosa's numbers to his contemparies. No player in recent history has matched 4 straight season of 138+ RBI's, juiced ball or not. Thats not mortal thats impressive. For example, the HOF judges players on how the rank compared to those they played against, and when it comes to that 4 year streak no one was better. I am sorry, but thats not mortal. A HOF player, imo, isn't mortal. Another thing that I pointed out is the players arround him, and more specificly the players that batted in front of him. Its hard to drive in runs when there aren't guys on base when you come to the plate. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I am pretty sure that Sosa hit around, if not well above, .300 with runners on base during that stretch. He took full advantage of the chances he had to drive in runs. Since you were speculating about Sosa's numbers during a different era, I think it is only fair to speculate about Sosa's numbers if he had better offensive players surrounding him like the old timers you mentioned. I think it is fair to assume that he would probably have 15-20 more RBI's a year(assuming he hit for the same avarege with runners on base that he did during that stretch) if he had better hitters behind him to allow him to see better pitches, and guys in front of him that consistantly got on base. I think that is fair speculation and would allow Sosa to say that he drove in 150+ runs during that stretch, and I don't care which era you are in when you drive in almost a run a game that is down right impressive. As you can see you can speculate negatively like you did assuming that he would hit fewer HR's during that era or you can speculate positively like I did and assume that he would have more RBI's if he had better offensive players surround him like the players you mentioned did. Either way you can't deny that in this age of baseball Sosa is not mortal when it comes to production compared with his current counterparts. Its just an attempt to tarish his amazing numbers on your behalf.

Thats an interesting idea. I am pretty sure that the D-Backs wouldn't want to take Maggs salary and won't trade Baldelli, but none the less interesting. I am greedy and would want a little more then Baldelli and Huff for Maggs. Throw in a good pitching prospect and you might have a deal. The one thing that I worry about in regards to Baldelli is his lack of walks. If the Sox do free up some payroll, one guy that I would love to see them go after is Beltran. A true CF just entering his prime. He is the type of athlete that the Sox need to start adding to this team. I am tired of all of these one dimension power hitters. Beltran has put up some consistant numbers and is a prove 5 tool player. He would be a great peice to build around and is currently on the trading block. The one complication of course is that he is looking for a big contract in the near future that will probably pay him 10-12 million/yr.

"However, you are kinda wrong in your minor point quoted above: if you forget about HR totals for a second (homers are flashy but pretty meaningless, it's the RBIs that count), his run production is certainly excellent, but it doesn't rival that of Foxx, Ruth, Gherig, Ted Williams, etc best years....especially when you consider they played with unwatered-down pitching, dead ball, in huge parks, with pitchers throwing spitters every other pitch, high mounds, without steroids or even personal trainers, etc, etc, etc." I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you. As you pointed out it is a different type of game when those guys played. While they didn't have the advantage of hitting as many HR's they did have other advantages. It's nearly impossible to accurately compare different decades, especially players that played mostly in the first half of the 20th century. The game has evolved into a HR hitters delight. I don't think there is enough evidence to support either way that the above players and other greats would not have evolved as well and become similar to Sosa and the other power hitters of this day of age. I agree that an RBI is one of the most important stats in baseball, but correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't a HR at least yield one RBI? I think the HR is more then just flash, especailly if you try and make the arguement that the RBI is probably the most important stat offensively. Furthermore, I do think Sosa's run production matched those above guys. I did a quick check of those guys stats and not one of them drove in 138+ runs 4 years in a row. Another thing to consider is the teams that they played for. Playing for the Yankees during their prime gave hitters like Gehrig and Ruth many more RBI oppurtinuties. Sosa played for the deadful Cubs. Look at the OBP of the guys that hit in front of Sosa during most of those years, and his RBI totals become that much more impressive. The stat that shows that he accounted for more then 30% of the Cub's offense in my mind is the most telling stat. It shows that he pretty much cared the offense for the Cubs, something most of the players that you mentioned didn't have to do because of the good players surrounding them throughout the lineup.

