whitesox61382

QUOTE(DukeNukeEm @ Jul 24, 2005 -> 01:33 AM) NO WAY. Thats impossible. Thats nearly the exact same teams in the playoffs. No way that happen. Way to conservative. No Offense, but those are the worst predictions I've ever seen. I'm not trying to mean. If this isn't a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black, than I don't know what is. Duke, with your predictions it looks like you haven't been following football the past decade and decided to pull names out of a hat. Lions winning the NFC North? The Lions do have a dangerous receiving core, but that alone won't win you a division. They have a mediocre at best QB, not much of a running game, and an average D. Granted the NFC North is one of the weakest divisions in the NFL, but I guarantee that the Lions don't win the division. Cardinals winning the NFC West? This is a similar situation to the Lions. The Cardinals have a decent young team and they play in a terrible division(like most of the NFC for that matter), but that alone doesn't mean they will win the division. Either the Rams or Seahawks will will this division. Browns and Bengals 1st and 2nd with the Ravens and Steelers 3rd and 4th? Please put the crack pipe down before you make predictions. What have the Browns and Bengals done to surpass two of the top teams in the NFL? I do think that the Steelers had a semi-fluke season last year, but they will still probably win double digit games. The Ravens might be the most dangerous team in the NFL. They have added a few upgrades on offense, so if Boiler can do anything right(with their D), than this team has a chance to come out of the AFC. Jets over the Pats? With a healthy Chad, the Jets should be improved and fight for a wild card spot, but to underestimate the defending champs like that is idiotic. Jacksonville over the Colts? Jacksonville certainly has a dangerous young team and could find themselves in the playoffs, but I highly doubt they top the Colts. Before you bash someone elses predictions you should look in a mirror.

"1. So tracey is having a half decent year.. Lets annoint him starting 1b? The guy lost his 3b job.. They gave him the 1st base job and manages to lsoe that.. And still you want him as our 1b.. .. hell he probally lose it out to Timo by May. But your right I see your sign someone who hits .004 better avg is such the answer.. Funny you forgot to mention their OBP.. wonder why that is .. Mabye because Overbay actually is better in every single offense Catagory, that matters?" Anthrax, I like the idea of getting Overbay, but I also like the idea of getting Tracy and I really think that you are drastically underestimating him. Lets get some facts straight for starters. Just because a player loses his starting job at one position doesn't mean that he is a bad player. In reality, he essentially was moved from 3B to 1B(didn't really lose anything), because the D-Backs wanted to improve either 3B or 1B this past offseason with the intension of giving Tracy the starting position at the place they didn't upgrade(which happened to be 1B). Furthermore, they felt so highly about Tracy that the moved Hillenbrand(.310/15/80 .812 OPS in 04') arguable their most consistant bat from 2004 to give Tracy that starting 1B job(that alone should tell you something about this kid). He is losing some AB's this year because Tony Clark decided to put up a monster season(not because Tracy is playing bad). You don't think Milwaukee would sit Overbay a few more times or that the Sox would sit Konerko a few more times for that matter, if they had Tony Clark hitting .330/16/52 1.034 OPS behind them. Would that make Overbay or Konerko bad players by your logic? The fact is that Tracy can flat out hit. He hit .335 in the minors, has a career BA of .288, and is hitting .293 this season. Furthermore, he is all of 25, so the prime of his career is still far ahead of him. I mean Overbay was still in the minors at 25 with a grand total of 2 major league ABs. I would be happy with either guy at 1B in the long-term.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Jul 25, 2005 -> 01:21 PM) 1. They say that now, but things change...Just like Lee last year was untradeable..The Dye part of the deal.. WE need to get rid of him in order to make room for Giles who better fits this team. 2. Read the whole post.. He hits 9th to take the spot of the loved Uribe :rolly. Lets see if Uribe is worth about 4 mil a year then you have to figure 6-7mil for a better player.. I am sure you will disagree, becuase why pay for good players right? But its to early to see what the market price is for STARTING SS 3. Again this is a question that is to early to answer in regards to the money part of it. THe pads have Nady and Guzman in the wings waiting..I don't think they are looking to keep to much in regards to OF payroll. 4. And when I made the same defense in regards to OH, I got ripped on...No your right lets try and trade for Jarret Wright he fits in here much better :rolly 1) Personally, I have no problem with Dye. He gives you sold production for his price in salary. The point that DBAHO is trying to make(and you have yet to address) is the fact that Milwaukee will have no interest in Dye, although like I said in a previous post, I do think Overbay would be a nice addition. 2) I am a big Furcal fan as well, and would love to see the Sox make a run at him. If he continues to have a big second half and puts up numbers similar to his career averages, than you will probably see him get 8-10M/yr on the open market. Personally, I think Furcal would look better in the #2 slot. His numbers are down a little this year, but he still has a solid career OBP of .344, he strikesout less then Iguchi, and he has better speed. Podsednik and Furcal would be a nightmare for opposing pitchers when they get on base. 3) I am a HUGE Giles fan, however he is going to be in high demand on the open market and will get 10+M/yr. You can expect the usual big name players taking a run at him, and I am sure that San Diego will be willing to shell out some big money to keep him. I can see the Sox going after one big FA, but not two or three. 4) I am not a big fan of Washburn. He can be inconsistant and the fact that he is an extreme flyball pitcher worries me. I see him as a slightly better version of Milton(especially if he were to move to USCF). Besides, with the solid season that he is having, some team will probably overpay for him and give him Milton-like money(7-8M/yr). I think Perez would be a better option if you want to add another lefty to the rotation.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jul 25, 2005 -> 09:24 AM) .230 6 18 Those are Soriano's average HR's and RBI on the road. Isn't that one of the big complaints about Konerko? Yes, this guy can flat out hit ..... AT HOME. No thank you. By making that statement, you are suggesting that Soriano's production is a product of his home park correct? If that is the case, than let me point out the flaws in that logic. 1) Sample size - You are basing this statement on a half a season worth of stats. That simple isn't large enough to make an accurate assessment. 2) 2004 splits - While there was a difference in his home and away splits(.886 OPS vs .735 OPS), it was no where close to the drastic difference of 2005. Furthermore, it is worth noting that he actually hit more HR on the road(16) than at home(12). 3) Expect some difference - I don't care who the hitter is, if you play in a great hitters park, than you are going to see some difference in their home and away splits, however, that alone doesn't necessarily mean that he is a product of the park that he plays in. 4) Yankee production - If Soriano is a product of Arlington, than how do you explain his BETTER production as a Yankee playing in a neutral hitters park? 5) Similarities - From a statistical perspective, Arlington and USCF are very similar in regards to park factor, so it is likely that you won't see much of a difference in his overall production. You are making an extremely weak and flawed arguement if his away splits are the primary reason for not wanting Soriano. While they shouldn't be ignored, to suggest that his production is solely because of Arlington simple holds little water.

