whitesox61382

I think it is you that needs to get a clue. Justifing uncalled for actions because he doesn't have a history of it is one of the stupidest things I have heard in a long time. An extreme example, I am a law bidding/tax paying citizen my entire life, but I commit a murder. Should my actions not be punished because I don't have a history of breaking the law. Is the murder that I commited any better or worse then a murder commited by someone that has a history of breaking the law. Is the end result, a person being murder, any different in either situation? Of course not, so please don't make yourself look like an idiot by saying things that you did. Furthermore, how is Wallace's actions much different from O'Neal? In fact, I think you can make an arguement that Wallace's actions were worse then O'Neal. In both cases, they essentially threw punches at another person. The major difference is that Wallace was the instigator in his situation and had no just reason for throwing his punch. O'Neal's punch was justified in some ways because it was self defense. Any time a fan runs onto the court, especially in a situation like the one that occured on Friday night, he becomes a threat to the player(or do you think he went onto the court to ask O'Neal for his autograph). So please justify O'Neal getting punishment that is almost 5x as harsh as the punishment that Wallace received(please use some more of your messed up backwards logic to justify this one). Because he threw a punch at a fan opposed to a player? Get a clue. Not to mention the fact, that if Wallace doesn't overreact, than this whole incident doesn't occur. In a round-about way he is directly response for the fans overreacting, but he is a good person so he shouldn't be punished(get a clue). Do you personally know Wallace? Then how in the world can you accurately say that he is a good person, because he seems like a nice guy on the court or in press conferences. Wasn't the same thing being said about Kobe, but when the incident in Colorado occured all you heard about were reports of how much of an asshole he was(things that were never mentioned/known before hand). Maybe we will find out that Wallace isn't the angel that you crack him up to be, although it appears that you are easily manipulated by what other people say. Furthermore, not taking responsibility for your actions is one of the most classless things you can do, yet angel boy did that as well. Open your eyes to reality and pull your head out of Wallace's ass.

Sort of. The fans started to charging onto the field and my teammates and I kind of meet them half way. Fortunately the coaches and security did a pretty good job of keeping things seperated. There were still punches thrown by both sides. I feel that if any object is thrown at a player it becomes a threat to them, and has the potential to cause serious injury(in my cause it didn't cause any long-term damage luckily). Does that give them enough reason to go after fans? Probably not, but personal well being and the source(instigator) of the altercation needs to be taken into consideration when dealing out punishment. It is easy to sit back and say that I would have taken the high road and just walked away, but we can't begin to understand the emotion and circumstances that surrounded the incident, so I don't think we can accurately say either way what we would have done if we were in Artest's shoes. Furthermore, there is no possible way that you can guarantee that things would have no escalated if Artest didn't go into the stands. All it takes is one bold(stupid) fan, and the rest tend to follow. That was the case in my situation. One fan started it by throwing a bottle in the direction of my teammates and I, and we did nothing, but 20-30 seconds later dozens of fans started throwing anything they could find at us. There was certainly not enough time to get our team off the field, and I am guessing that a similar situation would have occured in the Pacers/Pistons incident. If I were in charge of dealing out punishment, than I would have given the following suspensions. Artest - 30 games - The entire season was too much and a result of past events(which isn't fair). He did a great job of not reacting to Big Ben(something that has been forgotten). You have to believe that his emotions were high(anytime someone comes that close to a fight their emotions rise), and that the slightest thing would set him off(as it would almost everyone). Since he was prevoked and threatened(something being thrown at a player is threating in my book), I think that needs to be taken into consideration. 30 games is still a very large punishment. That is almost half of the remaining season, and more then enough IMO. Jackson - 30 games - His actions were not warranted in any way. You can make the weak arguement that he was trying to defend Artest, but it was clear that he had intentions of getting into a fight. He wanted to get into a fight right after the Big Ben altercation, and directed his attentions at the fans. He was not provoked or threatened(unlike Artest). O' Neal - 10 games - I think his punishment was very unjust. I think it is somewhat comparable to the Gamboa incident. Fans ran onto the field and presented a threat to the players(in this case a coach). KC players responded by beating the s*** out of the two fans. Why were they not given suspensions for punching fans that were on the field? You can say that the fan didn't present any danger, but I think it is fair to say that when a fan charges the court/field like that he has the intent to injury/threaten someone. Why else would he charge the court? So I think self defense does come into play for O'Neal, since he didn't entire the stands and look for a fight, but defended himself when a fan confronted him on the court. You still need to be punished for punch a fan though, and 10 games seems fair in my book. Wallace - 15 games - I think his actions were similar to O'Neal. He threw a punch at a person(a player instead of a fan, but should that matter). He should get an extra 5 games because he instigated the entire situation. It is fair to say that if he doesn't overract to the foul, that this incident would have never escalated to point that it did. For that Wallace deserves an additional 5 games IMO. Finally, I think the fans need more severe punishment. It is obvious that the current punishment for incidents like this does not work, since we have seen similar cases were fans have thrown objects at players and started altercations. The punishment needs to be strict enough to make fans think twice about the potential consequences that fans would receive for their actions. I am getting tired of fans that think they can get away with anything just because they bought a ticket. I do think the fans are responsible for escalating the situation, and that they should be punished severely. I am sorry that I am getting worked up, but this topic hits me in a couple of ways. Having been in a similar situation I can understand the players reactions. I am also a Pacers fan who feels that the Pacers have been cheated out of a chance to win a Championship because of a few drunk Pistons fans, and I don't feel that is just. The Pacers players actions were not called for and should not be defended because of the Piston fans(as evidence of my personal suspensions for the Pacer players), however, it just doesn't seem fair and that equal/just punishment has been given. I played D2 football and baseball at Bryant College in RI to answer your question Steve.