Only playing the devils advocate here, but you blame Sosa for his lack of team play and the Sox management and not the individual player for their lack of team play. That sounds like a double standard to me in an attempt to make a negative comments about Sosa. If I was coaching the Cubs and Sosa has put together back-back-back 50+ HR season, I would let him swing away. Thats just me. A 2 run HR is a little better then sacrificing a guy into scoring postion by giving up an out. Call me a selfish coach, but 50 HR's is hard to argue with and is more then enough justification for allowing him to swing away and see what happens. Judging by his RBI totals he usually does a good job driving the runners home. Asking Sosa to bunt would be like asking Thomas to bunt when he was in his prime. If he did that you would have probably called for the managers head, but since it is Sosa it is his fault and he is selfish. You may not dislike him because he is a Cubs, but it is clear that you hold a double standard in regards to the Cubs and change your point of view in referance to the Sox. Once again I will state that I don't like him as a person, but as a fan of baseball I respect what he has done production wise and for the sport of baseball. You missed my entire point. I do respect what Sosa has accomplished. However, he could have been so much better, accomplished so much more. If was a team player, he might have a couple of rings by now. After all, isn't what this thing called baseball is all about? Team victories? Sosa has had his priorities out of whack for a long time. And I'd call Baylor a much more knowledgable "coach" than you. Nothing personal, but he does have you beat on qualifications, I would assume. He tried to bring out the best in Sosa, only to be rebuffed. Here is a situation where his manager wanted him to play one way, and he refused, in order to do his own thing. The Sox players are doing are their stupid mangement team asks them to do. He could have been so much better and accomplished so much more? How? He had 5 straight seasons in which he hit at least .288/49/108, and during the 1st 4 years of the stretch only hit below .308 once, only hit fewer then 63 HR's once, and drive in 138+ runs each year. No player in the history of baseball has/had come close to those numbers for that extended period of time, and you are trying to make the arguement that he could have be better or accoplished more? You are going to have a hard time proving that. Say he didn't balk up and still was a better runner and defensive player. You are trying to make an arguement that Sosa could have hit for a similar average, far less power, fewer RBI's, probably fewer walks, a similar number of strikeouts, more stolen bases, and a better defesive player would have been a better player? Not many people are going to agree with you on that. You have to make sacrifices to evolve with the game, and Sosa did that and was better off for it. His production is the only thing I need to point to to back up my opinion that Sosa couldn't have been more productive for his team. Won a ring? Now you are really going out on a limb. You really think the Cubs ever had the talent to win a ring? You think the Cubs would have made the playoffs in 2001 if Sosa hit half as many HR's and drove in a lot fewer runs in to play better defense and steal a few more bases? If so then you need to learn more about baseball. Sosa was the Cubs. He single handed cared them. There is no way that the Cubs could have won a ring, because they never surrounded him with enough talent. There was an interesting stat about how Sosa accounted for more then 30% of the Cubs offense, more then any player in baseball, and you are trying to say that he would have done the same with fewer HR's and RBI's, but more speed? Or that with almost no offensive support they had enough talent to win it all? Give me some of what you are smoking because you are dulisional right now.

Only playing the devils advocate here, but you blame Sosa for his lack of team play and the Sox management and not the individual player for their lack of team play. That sounds like a double standard to me in an attempt to make a negative comments about Sosa. If I was coaching the Cubs and Sosa has put together back-back-back 50+ HR season, I would let him swing away. Thats just me. A 2 run HR is a little better then sacrificing a guy into scoring postion by giving up an out. Call me a selfish coach, but 50 HR's is hard to argue with and is more then enough justification for allowing him to swing away and see what happens. Judging by his RBI totals he usually does a good job driving the runners home. Asking Sosa to bunt would be like asking Thomas to bunt when he was in his prime. If he did that you would have probably called for the managers head, but since it is Sosa it is his fault and he is selfish. You may not dislike him because he is a Cubs, but it is clear that you hold a double standard in regards to the Cubs and change your point of view in referance to the Sox. Once again I will state that I don't like him as a person, but as a fan of baseball I respect what he has done production wise and for the sport of baseball.