I didn't mean for this thread to get out of hand. I figured that this time of year it is always fun to play fantasy GM, so I put together some trades that I would like to see made, that would interest the Sox, with players who are available, and were the other team gets a fair return(no Pujols for Uribe and a bag of balls). I was hoping that the title would keep people from thinking that this thread was all that serious or that I think it is likely to happen. Just a little fun. "Talk about shredding your system to hell." In my scenerio the Sox would trade a few prospects, but it certainly wouldn't shred the minor league system. Prospects are nothing more then unproven potential, and the sooner you realize that and become unafraid to trade them for PROVEN MAJOR LEAGUE TALENT the better off you will be. Now obviously that doesn't mean trade every decent prospect in your system, however the Sox system would still be in pretty decent shape with McCarthy, Gio, Sweeney, Fields, Rogo, Valido, Liotta, Broadway, ect. Furthermore, and more importantly, the nucleus of the team that I put together is relatively young and signed long-term with very few positions open for prospects over the course of the next couple of years. "Send Jenks and Sweeney to ATL for Furcal." At this point, I am unsure whether the Braves will trade him considering that he has been a big part of their turn around, and the Braves are a dangerous team in the watered down NL. Besides, the asking price would be a lot(maybe even more then Jenks and Sweeney). I am not an Uribe fan, but I can put up with him until the end of the season, than the Sox can get Furcal without giving up anything(maybe picks if they offer arbitration). "Send Vizcaino, Owens, Tracey and Crede to TOR for Batista and Hillenbrand." I think the Sox should stay away from Batista and Hillenbrand. While they may be after them realistically, I question how much they improve the team. Hillenbrand is alright, but only a slight improvement over Crede. Batista is overrated IMO. His numbers aren't that good, and I honestly don't think he is much of an improvement over Vizcaino. "So this offseason we trade off Contreas and Dye to Milwaukee For Lyle Overbay and a minor leaguer" As someone else mentioned, Milwaukee would have absolutely no interest in Dye, and probably little interest in Contreras. I think the idea of getting Overbay is a decent one, but it will cost the Sox a couple good young players/prospects. In regards to Soriano, I think a lot of you guys are selling this guy short. I am one of the biggest fans of plate disipline and high OBP, and Soriano's plate disipline and low OBP are hard to swallow, but that alone doesn't mean you can simple ignore the positives about this guy. This guy can flat out hit. He is pretty much a guarantee for 30+ 2B, 30+ HR, 90+ RBI, .280+ BA, and a mid .800 OPS(only a hnadful of guys in this league can guarantee you those numbers). Furthermore, he is capable of stealing 30+ bags at a high success rate. Soriano isn't a good top of the order hitter, but he is a very good middle of the order hitter, and in all honesty, I kind of like it when the middle of the order guys swing the bat and try and drive in runs(opposed to walk). Finally, if you move him to DH(and sadly say goodbye to the aging, injury-prone, declining production of Thomas) you take away his only other negative(terrible D). Say what you want, but this guy strikes fear in pitchers when he steps up to the plate, which can't be said about many of the current Sox offensive players. Back to reality, I do think the Sox should look into possible aquiring Tracy from Arizona(to play 1B or 3B). I think he would be a great fit for this team, and it is likely he will be moved this offseason with the emergence of Conor Jackson at 1B(I am interning for the Sidewinders down in Tucson this summer and this guy can flat rake). I also think the Sox should look at Perez who is pitched well of late and flying under the radar. He would probably cost less in trade then Burnett, and he is more then a 3 month rental. Finally, I would love to see the Sox upgrade at SS. I had my doubts about Uribe entering this season, and unfortunately they have come true. I wouldn't mind a trade for Vizquel if the price isn't too high, although I would love to see the Sox pursue Furcal this offseason. Once again, I think he would be a perfect fit at the top of the order.