I agree. A perfect example is when the so-called "Sox fans" attacked the 1st base coach of the Royals. KC players were punching the fans, should they be suspended for their actions against the fans? Of course not, so how is it any different if a fan charges onto the court, and O'Neal hits the fan? Don't tell me that he wasn't threatened either? What is the reason for a fan to charge onto the court in a brawl like that? Obviously he was out there to start stuff with the players, and O'Neal defended himself. He should be suspended for throwing a punch, but I think 10 games would have been fair. I really hope that the fans involved are punished just as severely as the players have been. This kind of behavior has to stop, and if the fans just get a slap on the wrist, than they will continue to do stuff like that.

Rex, we have already gone through this. I personally think you are bulls*** and totally disregard what you have to say. Ever since you showed your true self by attempting to personally attack me for no reason you proved that you are nothing more then a want to be thug yourself. You are making excuses for fans to act like thugs. You are an old time who has no grasp of reality in regards to current societal trends(ect). You are one of those people that I was refering to. One of those people with no personal experience playing a sport at a high level. The only perspective that you have a clue about is that of a fan, so that doesn't give you the right to accurately comment on this matter, since you lack the ability to understand the situation from the other perspective. As I mentioned before, I was involved in a similar situation. My college football team was playing our division rivals, and after the game, the fans started throwing things at us. I was struck in the eye with a rock and lost vision in my right eye for 3 days. Do you have that kind of experience that allows you to accurately comment on this type of situation from both perspectives? So please don't tell me that Artest wasn't threatened(when objects were thrown at his face), or that the players weren't in any danger, or that you would have the ability to take the high road and walk away from the situation(as always you have an elevated opinion of yourself that makes me want to puke). How do you know that the Pacers personal could have gotten the players of the floor? That is just like saying the security did a good job of preventing the situation from escalating. It took a matter of seconds for things to get out of hand, so please don't pretend that it was a guarantee that the Pacers would have had the ability to get off the court, or that the fans would have remained relatively calm. Once again, you have no clue what you are talking about. I wish you could come to some of our football games and see the type of abuse that players take from fans. You never hear about the 99.9% of things that fans do to player because often the players take the abuse, but the truth of the matter is that some of the things that are done would be grounds for fines and potential jail time. The fans get away with so many things that it is unbelievable(you couldn't even begin to comprehend). Sometimes fans cross the line, and they need to be held responsible for their actions. And please don't give me this, "let the police deal with that BS", because they get a slap in the wrist(if that). A message needs to be sent to the fans that this type of behavior will not be tollerated. Answer me this, would the incident have occured if that fan didn't throw a bottle at Artest's face? So how can you defend the fans for instigating the matter? How is it not self defense when a players personal health is put in danger? How is it not self defense when fans start charging the court and threating player? You have no clue what you are talking about. I think it is past your bedtime gramps. Stick to talk about the Great Depression and other events that occured when you had an accurate grasp of reality and society, because you sound like one of those old people talking about how stamps were 2 cents, politicians were noble, kids respected their elders, ect. What are you talking about? The NBA has received some of its highest ratings over the past couple of years. Once again you have no clue what you are talking about. Are you suggesting that fans should have the right to do whatever they please just because they bought a ticket? You sound like a typical fan who never had the athletic ability to play sports at a high level, but who feels that they have a right to comment and treat athletes as they please(even though they have no experience or understanding), but what else would I expect from you. You are always right. You always take the high