You have to factor in the time that they are caught stealing. IMO being caught stealing cancels out 2 SB's, so in the end unless you have 20+ SB's with a great percentage of steals it becomes overrated. Is taking one base worth the chance of an out, especially when teams are hitting HR's at a record paces. Bobby Valentine brought this issue up on BB tonight and also agreed that the risk of taking another base is not worth the chance of making an out. There is more to speed then just stealing bases, but Sosa has decent speed even today. He is nowhere near as slow as a guy like Konerko. He scores from 1st on most doubles, from 2nd on most singles, and from 3rd on most fly balls. He still has decent speed. A valuable leadoff hitter like Henderson in his prime is just as valuable as a slugger like Sosa in his prime. But to suggest that Sosa had the potential to be the 2nd coming of Henderson is blind optimism. The fact is that he become just as productive as a guy like Henderson taking a different path, but because we don't like the Cubs or Sosa we find ways to critize him without just cause.

You must feel the same way about the entire Sox offense then, because no one makes sacrificies for the team. No one gives themselves up to move runners in scoring position. No one bunts. No one tries to hit the ball the other way. No one just tries to put the ball into play with a runner at 3rd and less then 2 outs. Yet I don't hear you blaming them. The fact is that if Sammy were still on the Sox most of the people in here would be defending him. The majority of people out there don't see this as a major offense, by our anti-Cub bias is clotting our thought process. Which is more important a guy that hits .280/50/125 0 SB or .300/30/100 20 SB? Speed isn't as important as it use to be. It is an overrated aspect in baseball. The game is evolving into a power hitters delight, and Sammy is evolving with it. And you don't like him because of it. I think you would have a tough time arguing that a Sammy that hits 50+ HR's is less productive to the team then a Sosa that only hits 30, steals some bases, hits for a similar average, and plays a little better D. Give me an examples of how he is any more selfish then any other cocky sports star. McGwire and Ripken are the exceptions and not the norm. It just so happens that you singled out one cocky star because he plays for a team you dislike, and used your negative bias to form a decision before even thinking things through. I don't like Sosa as a person, and I hate the Cubs even more. However, as a fan of baseball in general I respect the numbers and positive things he has done to baseball. You argue that his his attitude during the 66 season was negative, but he inspired interest in this sport that has never been seen before. You are just to near sighted to realize that though. This is a minor offense that people like you are blowing out of poportion simply because you don't like him as a person. Do you think that is fair?

He may be young in age, but he is old in experience. He has been given every chance to suceed and management has been very patient through his struggles. You have to ask yourself when is enough? When has a kid been given enough chances to improve and show consistancy? Some guy pointed out that he has shown improvement. I don't think we are watching the same Garland because he has shown no consistancy. In 2001 he posted an ERA in the 3's. Granted most of it was in the pen, but still he has regressed since then. In 2002 he posted an ERA in the mid 4's, and this year he has an ERA in the 5's. tell me how that is improvement? My patience is running thin with Garland and unless he start to show some improvement or consistancy by the end of the year I think he should be traded while he still has a little value. I thought he should have been sent down to the minors to work things out earlier in the year when he was really struggling. The Sox have been unable to develop pitchers and it is really starting to piss me off. Looks like you can add Garland an Wright to the list unless something drastic happens.

I hate to defend Sosa, but show me an athlete that doesn't have some cockiness? Self promotion? I think hitting 66 HR's in one year has something to do with that. When you put up numbers like he did the media is going to be all over him. How is he suppose to handle it? Most of the guys in the majors do something after hitting a HR. Bonds stands there and admires it before taking a nice slow cocky walk. Boone flips the bat. You can go on and on, yet I don't hear you point them out. Why? Because they aren't on the Cubs and as Sox fans we are suppose to hate everything about the Cubs and hold a double standard for all other teams. You missed the point of my post. You pointed to the media aspect of things and I am talking about his production on the field. I don't like Sosa as a person, but I do respect the numbers that he has put up. One mistake shouldn't tarnish his entire career, whether you like him as a person or not. If Maddux got cut throwing a spit ball would you tarnish his legacy. Like Gammons pointed out he has voted for at least 4 pitchers that are in the HOF that he thought doctored the ball in some way. Why is this any worse? That is the question I ask and you haven't answered.