Trade deadline moves: Arizona gets: Anderson, Tracey, and Gonzalez(SS) Sox get: Tracy LA gets: Crede, Haigwood, and Owens Sox get: Perez Texas gets: Contreras and Young Sox get: Soriano Offseason: Sign Furcal Resign Konerko Resign AJ Resign Soriano Resign Politte 2006 team: LF Podsednik SS Furcal DH Soriano 1B Konerko 3B Tracy RF Dye CF Rowand C AJ 2B Iguchi Can you imagine how exciting it would be to watch this offseason? The mixture of speed and power would be amazing. There would be a possibility that the top 3 hitters could combine to steal 150 bags, plus you have guys like Dye, Rowand, and Iguchi who are capable of stealing double digit bags. With the exception of Podsednik, all the other hitters are on pace for double digit HR, and three(Soriano, Konerko, and Dye) are on pace for 30+ HR. This lineup could be a 200/200 SB/HR lineup. You have a nice balance to the lineup, and all the players are in the prime of their careers(none of them are over the age of 31). LH Buehrle RH Garcia RH Garland LH Perez RH Hernandez/McCarthy The Sox would retain the big 3 from this year, and add another solid lefty to the mix. They still have McCarthy as insurance in case one of the starters struggles or goes down with an injury(a nice insurance policy to have). RH Hermy RH Politte RH Vizcaino RH Jenks/Baj LH Marte LH Cotts The Sox keep the nucleus of the solid pen of 2005. With a young arm like Jenks/Baj being a wild card with their potential to dominate. IF Uribe IF Ozuna/Harris 1B/OF Gload C - whoever OF - whoever Sign a decent backup catcher and outfielder, and the roster is set. From a payroll perspective, the Sox would lose about 20M from Thomas, Contreras, Takatsu, and Everett, while adding roughly 25M from Tracy, Perez, Soriano, and Furcal. Add in about 10M from internal raises and arbitration, and I think you have a semi-realistic payroll for next year based on the increase in attendance and potential playoff revenue. I realize that this is not going to happen, but it isn't out of the relm of possibility, and I wouldn't be surprised if a deal similar to the ones listed above occur.

I think one guy that the Sox should look into getting is Chad Tracy from Arizona. It is likely that the D-Backs will look to trade this guy in order to upgrade other positions since they have a lot of money tied up in Glaus at 3rd, and they have one of the top 1B prospects in baseball tearing up AAA in Conor Jackson. I think he would be a great fit for the Sox. He is young(25), cheap(making the min), won't be a FA for a while(4 years), is a lefty bat, is a high average hitter(something the Sox could use mixed in with their speed and power), and he is capable of playing 3B or 1B(if the Sox lose faith in Crede and/or let either Thomas/Konerko go this offseason). I am sure that the D-Backs would want quite a bit in return since Tracy has a lot of trade value and there will probably be a lot of suitors. My guess is that they would want young, cheap, major league talent in return to build around. Looking at the D-Backs organization, it appears that they are pretty weak up the middle(2B, SS, CF, Pitching). I think a package would have to center around either Rowand or Anderson(trade from strength), throw in a good pitching prospect like Tracey, and a fringe middle infield prospect like Gonzalez, and I think you have a relatively fair trade for both sides. In regards to pitching, I think the Sox should focus on Perez from LA. We all know that the Sox have shown interest in him before, and it appears that LA is willing to trade him. Like Tracy, I think he would be a good fit in both the short-term and long-term. He is young(28), signed for 2 more years after this season, signed to a reasonable contract, and would add another reliable lefty to the rotation. Besides, I think he has pitched better then his ERA would indicate, and it would probably take less to get him compared to a guy like Burnett. Not sure what LA would want in return. Crede might interest them a little since they have had a black hole in regards to production at 3B. Throw in two decent prospects like Owens and Haigwood and you might have a deal. Add these two guys, and I think the Sox are in good shape for this season and the future.