road. Open your eyes to reality and take a good look in the mirror old man. With that said, the players deserve to be punished. However, I just don't think it is fair that the Pacers should take on most of the punishment for the Piston fans actions. I think the Pistons as an organization should be held responsible for their fans actions. I would almost go as far as to say that the Pistons should be forced to forefeit the remained of the season. The Pistons organization needs to be punished and severely, if you want to help prevent future outcomes. Maybe fans would think twice about their actions if they knew that the team that they rooted for would be punished. Because when you boil it down, the Pacers are essentially forefeiting because of the actions of the Piston fans. What is going to stop Pacer fans from doing the exact same thing to the Pistons when they come to town(besides class)? Knowing that the potential punishment that they face is minor(if any) and the consequences for the Pistons players is severe. Until a strict message is sent to fans that this kind of behavior is unacceptable, you will continue to see similar incidents.

I think the league went overboard. I hate when people attempt to take the high road, and say that they would have done nothing if they were in Artest's(the rest of the Pacers) shoes. The fact of the matter is that very few people understand the emotion and situation that occured that night, yet they pretend to be experts with all the answers, and it makes me sick. People who say that Artest was not in any danger don't know what they are talking about. I don't care what was thrown at his face, anything thrown at a persons face is a threat for serious injury(trust me I have personal experience in a very similar situation were I lost vision in my right eye for 3 days). Even if Artest didn't charge into the stands, the situation would have escalated. All it takes is one stupid fan, and the rest will follow. As I mentioned before, if that one fans gets away with hitting Artest in the face with a bottle, with no consequences, than others will follow(especially when drunk). When objects are being thrown at you, you are outnumbered by intoxicated people, and fans start charging the court, than it is an act of self defense. It makes me sick that fans can get away with this type of behavior, and the players become victims of an uncontrollable situation. Athletes are human, and I get sick of people attempting to put them on a higher level. Should Pacer fans start throwing things at Pistons players and charge the court, because I guarantee that the Pistons players(any other teams players) would react the same way the Pacers did. Yet that wasn't even taken into consideration as evidence by the suspensions. Would this situation have occured if Wallace didn't attack Artest? No. Would this situation have occured if the fans didn't throw things at the Pacers? No. Yet the Pacers are punished for the actions of Wallace and the Piston fans. The league(Stern) needs to put himself in that situation and understand that 99% of humans would have acted in a similar way. It is human nature. I am not saying that it is right for a player to go into the stands and attack fans. The Pacers players deserve to be suspended, but the league went overboard. The Pacers championship hopes have been thrown out the window because Piston fans attacked the Pacer players. Is that just? I hope that the Pacers as an organization takes up lawsuits against the Pistons, the people in charge of the Palace, and the fans involved. I only hope that the fans involved are prosecuted the fullest extent. I hope that some of them get to spend some time in jail. They should not be allowed into another sporting event for the rest of their lives. The league has attempted to send a strong message to the players, now it is time for a message to be sent to the fans, because to often they get nothing but a slap on the wrists(if that). It is unfortunate that Artest's previous actions were taken into consideration. I guarantee that if Garnett or Duncan would have done the same thing, that their suspensions would pale in comparison. I think Jackson's suspension was the only one that was fair. O'Neal's suspension was overboard, since fans were charging the floor. That is self defense no matter what anyone says. Furthermore, it is sickening that Wallace, who started the whole thing, despite his idiotic comments that he isn't to blame(I lost all respect for Wallace and we finally get to see the true Ben Wallace), gets a slap in the wrist by comparison. The league made a mistake. The only justice is that Pistons fans will be seen as the most disgraceful fans in all of sports. Nothing but white trailor trash.