I hate Sosa, mainly because he is on the Cubs, but I think they are blowing this way out of poportion. How are they going to let this ruin the legacy of one of the top power hitters to every play the game? Unless they can prove without a doubt that he used a corked bat over most of his career, this incident shouldn't take away from Sosa's past sucess or legacy as a whole. As Hawk pointed out, he often used a corked bat and guessed that about 10% of players during his time did the same. Thats not to say that it is right, but it isn't a huge deal imo. He cheated and should be punished for it, but this is the 1st time anything like this has happened to Sosa. I am under the impression that it is not cheating unless you get caught. He hasn't been caught doing it earlier in his career, so why should that affect his past history. If a pitcher is found to be spitting on a ball during one of his starts should that take away from his career? I think not. Players are often finding ways to give themselves an edge. I think this is a minor offense that should only have an impact on the near future, ie a suspension and to make him think twice before doing it again. The idea that this single minor offense could tarnish his whole career is ludacris. Now if they find the steroids that he used that is a different story.

"We'll get very, very, very little for Thomas, so the smart thing to do would be to keep him. If he ever gets going again, he can carry a team by himself." While I agree that the Sox might not get much in return for Thomas and it might be better to keep, thinking that he is going to get going again is blind optimism. He is 35 and it is extremely clear that he bat speed has decreased significantly. I saw him swing through at least 2 90 MPH fastballs right down the middle today. He simply isn't the same player he was 6 or 7 years ago and will probably never be. "I say we keep one of Loazia and Colon....one is relatively cheap for next year, and will probably put up solid stats, and one is going to cost a bit more, but is a workhorse and a stud. There is no wrong choice....and both will net some very good prospects. I say take the best offer that gets rid of one....and do no more." I would love to keep both of them, but lets be realistic for a minute. There is almost no chance that the Sox are going to resign Colon, so you may as well trade him and get a couple of solid prospects for him. As far as Loaiza goes, I still think he is in for some struggles in the near future. Its rare for a 31 year old pitcher with a career ERA of 4.88 coming into this season to all of a sudden pitch like Loaiza is. Like I mentioned before his value isn't going to get much higher, especially at his price, so why not trade him and get a couple of solid prospects to rebuild with. I think his option is around 4 million for next year and that might be to rich for JR's blood, especially if he decides to cut payroll even further, which is likely. "but see if anyone wants to take a shot on Rick White. He's been a piece of s*** for us....but maybe he'll turn it around with another team. I'd take anything for him." I agree. I didn't even mention White because I just want to release him. No one is going to give up anything for him. "Unless we can get a good offer for Jose....I'd keep him. He doesn't have a good glove....but he's got good range....and I really don't want to see Jimenez anywhere but 2B, and we don't have another SS(though I believe Neifi Perez is a FA after this year....he might be worth a shot). Also....don't exclude the intangibles. Even the biggest Jose bashers will tell you he is a good leader." Valentin does nothing good besides hit for power. Don't give me this range BS. He is down right terrible defensively no matter which way you cut it. At 32 his range has also slipped some. Jimenez might not be much better, but it is worth a shot. One thing the Sox have a lot of is 2nd base prospects near the majors. There is no reason to pay 5+ million for a guy like Valentin. Don't give me this leadership BS either. That is just a excuse to make him appear more valuable then he is. What evidence do you have that he is a great leader or any better of a leader then anyone else in the clubhouse? Unless you are personally in the clubhouse I don't think you can say either way whether he is a great leader or not. Perez might be an interesting stopgap. "I'd also trade Daubach. If a team has a guy that gets injured for a long period of time, Daubach is the perfect guy for them(assuming the guy is a LF/RF/1B/DH). If, for example, Erubiel Durazo gets hurt in Oakland, a guy like Daubach could get us another Jon Adkins.....OK, bad example, but I think you get my point." I agree that Daubach is expendable, but if the Sox are able to get rid of Thomas and/or Konerko then Daubach might be a reasonable cheap stopgap until a better option comes avaliable. "If a team needs a good, clutch, util IF....I'd also trade Tony G. It'd actually be kind of sad to see him go....but if he could get us a prospect or two, that'd be great. One of Tim Hummel and Jorge Nunez(or whatever that guys name was that we got from Montreal in the Colon deal) will be ready to take over as util IF." I agree as well. If Graffy could only learn to play D he could be a solid everyday player. There might be a team or two interested in him, but he wont net that much. Hummel is a solid option to replace him. "And if you can, trade Josh Paul....please. I'd take a wet rag and a bowl of soup for that piece of s***....just get us a real catcher, please." Once again I agree, but you aren't going to get much besides a bag of BP balls for him.