If I had to vote for the most overrated team in baseball, than the Tribe would certainly be on that list. I hate how most people consider the Tribe to be a young and upcoming team, when the fact is that they are mostly a veteran team. Here is an honest analysis of the Tribe. Offensive: The Tribe got career years from career minor leaguers like Blake, Hafner, and Broussard. Delusional Tribe fans assume that these 3 will duplicate their 2004 production, when there is years of evidence showing a strong correlation between career minor leaguers putting up a career year and falling back to reality the following season. The Tribe have to look no further then their own clubhouse for a perfect example. Gerut 03' .279/22/75 .830 Gerut 04' .252/11/51 .739 Gerut didn't reach the minors until 26, put up a career year that surpassed everyones expectations, and not surprisingly followed the strong correlation stated above in 2004. The Sox have another perfect example in Podsednik. The Sox also have another example of a guy in the same boat as Blake, Hafner, and Broussard with Gload. I really like Gload, and he put up solid numbers in the minors, but it is highly unlikely that he will duplicate his impressive 2004 season. That is the difference between Sox fans and Tribe fans. They understand the reality of baseball and have the capability to look at things realistically, while Tribe fans tend to put the rosy colored glasses on before viewing their own team. The fact is that Blake, Hafner, and Broussard all fit the correlation above. They are career minor leaguers, who didn't receive everyday AB until 26+, put up a career year, and ????(I will let you fill in the blank in regards to what is likely to happen next year). Now there are always a few exceptions to a rule, but thinking that the Tribe are going to get similar production from all 3 players is nothing short of foolish. Factor in that the Tribe lost two solid proven bats in Vizquel and Lawton, and added inconsistant, injury-prone, unproven bats like Gonzalez, Boone, Hernandez, and Cora to replace them, and you have an offense that will probably be worse then their 2004 production. Rotation: Westbrook is a huge question mark. The guy had a career ERA of 5.23 before last season. Now it isn't uncommon for a young pitcher to show improvement over the years, but such a drastic improvement over one year screams career year. I do think that Westbrook will be a solid major league pitcher for years to come, however, I doubt that he duplicates the 3.38 ERA he posted last year. I think an ERA around 4 is much more realistic. Sabathia has shown to be a pretty consistant pitcher. His 4.12 ERA last year was the same as his career ERA, so you can probably expect a similar ERA in 2005. Millwood is as inconsistant as they come. He started off his career solid, but hit a rough patch in 2000 and 2001, rebounded in 2002 and 2003, and was awful in 2004. So the question is, which Millwood is going to show up? For the most part, Millwood has shown to be a low 4 ERA type pitcher, so I would guess that is what you can expect assuming that he is healthy, but if Tribe fans expect him to be their savior, than they are in for a rude awakening. The backend of the Tribes rotation is probably one of the worst in baseball. Elarton came out of nowhere with a respectable ERA of 4.53 last year, but most people wonder how he did that considering that he gave up an astounding 25 HR in only 117.1 IP. That has to be one of the more remarkable stats in baseball. I can't remember the last time a pitcher gave up that many HR/IP and posted such a low ERA. Needless to say, history will not repeat itself. There is a reason that Elarton has a 5.00+ career ERA, and if he continues to give up HR at that rate, than Tribe fans will find out why. Lee and Davis were both terrible last year. The good news is that they can't get much worse. The bad news is that they showed little hope for drastic improvement. The Tribes rotation is shaky at best, and the Tribes #4 and #5 starters will probably be among the worst in baseball. Bullpen: The good news is that the Tribe bullpen can't get much worse. The bad news is that the Tribe really didn't add any proven relievers to improve the pen. They have added more depth, but unproven, inconsistant, injury-prone depth. They should be better for the simple fact that they can't get much worse, but the Tribe bullpen is still well below average. Defense/Bench: The Tribe should have a solid defensive team, although they did lose two quality defensive players in Vizquel and Lawton. The Tribes bench should be improved with more depth. Overall, I don't see this as an improved team. The offense will probably be worse, the rotation, bullpen, and bench will probably be only marginally better, and the defense will be similar and maybe slightly worse. This is a team that will probably finish below .500 again this year, and if they don't watch out, might finish in 4th.

I could see people putting the Red Sox and Cubs rotations ahead of the Mets, but I do think people are sleeping on the Mets rotation. I am not a huge Pedro fan, but he is still a solid pitcher and could benefit with a move to the NL and a better pitchers park. Glavine is still a quality top of the rotation guy. The backend of the Mets rotation isn't eye poping, but they are solid and consistant, which can't be said about most teams back of the rotation. With the exception of Zambrano, the other 4 starters each threw at least 200 innings last year. As I also mentioned, all 5 posted an ERA below 4.40. There isn't another rotation that can say that. I do think that the Mets have a top 5 rotation, however, they can be ranked anywhere from 1-5 IMO. I just thought that they had the #2 rotation based on the quality of the backend of their rotation(i flipped a coin between the Red Sox and Mets). I thought the Red Sox had a few more question marks(Shilling's health, Clement's adjustment, Wells's age, Miller health). The Marlins rotation is hard to rank. Like I said, I took many things into consideration including league factor, park factor, health, age, ect. I worry too much about the health of that rotation, and they do benefit from pitching in a great pitchers park.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Jan 2, 2005 -> 11:19 PM) Our rotation isn't better than Atlanta, sorry fellas. I think that a lot of people are overrating the Braves staff. I do like Hudson, but I worry that his workload is going to catch up to his sub 6 foot frame at some point. I think people are drastically overrating Smoltz, especially those that think he is heading back to his CY Young calibur days. Like I said before, the guy is going to be 38 next year and hasn't pitched more then 81 IP since 1999. I am not sure what to expect from Thomson. Last year was his 1st full season away from Coors, and he responded with his best season. I don't think he is quite as good as his ERA in 2004. Hampton has been all over the place, and his 1.53 WHIP is terrible and suggests that his ERA will be higher in 2005 if he posts a similar WHIP. Rameriz has a good arm, but he is coming off a pretty serious injury and it will be interesting to see how he reacts. Finally, you certainly have to take into consideration both league factor and park factor. The fact remains that the NL pitchers have a lower ERA on average versus their AL counterparts(pretty obvious). Furthermore, the difference between UCSF and Turner Field is drastic. I have seen some park factor stats that rate UCSF right with Coors, while Turner Field is probably one of the top 5 pitcher parks. Classic examples include Garcia last year with Seattle(3.20) versus him with the Sox(4.46), or Hampton in Colorado(5.41 and 6.15) versus him in Atlanta(3.84 and 4.28). I think the rotations are pretty similar, and that you can swap them if you want, but I don't think Atlanta has a top 5 rotation.