People need to look at this from both perspectives(fans and players). Unfortunately, most people only have experience as a fan so they really don't understand the players perspective, so it becomes easy to blame the players and say that they shouldn't have reacted the way that they did. Most fans don't understand the abuse that players take from fans over the course of a season. Some of the things fans say and do is enough to be arrested, but nothing happens to them because they paid their money for their ticket and the players don't press charges in most cases. 99.9% of the time a player doesn't react to the abuse that they take, which is something that often goes ignored. Because of this we put players on an unfair level. We have to remember that players are human, and that you or I would probably act the same way(maybe even act worse) when dealing with the abuse that they take. It crosses the line when fans start throwing objects at players. I have no tollerance for that, especially with my personal experience. My teammates and I were leaving the field after an emotional football game with our division rivals. The fans were yelling and spitting on us as we left the field. All of a sudden one fan throws a bottle at us, and a dozen other fans follow by throwing anything they can find. I was hit in the eye with a rock and lost vision in my right eye for 3 days. Luckly there was no permanent damage. The point is that anything thrown at a persons face can cause serious injury, even if it is a plastic cup. Human beings have very fragil faces that can be hurt by almost anything, so saying that Artest wasn't in any danger is incorrect. Does it justify him going into the stands? No, but anything thrown at another persons face is reason enough to defend yourself. Furthermore, I laugh at those people that say they would take the high road and do nothing. Call me up, and we will play a physical, emotional game of basketball, and after the game I will throw something at your face, and we will see how you react. The truth of the matter is that 99% of us would have acted in the same way, so please stop trying to take the high road having never been in a similar situation. Furthermore, you pretend that things would have died down if Artest didn't react, but that simple isn't true. All it takes is one fan to start something, and a dozen more will follow(see my experience as an example). You honestly think that other fans wouldn't have started throwing things at the Pacers? The fans see that one person threw something with no consequences, so I guarantee that other fans would have followed suit. That doesn't justify Artest charging the stands, but don't pretend that things would have died down otherwise. The fans of Detroit are to blame for this incident. I am tired of all things that fans can get away with no consequences. This will hopefully serve notice that this type of behavior with have consequences. I hope that every Pistons fan involved is prosecuted to the full extent. I hope that some of them spend some time in jail. They will see what happens when you throw something at a fellow inmate. I am really upset as a Pacers fan, because this incident hurts them in so many ways. For starters, it overshadowed a dominating performance by the Pacers on the defending champs own floor. Artest, whos image is not clean to start with, will be seen as the villian in all of this. People will forget the amazing restraint he showed when Big Ben came after him. They will see him as an even worse person despite the unjust situation that he was put in. Furthermore, the Pacers top 3 players have been suspended indefinately. While they should be back before too long, the Pacers are going to be extremely short handed and will probably lose the majority of their games. They will probably make the playoffs still, but they will probably lose homecourt and a top seed because of this. Maybe Pacer fans should attack Pistons players and get their top players suspended, except Pacer fans have class unlike white trailor trash Pistons fans. I really think that Bird is planning on coming out of retirement to play. That is how short handed the Pacers are. They only had 8-9 players dressed the past couple of weeks, and now they lose 3 more. They are litterally only going to have 1-2 players on their bench. Not only that, but 3rd string players are going to have to start. The Pacers will be without their starting center(Foster), starting PF(O'Neal), starting SF(Artest), starting SG(Miller), backup center(Pollard), backup forward(Bender), backup SG(Jackson), and backup PG(Johnson). Finally, I worry about potential injuries. It is not uncommon to break your hand or bones in your hand when you land a punch. You also have to worry about the players that get hit with objects(fist, bottles, ect). I think it was Fred Jones that got clocked in the back of the head by a fan if I am not mistaken. Overall it is a terrible situation for the Pacers, despite the fact that the incident was started by Big Ben and continued by Pistons fans. It just doesn't seem fair to the Pacers that they simple defended themselves from a dangerous situation, and they are going to get the worst of the punishment. I wish Stern would put himself in the shoes of a Pacers player, because then he might understand their perspective. ps...sorry about the length, but this is a sore subject for me