I don't disagree with most of these picks. Here is where I had each of the players ranked. Holt (47) - I had him rated lower because of his age. He is 24, which is too old for high A ball. He has been unable to put up good numbers at the upper minors. I also am not a big fan of his plate disipline, especially his high strikeout totals. Rodriguez (37) - I had him a little lower because I am not a big fan of ranking guys that have only had 1 year in rookie ball that high. I am a big fan of consistancy and proving themselves at different levels in the minors. With that said, I am a big Rodriguez fan and think because of his potential that I have no problem with him being ranked as high as you guys have him. LaMura (28) - Great minds think alike. We both had him ranked 28th. He has a solid arm and is putting up a good year, so I think this is a good place to put him. Yofu (NR) - I stuck by my guidelines of no one over 25, but Yofu and Miles were the 2 guys that I contemplated adding to my list and breaking my guidelines. I think you can consider him a prospect because he isn't a career minor leaguer. He is from Japan and has a chance to make an impact in the near future. However, if he isn't in the majors by next year I don't think he will ever be in the majors. Phillips (21) - I had Phillips ranked a little higher because I am a huge fan of pitchers with good control and fewer hits than innings pitched. He is also on a good pace as a youngster, and at a good level for his age. I am going to really start watching this kid now that he is healthy. Rupe (25) - Once again we are identical with are ranking of Rupe. He looks like a future closer as he has been dominating since being moved to the pen. West (22) - We were very close on this ranking as well. I think West's future is in the pen and you might see him moved there in the near future. He could become a domination closer by adding a few MPH to his already low-mid 90's fastball if moved to the pen. If he can ever learn to throw a consistant breaking ball and improve his control some he could be a very good closer. Maeux (24) - Very close on this one as well. The one thing I don't like about him is his age. At 24 he needs to be at AA at the least. They should promote him since he has proven himself at high A ball and we can see what will happen to him at a higher level. Could become a lefty specialist. Francisco (33) - I had him ranked lower because of his age, lack of control, and inability to put up consistantly good numbers at the upper minors. He has a good arm and his future is probably in the pen, but he will have to start progressing soon. Miles (NR) - I didn't have him ranked because of his age, but I do think he has a decent possibility of making the majors. I don't feel he should be ranked this high though or above Hummel. As you can see we are very close on a majority of are rankings. I take it that you guys don't have prospects like Spidale, Lopez(the pitcher), Haigwood, Malone, Castro, and Morse ranked? How do you feel about these guys and why didn't you think they were top 50 prospects? Keep up the good work and looking forward to the next list.