This is a good question. Here would be my rankings. 1) Yankees(Johnson, Pavano, Brown, Mussina, Wright) - With the exception of Mussina, all the starters posted an ERA below 4.10 last year. I also think that Johnson is the best pitcher in the majors. 2) Mets(Martinez, Glavine, Benson, Trachsel, Zambrano) - This might be the best 1-5 rotation in the majors. All 5 pitchers had a sub 4.40 ERA last year. 3) Boston(Schilling, Clement, Wells, Miller, Arroyo) - I really think Miller is a sleeper, and Arroyo is a very underrated pitcher. 4) Cubs(Zambrano, Prior, Wood, Maddux, Rusch) - I love Zambrano, Wood is good when healthy, but Rusch is a question mark. 5) St Loius(Mulder, Carpenter, Marquis, Suppan, Morris) - Mulder finally gives this rotation an ace to mix in with the rest of the quality middle of the rotation starters. 6) Florida(Leiter, Burnett, Beckett, Wills, ?) - I really like the Leiter signing. This rotation has the potential be be #1 if they stay healthy. 7) Sox(Buehrle, Garcia, Hernandez, Contreras, Garland) - The back end of the rotation will determine how good this staff is. It has the potential to be very good. 8) San Diego(Peavy, Lawrence, Williams, Eaton, May) - Peavy might be the best pitcher that you have never heard of. Lawrence, Williams, and Eaton are all solid middle of the rotation guys. 9) Atlanta(Hudson, Smoltz, Thompson, Hampton, Ramirez) - I rank them this low because I have question marks about Smoltz. The guy will be 38 next year and hasn't thrown more then 81 innings since 1999. 10) San Francisco(Schmidt, Lowry, Tomko, Williams, Rueter) - Schmidt has been one of the top pitchers over the past couple of years. Lowry and Williams are two very good young pitchers. HM) Minnesota(Santana, Radke, Silva, Lohse, ?) - Santana and Radke can match any top two starters, but the back end of their rotation has some serious question marks. Sleepers Cleveland - If they sign Millwood, than they will have a solid 1-3 with Westbrook, Sabathia, and Millwood. Plus they have a couple of young arms with potential. Houston - If Clemens comes back, and Pettitte and Hernandez stay healthy(with Ozwalt), than this could be a very good rotation. Oakland - Harden might be a huge sleeper waiting to break out. Their rotation has as many unproven, but talented young arms as any in MLB. Philadelphia - Wolf and Padilla are underrated pitchers, Lieber was a solid starter, but Myers will determine who good this rotation is. Pittsburgh - Perez might be one of the top 5 pitchers in the game. Wells, Redman, and Fogg give them a decent middle of the rotation.

I think people have a misunderstanding of what is a quality rotation in major league baseball today(especially in the AL). For example, if you look at the 4 teams that went to the playoffs in the AL this past season(NYY, Boston, Minn, and Ana), take the 5 guys with the most starts for each team, and rank them 1-5 based on ERA, than you would get the following averages. #1 3.47 #2 4.08 #3 4.37 #4 4.99 #5 5.36 It helps put things into perspective. On average, only the #1 starter had an ERA below 4.00. On average, the 4th and 5th starters had an ERA of 4.99+. Lets remember that these were the 4 AL playoff teams as well. Compare the projected ERA's for the Sox top 5 starters, and they are very favorable. In fact, I think you can make the arguement that the Sox starters ERA's would be better. Can the Sox rotation pitch in big games? Thats a question that will be answered sooner rather then later(hopefully), but for now the Sox should worry about getting to the playoffs first. Is Hernandez an injury risk? Of course, but as others have pointed out, when healthy he is a pretty solid starter and a drastic upgrade over the guys the Sox trotted out there as their 5th starter(even if he projects as the Sox #3 starter). The Sox also got a reasonable price on Hernandez(although 2 years guaranteed is a risk), and it might allow the Sox to improve other areas(see 2B and catcher). If the Sox would have given Perez, Clement, or Millwood the 7M+ that they wanted, than they probably wouldn't be able to improve the other areas. Furthermore, the Sox already have a large amount of the current payroll invested in the rotation next year and into the future(see Garcia, Buehrle, Contreras, and potentially Garland). Adding another big contract would inhibit their ability to improve other areas. I wouldn't have minded either Perez and Clement, but both come with risk as well. Millwood is a so-so pitcher to begin with who doesn't deserve the money that he will likely get. Loaiza's contract was only 4M last year, so even if they kept him for the remainder of the season and let him walk it doesn't free up enough money to go after the top of the rotation starter that you wanted. Personally, I like what KW has done this offseason, especially if he finishes it off with the signing of either AJ or the Japanese 2B(both would be even better). I have a lot more confidence in this years starting roster then last years, and I think this team has the potential to win 90+ games and make an honest run at the division.