Age is definately a concern, but this guy can hit as well. This past season he hit a solid .272/9/58 .742 OPS. He has a career OPS of .750, and he has posted a .740+ OPS in 6 of the last 7 seasons. Obviously, his defense is very good. The guy has thrown out at least 34% of base stealers in every year in the majors. He has also worked with about a dozen CY calibur pitchers the past 3 years, and has the reputation of being a good handler of pitchers. I have mentioned Miller as a possible short-term upgrade, and I think 2 years/7.5M is a reasonable price for him.

You complained that the Sox would be trading a good portion of their 2005 roster and beyond, yet they only trade 2 players from their 2005 roster(and receive a huge upgrade at one of the positions). So let me see if I get this math right, 2-1=1 and 1=a good portion of the 2005 roster. Is that correct? And beyond? Konerko is a FA beyond 2005. Garland = a mid-high 4 ERA bottom of the rotation starter and with him being arbitration eligiblable he will probably be making 4M+ after 2005. Is it that hard to find a mid-high 4 ERA starter for 4+M? Finally, we have no clue what kind of prospects were offered, so don't pretend that we traded the farm as well. The Sox wouldn't be morgaging the future, so I don't know what you are complaining about. It comes down to Johnson/Gload versus Garland/Konerko, and I would take my chances with the 1st option, because pitching is much more valuable(see where the Sox 200+ HR's got them this past season). Like I said, I was against trading for Johnson, but I would do this trade as long as none of the top prospects were involved.

Great insight...seriously are you negative about everything...if you want to root for a 200M roster of All Stars...than root for the Yankees...otherwise open your eyes to reality and understand that it is a pretty talented roster for roughly 70M...and i would love to see you put up a better roster for 70M under...stop complaining and add some insight buddy...anyone can sit around and complain like a baby.

What are you talking about? Konerko is a FA after the 2005 season. Garland has shown no progress. Age can't be used to defend this guy anymore. He is a veteran in regards to experience. It depends on the prospects involved, but if none of the big prospects are involved(Anderson, Sweeney, McCarthy, Fields), than I would do this trade and I don't see how the Sox are morgaging the future. This is coming from a guy that has been against a trade for Johnson, but I think that I might do this deal if I were the Sox.

I don't know about you guys, but I would love that roster. It fits the Sox financially, gives them a decent lineup(considering the likelyhood that Maggs and one of Lee/Konerko with probably be gone), a very good rotation, a solid bullpen, and a good bench. I love the SF trade. I wish the Sox could get their hands on Williams. This guy has great stuff, is only 22, is cheap, and has very solid career stats (17-12 3.77 ERA) with good peripherals. Pierzynski might be an asshole, but the guy can hit and is decent defensively. The question is, why would SF do this trade? Why would they give up one of the most promising young pitchers in the game and a quality starting catcher for a power hitting outfielder and lefty reliever? They could just sign someone like Alou(playing for his dad) for about the same amount that Lee makes, with similar production, and without giving up that kind of talent. They don't NEED a lefty reliever that bad either, with former Sox Scott Erye pitching well for them. I hope the Sox can pull off this trade, but it is highly unlikely. Dye wouldn't be a terrible addition if his asking price isn't that bad(under 6M). Everyone here has been talking about the affect that USCF has on pitchers, but lets not forget that most offensive players will probably see an increase in production. From a production standpoint, I would rather get Alou, but most people don't like him personally. That bullpen would be pretty solid. I wouldn't be against trading Cotts for Vizcaino, since he is a pretty dominating right handed reliever. Rincon would also be a nice addition, especially if Marte is moved. I think that is a very good roster all things considered. However, I don't see that SF trade happening.