thats the sound of the white flag being pulled up the flagstaff. Watching these losers with no heart or determination makes me sick. I can stand losing if the players are giving 100% and leaving it all on the field, but what this team is currently doing is down right terrible. I would much rather see a bunch or youngsters/rookies/prospects struggle, but give it their all trying to win a permanent roster spot. Here are the following people that need to go. Manuel - The manager can only take so much blame, but in my eyes he has never proven himself to be a good manager. He lacks heart, emotion, and the ability to motivate. Management has given him enough talent to contend for the divison, and they are underachieving, so why not start at the top and get rid of Manuel. Colon - I would leave to keep this guy and sign him long term, but lets face it, its not going to happen. Front of the rotation starting pitching is always in demand by contenders. He could probably net the Sox at least 2 solid prospects. Loaiza - The guy has been amazing so far, but like a stock you have to sell high. The way he is currently pitching with his salary will probably interest quite a few teams and net the Sox a couple of solid prospects. He really has no place to go but down and I think it is inevitable that he will struggle sooner or later this season, so trade him now while his value is high. Koch - When you only have a mid-90's fastball that you can consistantly throw for strikes you will struggle some. I always felt that he was an overrated closer, unntil he came to the Sox of course. There are usually a couple of contenders looking for a closer/bullpen help and since he is singed for next year the Sox might be able to get a good prospect or 2 for him. Gordon - At 35 he is not a part of the future. He is realitively cheap and has been decent(although he blew yet another game). He wont net the Sox a lot, but they might be able to get a decent prospect for him. Wunsch - The Sox have a ton of reliever prospects, especially left handed relievers. Lefty relievers are always in demand at the deadline and the Sox could probably get a decent prospect or 2 for him. Thomas - He is having a decent year(at least what I expected from him), but at 35 is not a part of the future. It is obvious that he has a slider speed bat now, and because of his contract, age, and inability to really play a defensive position it will be hard to move him. If the Sox can get a decent prospect for him, than take it. Konerko - He is too one-dimensional to keep. The Sox need to get better athletes that have more tools. Konerko does nothing well besides hit and he isn't even doing that. I would like to wait a little bit for him to heat up a little to get his value up. He won't get the Sox much in return, but I am sure there is a team out there that would be willing to take a chance on him. Valentin - All the guy consistantly does is hit for power. He does nothing else well and isn't a key part of the future. He won't net the Sox much, because he only does 1 thing about average. Get rid of these guys and start to rebuild. The Sox should try and get prospects in the upper minors because their is still a young core. I think pitching prospects should be the key to most of these trades. With the recent draft the SOx stockpiled outfielders to add to the list of Borchard, Reed, and Webster. The Sox should also get catcher, SS, and 3B prospects to add depth at those positions. I have defended this team till I am blue in the face, but the fact is that this team doesn't deserve to be defended. That is how terrible their play has been. Look out Sox fans here come the trolls to tell us that the Sox s@ck in hope of finding meaning in their pathetic lives.

What is with all of these outfielders? I like the idea of taking the best player available no matter what the position or need of the organization, but once you get into the later rounds I also think you need to start considering weaknesses because the draft begins to become a crapshoot. 5 outfielder in the 1st 9 picks is a big commitment to one position, a position imo that isn't that weak. Oh well. I still like the guys that the Sox have drafted and feel like they have gotten themselves a good amount of steals, espeically in Sweeney and that HS SS in the 4th round.

So far I think the Sox have done a great job getting steals. Like I said before I go to the U of A and have seen Anderson play multiple times. He is a pure athlete and has all the tools. The one thing that bothers me is that he really only had one good year. Sweeney is a steal in the mid-2nd round. Most experts thought that he would go in the 1st round and the early-2nd at the latest. The OF the Sox got in the 3rd round is also very talented and has some serious power. The SS like most of you pointed out was rated by many as the top high school SS. So I have to say that I am pretty impressed. The Sox haven't gone after needs, but the best available talent and I like that appoach. I do think it was kind of odd that they drafted 3 outfielders in the 1st 3 rounds(Sweeney might move to 1B). The outfield doesn't appear to be a big weakness. I also think they will go after some pitching in the next couple of rounds as well as a catcher. So far so good. Teams like Oakland and Minnesota show how important a solid draft is and its a step to building a much better team. There also is a trend of getting good athletes which is one thing this team needs, so that is a positive. Just my 2 cents on the draft so far.

"If I should go to Summer School Prospects 101, will the following stat heads be in attendance also? Billy Beane Paul DePodesta Theo Epstein J.P. Ricciardi Bill James Theo Epstein Because if they are, then I'm in some pretty good company thinking like a moron." You are completely foolish if you think the guys above make their decisions based solely on stats. As far as Kolhmeier is concerned I explained my guidelines. Then agains who ever said that a guy not eligible to be a rookie isn't a prospect? 100 IP and 300 AB's or less to me is a good a guideline because it means the player has less then a half of a year in the majors. I think a guy 25 or younger with some major league expereince, but fewer then the above guidelines is much more of a prospect then a 28 year old career minor leaguer putting up good numbers. Thats just my opinion and what I decided to use for guidelines.