I posted a similar response in the rumor thread, but I don't think a CLee for Podsednik and Ginter would be a bad deal. Podsednik would give the Sox the leadoff hitter they want, and Ginter would be a perfect guy to platoon with Harris and be the back up infielder. Finally, one thing that you are forgetting is that this trade would free up a nice chunk of change, and would probably allow the Sox to go after a good starter like OPerez or Clement. Would you trade CLee for Podsednik, Ginter, and either OPerez/Clement? Because that could be essentially what the Sox get(with some financial flexibility). I think it would make the Sox a better overall team and it allows them to stay under the 75M mark.

Is there any validity to a rumored trade between the Sox and Brewers where the Brewers get CLee and the Sox get Podsednik(possible Ginter)? Has anyone heard a similar rumor or seen an article about it? Personally, I think it could be a very good trade for the Sox(assuming Ginter is included). Podsednik's numbers were down last year, but I think he will rebound. His speed at the top of the order would also be a pleasant addition(he also plays solid D). Ginter would also be a nice addition. Ginter would be a perfect guy to platoon with Harris, and give Uribe and Crede an occasional day off. He has shown the ability to be a high .700/low .800 OPS guy, and has really excelled against lefties with a 3 year OPS of .868(in 178 AB). He also plays some pretty solid defense. Finally, this trade would free up some money. It should give the Sox enough money to sign a starter like OPerez or Clement, and maybe add another bullpen arm like Alverez(or acquire AJ to catch). I question the motive behind the Brewers though. They aren't one power hitter away from contending, and they add considerable payroll for a minor upgrade to the team in general. Furthermore, CLee could be a FA this next offseason as well. I would do that trade if I were the Sox. Giving you potentially the following lineup: CF Podsednik 2B Harris/Ginter DH Thomas/Everett(until Thomas is healthy) 1B Konerko LF Rowand RF Dye SS Uribe 3B Crede C Davis/Burke(wouldn't mind AJ) RH Garcia LH Buehrle LH/RH OPerez/Clement RH Contreras RH Garland RH Takatsu LH Marte RH Politte RH Hermanson LH Alverez battle for the last spot between Cotts, Adkins, Diaz, Munoz, Grilli, ect OF Everett 1B Gload IF Ginter C Burke OF Escobar? That would be a pretty solid team, and would probably keep the payroll under the 75M mark. I guess we will have to wait and see.

I am neither for or against this signing. He seems like a very good guy, and I love what he has done with the Pats offense(although I am a Colts fan). However, I don't think he is the big name that ND needed. I am also a little concerned that this is his 1st job has a head coach(I know that he was highly thought of for a NFL head coaching job). He seems like a good option out of the remaining options, but I will remain skeptical and question whether this guy was worth firing Willingham for. We will have to see what kind of recruiting roots that this guy has, since that is going to be the biggest key to turning around ND. We will see if his offense will work in the college game, and what kind of defense he wants to run. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and wait a couple of years before I pass judgement.

Mark this date, Harold Reynold is making sense for the 1st time in his career.

I have never seen a pitcher coming off a season with a 5.42 ERA get so much attention and hype. Lets ignore all of his stats and spend big dollars on him because he is a groundball pitcher and pitched well in a couple of games during the postseason. Lets ignore the fact that opponents light Lowe up with a .299 batting average against him. Lets ignore that down right terrible 1.61 WHIP he posted. Lets ignore the .786 OPS posted against. Lets ignore the below average 1.48 K/BB ratio he posted. Lets ignore the fact that he was only 14-12 on a team that was 34 games above .500 and had arguable the best offense in baseball supporting him. Lets ignore the fact that he has gotten progressively worse over the past 2 seasons. But at least he is a groundball pitcher. Does that alone make him a good pitcher? The funny think is that Anthrax makes fun of everyone elses ideas/plans, but he thinks the Sox should sign Lowe. He thinks that will lead them to the promise land. Mark my word, the Sox should stay away from Lowe. He has a false market value that was created for some reason, and some team is going to drastically overpay for his services. Potentially paying him front of the rotation money for bottom of the rotation production. Some teams can afford to take those risks, but the Sox aren't one of them. There are much better options for a similar/less price.