If I am not mistaken, than the Sox will have roughly 62M tied up for next year(this includes estimated arb. and increases). It is hard to say what the final payroll will be, but I think it is reasonable to expect at least a slight increase(this past season was 68M). If JR is willing to spend 75-76M, than the following offseason and roster wouldn't be unrealistic. Sign Vizquel 4M/yr Sign OPerez 7M/yr Trade a couple of prospects for Julio/Kolb/Baez(about 2-3M for any of three) The roster would look as followed: SS Vizquel CF Rowand DH Thomas LF Lee 1B Konerko RF Everett 2B Uribe 3B Crede C Davis The lineup is as dangerous as the lineup that started this season(with a healthy Maggs and Thomas). You add a quality top of the order hitter, a lefty(switch hitter) in the middle, and hopefully an improvement from Crede. RH Garcia LH Buehrle LH Perez RH Contreras RH Garland The rotation is 10x better than last year rotation. The two holdovers are Buehlre and Garland, and when you compare Loaiza(not 2003 form), Schoeneweis, and the army of 5th starters to Garcia, Perez, and Contreras it is like comparing night and day. Any way that you look at it, the rotation is drastically improved with the potential to be one of the top rotations in baseball. RH Takatsu RH Julio/Kolb/Baez LH Marte RH Politte LH Cotts RH Adkins The bullpen would probably be better with the addition of a quality right handed reliever like Julio/Kolb/Baez(all with closing experience). You also hope that either/both Cotts and/or Adkins will show improvement. 1B/DH Gload 2B Harris C Burke OF Borchard/Escobar IF Valdez The bench is pretty solid and offers a little bit of everything power, speed, defense, ect. Is this scenerio that unrealistic? I hope not, because I think the Sox would be improved across the board(when compared to the team that started the year). Last year the papers speculated that the Sox would end up with a payroll around 60M, and JR surprised us with a payroll of 68M, so is it that unlikely to have a payroll around 76M(especially with an increase in revenue)? I know that it is likely for the Sox to trade Konerko or Lee, but weren't the same things being said last offseason? I know that there have been talks about drastic changes, but I think the roster just needs a little treaking(and some health).

I wouldn't mind the Sox going after Mirabelli, Redmond, or Zaun as a cheap upgrade at catcher. Here are there career averages. Redmond .284/.348/.362/.710 Zaun .250/.339/.375/.714 Mirabelli .242/.331/.426/.757 If I had to choice, than I would go with Zaun for the follow reasons. 1) He is the only one of the three to get at least 260+ ABs in a season. This includes 338 ABs this past season. 2) He probably has the best plate disipline of the three. This includes a pretty impressive .367 OBP last year. 3) He is a switch hitter. 4) He is probably the best athlete of the 3, and probably has the best speed of the three. They are about the same age, are similar defensively, and will probably get about the same salary, so I would give Zaun the slight edge. If the Sox really want to upgrade at catcher and are willing to spend 3-4M, than the guy I would go after is Damian Miller. He is coming off a pretty solid season: .272/9/58 .742 OPS. He has also posted a .740+ OPS in 6 of the last 7 seasons. He has the reputation of being a great defensive catcher. He has caught about a dozen CY calibur starters over the past 5 years. He has also thrown out at least 34% of would be base stealers in every season. His age(35) is a concern, but he has shown no signs of slowing down, and probably has 2-3 good years left. In regards to Kapler, he would be a good bench player/4th outfielder, but the Sox are in some trouble if they have him as an everyday starter. If he comes for a reasonable price(around 1M), than he would be a decent option.