I have to disagree. A new coach, and more importantly, a new scheme can make a huge difference, especially in the college game. I have a feeling that Meyer is all but a guarantee for the ND job. In that case, look at what this guy has done for BG and Utah in his 1st year. Two of the biggest turnarounds. Furthermore, it isn't as if the Irish don't have any talent. In fact they are returning almost all of their offensive players(that showed drastic improvement as the season has gone on), and with Meyer's deadly offensive scheme it could be a perfect match. Meyer has turned so-so players into good players(even Heisman canidates) at BG and Utah, so whats going to happen if he gets good/great players? I think the Irish will win 7-8 games next year with Meyer(assuming he is the choice). The one concern that I have is in regards to recruiting. Meyer has never recruited(as a head coach) at a big time university. It is one thing to recruit for BG or Utah, but ND is another monster. Furthermore, BG and Utah don't have the academic restrictions that ND have. Recruiting is going to be the long-term question mark and the only way for ND to get back to their dominate ways. In regards to Willingham, I don't think he was given a fair shot. His fluke 1st season put unattainable expectations on him and probably cost him his job. He has shown mild progress(IMO), and deserved 1 more season. Willingham really hasn't recruited as well as expected, and that was a bit of a surprise. It brings up the question, can any coach get the top recruits to ND?

I think it is highly likely that the Sox sign some middle infielder this offseason, and that would leave no room for another middle infielder on the 25 man roster. Why do you like Meyer? I just checked out his stats, and the guy hit .239 with a .616 OPS at AA. Why do you think he will be able to be a decent big leaguer next year(worth a roster spot) after struggling so badly at AA last year? Every team usually takes a couple of Rule 5 players, but you don't hear about it much since they rarely warrant a big league spot, and are returned to the original team. My guess is that the Sox might take a chance on a few of the pitchers listed(assuming they are available) with the questions that they have at the back end of their pen.

I agree. Colt Griffin was a name that jumped out. I remember this guy being a top 10 pick(if I am not mistaken), and reports said that this guy can get up into triple digits. It sounds like he had mild sucess as a reliever at AA, and at 22 he is still very young(with upside). The Sox also have a need for a power right handed arm in the pen, so it could be a perfect fit. As others have mentioned, Sisco would also be an interesting pick.

You have failed to answer the 1st question that I presented. 1) Just because other people have acted a certain way in the past does NOT under any circumstance give Wallace the reason to act that way, nor does it make it right for him to do so. How is this simple concept so hard to understand? 2) Wallace does NOT have the right to take matters into his own hands in that way. Just as Artest does NOT have the right to do what he did. How is this simple concept so hard to understand? 3) A hard foul(wasn't even that hard) is NOT reason enough to act the way that Wallace did, nor does it justify the actions that Wallace took. How is this simple concept so hard to understand? The fact is that Wallace had no right or justification to act the way that he did. Do you find it kind of odd that you are the only one defending Wallace? I guess that makes the rest of us unknowledgible people who must not watch/follow the NBA, or have the expertise that you possess(get a clue). In regards to question 2, as I have shown(along with the help of another poster), O'Neal most certainly used self defense. Fans have absolutely no right to charge the court, ESPECIALLY in a situation like that. Furthermore, I love how people say that the Pacers players should have taken the high road and walked away, but what about the fans? They should be held accountable as well. When a fight breaks out they should also take the high road and walk away. The intent of the fan that charged the court was as clear as day. He presented an immediate danger to the players. What if he had a weapon of any kind? This certainly gives O'Neal the right to use force in order to defend himself, and if taken to court, I guarantee that he would get off because of self defense. You can maybe make the arguement that he used excessive force, but when his well being is threatened, he most certainly has the right to defend himself. Once again, you missed the entire point in question 3. Unless you personally know Wallace or someone very close to him, you don't really have an accurate idea of the person he is or the personality that they possess. A perfect example is Kobe. Before the rape incident he was seen as an angel, a poster boy for the NBA, a guy that could do no wrong. There were litterally dozens of articles written about the quality of Kobe's character and personality. He then gets charged with rape(which alone brought down his character/personality), and all of a sudden the same reports that wrote the articles about how good Kobe was as a person began to write articles about how bad he was. Examples of questionable things that Kobe did were brought to the public, and this golden boy image feel apart. The point is that you/I/most reporters have no clue what type of person Wallace is, and to think that you know him because you see him play or you read a couple of articles on him has to be one of the stupidest things I have heard since you last posted. For the record, I have read(similar to the ones written about Kobe) and followed Wallace for some time. He use to be one of my favorite player, so please quit pretending like you are the only expert on the matter. You have got to be kidding me. You blame this situation on the fact that Artest was man enough to back away and make Wallace look like the punk that he is. That has to be some of the dumbest logic I have heard(since your logic in response to question 1). Wallace DRASTICALLY overracted to a foul. That started the whole altercation and caused fans to get excited. Will you get it through your thick head that he did more then shove him. He took a semi-swing at Artest's throat. Knowing anything about hand to hand combat(of any form), you will know that a humans throat is arguable the most fragil/sensitive part of their body. Furthermore, he took multiple swings at Artest afterwards, and continued to chase Artest despite the fact that Artest backed away and didn't retaliate. It was more then just a shove junior. Wallace did sucker punch Artest. Are you blind? That is what started the entire situation. Not only did Wallace's action spur the fans, but him failing to back down or walk away only escalated the situation. A better man would have walked away, but Wallace is nothing more then a punk.

This post has been removed. If you two want to fight, do it somewhere else. If you can't post civily about this conversation and put what the arguments the two of you had behind each other (at least the personal ones) then refrain from responding to each others posts.

Furthermore, what Wallace did was more than shoving, so please quit this, all he did was shove someone BS. He took multiple swings at Artest and rapped his hands around Artest neck. That is not shoving junior. I can s*** and hit someone with a higher IQ then 50(like yourself). You can't handle the heat, than get the f*** out of the kitchen(or I could personally show you what Wallace did if you would prefer that). *Beginning Portion of this post was edited by Chisoxfn. 61382, I know you were posting when I made my post, so I did remove the beginning which was a semi personal move, but just wanted to give you the heads up. I left the rest up because it dealt with the issue*

Wow, exactly the response that I would expect from someone like you. You fail to address any of the logical points that I bring up, and instead turn to personal attacks(classy junior and a classic sign that you are wrong). Once again you justify Wallace's actions because it has happened before. Say that outloud, because I don't think you understand what you are saying. It is a classic case of a friend jumping off a bridge, does that mean you should do the same? Get a clue if you want to have a true arguement. Furthermore, what Wallace did was more then just shoving. He took two hands towards Artest's throat(wasn't Spreewell suspended for similar actions)? This is a classic case of unfair justice because of the people involved and the so-called "victims". Of course you missed the entire analogy(I guess you have to have some common sense in order to comprehend). The point of the analogy wasn't murder, the point was to show a similar situation of circumstances. If you want to be considered a logical poster, than answer the questions that I presented, else get your ass back to grade school. Here is a repeat of the important questions that I presented that you side stepped. 1) How can you justify a persons actions because they have happened before(with other people)? Does that make it right or ok? 2) How can you justify giving O'Neal almost 5x the punishment that Wallace got. O'Neal's past record is as clean as Wallace(if you follow the NBA according to you). The 2 differences is that Wallace instigated his fight, while O'Neal was defending himself. The other difference is that Wallace attacked a player and O'Neal a fan. That only does not justify the punishment that O'Neal received in comparison to Wallace. 3) You have no clue what type of person Wallace is. Are you stupid enough to believe that just because you watch the NBA that it gives you an accurate opinion of what kind of person a player is? 4) If Wallace doesn't overreact, than this whole situation never occurs. 5) Wallace classlessly denies that he is response for anything. Talking about what kind of person he is, that is about as classless as it gets. A good person takes responsibility for their actions, but I guess you will just ignore that since you have head so far up his ass that you can't see what type of person he truely is.

Obviously you are a lawyer, because that is very easy to defend. Here are two examples of some what similar situations. 1) When Diaz was attacked. The intent of the fan was to injury Diaz, and Diaz responded by using the force that he deemed necessary. In this case, Diaz's well being was put in danger. The O'Neal incident was not very different. Any time a fan charges the court and comes close to a player(especially after the fights in the stands) it becomes a threat to the player with no ifs, ands, or buts. When a players well being is threatened he has the right to use the force that he deems necessary to defend himself. In our criminal justice system the intent of the person is one of the most important things, and in this case it is VERY easy to show that the intent of the fan was a danger to the players. Furthermore, I love how we hold athletes to a higher standard. Athletes should refrain from such actions. The Pacers players should have walked away according to everyone, but what about the fans? Do they not have the same responsibility to walk away? If a fight in the stands occurs between fans and players, than shouldn't fans head for the exits for their safety and the safety of the people involved? There is no justification for the fan to enter the court when an event like that occurs. It is clear what his intent was(wasn't asking for O'Neal's autograph), and that is a threat to the player and justification for self defense. Welcome to criminal justice 101. 2) This example I have to thank to Rex for. It is more of a real life situation, but it shows the same overall situation. If someone breaks into your house, than you have the right to defend yourself with the force you deem necessary to prevent the threat to your life(even if the person B and E is unarmed). Obviously if you kill the individual, than you have to prove that the force you used was necessary. If you punch the person in the face(causing damage to the persons face), and hold him down to the police arrive, than it is almost always thrown out because the force fits the standards of being necessary, but not excessive. This is similar to the O'Neal situation because the floor/field is essentially O'Neal's house(of any other player/coach/ref). The fans have no right to enter the playing field under any circumstances. The mere fact that the fan entered the court causes a threat to the players well being and allows him to use the force deemed necessary to defend himself. Once again welcome to criminal justice 101. It is very easy to prove that O'Neal was using self defense. The only arguement that can be made against O'Neal is that he used excesses force. You might be able to prove that O'Neal could have used less force to protect himself. However, it is a clear case of self defense since the fan illegally entered the playing field and presented an immediate danger to the players involved. Any other legal advice will cost you in the future Spiff. Dybber, this goes back to the arguement that players are held to a higher standard, which is not fair or legal(IMO). Whether you hit a fan or a player, you are using violence on another person. It shouldn't matter that the person was a fan or player, and that is the point that most people don't understand.