Let me get this straight, you guys think that Lee/Gload would be more productive than Alou/Konerko? I like Gload as much as anyone on this board, but to think that he will put up numbers similar to Alou is just foolish. I can understand the arguement that the Sox might be able to spend their money for other needs, but if the Sox only take 4-5M in salary via a trade involving Lee(cutting about 3-4M from the payroll). They turn around and spend 6-7M on Alou. They only add about 3-4M to the current payroll, don't miss a beat production wise(between Lee and Alou), and fill other needs with the players received in the Lee trade. I know that it is highly unlikely, but it is certainly a scenerio that the Sox might consider(or a similar path). Alou's age/health is a concern, but it could certainly be a risk worth taking. I just thought that I would throw that scenerio out there.

There have been some reports that the Sox might go after an outfielder(even with Everett aboard). There is also the possibility that Lee could still be moved. A lot of big name outfielders are being mentioned Beltran, Maggs, Sosa, ect, but one name flying under the radar is Moises Alou. The guy quitely put up a pretty impressive season last year: .293/39/106 .918 OPS. I am not sure what he will get in the open market, but if the Sox could get him for 6-7M/yr, than I think they should take a look at him as a good stop gap type player(move Lee to fill other weaknesses and sign Alou for a couple Mill less than Lee). Just something to think about.

What is with this obsession with Lowe? I am really getting sick of it. People are justifing Lowe because of his great groundball ratio, but that alone doesn't make him a good pitcher. Why is that hard to understand? Why do people ignore the fact that he had a terrible 5.42 ERA? His peripherals are down right terrible including an opp. BA of .299 and WHIP of 1.61. Not to mention that he has gotten progressively worse over the last 2 years(his 2002 season was a fluke). Yet people ignore these facts and are blinded by the fact that he is a groundball pitcher. Would Lowe be a decent option as a bottom of the rotation starter, and for the right price(under 6M)? Sure, but that isn't going to happen. Saying that Lowe is a better pitcher than Clement is just plain stupid. Why would Clement get BOMBED in the AL? This stuff is also making me sick. Sure there is usually a slight difference between NL and AL, but to suggest that a consistant pitcher with an ERA around/below 4 is going to get BOMBED if he moved to the AL is just plain stupid and holds no water. Clement is one of the top groundball pitchers in the game, and has never given up more than 23 HR in a season, so you don't have to worry about him giving up a ton of HR's with a move to the AL/USCF. So please explain what kind of logic you used to lead you to the conclusion that Clement would get hammered in the AL? I think Clement would be a great option if his asking price is not too high(under 8M). I realize that some people are worried about his health due to the wear and tear on his arm from that nasty slider, but he has remained relatively healthy the past 6 years(169+ IP in each season).

If I am not mistaken, than I remember all the Sox papers saying that the Sox would have the same payroll in 2004 as they had in 2003(under 60M). Yet the Sox saw an increase of about 10M(58M to 68M), so take what the papers say with a grain of salt since it is just speculation at best. My guess is that the Sox will probably end up in the low 70M range(JR probably has a top end set at about 75M).

Julio Castro is a name that caught my attention. At 23(finishing a complete season at high A ball) he is still considered a legit prospect. He had a very dominating season last year. His ERA was high at 5.54, but his peripherals were very good. 52 IP 40 H 18 BB 61 SO - The only problem was that he gave up 9 HR. Next year would certainly be a make or break year for him, but I would like to see what he can do at AA.

I agree...Nixon would be a nice fit in RF if he is healthy. His 2003 season was very impressive. .306/28/87 .974 OPS. Nixon is a complete player, and would add a lefty bat to the lineup. The thing I really like about Nixon is his high OBP. He has a very impressive .367 career OBP(has had a .368 OBP in 4 out of the past 5 years). I wonder what Boston would want in return? If I am not mistaken, Boston has a ton of FA this offseason, so we will have to see who they retain.

I mentioned that the Sox could spend the 75M in a better way. For comparison sake, here would be an example. Diaz and Borchard for Guillen - This isn't a fair deal for Anaheim, but since you use it in your comparison it is only fair that I can do the same. Sign OPerez for about 7M/yr Sign Vizquel for about 3M/yr The lineup is as followed: Vizquel SS Rowand CF Thomas DH Lee LF Konerko 1B Guillen RF Uribe 2B Crede 3B Davis C Too many righties, but 10x better than the lineup you suggest. Garcia Buehrle Perez Garland Contreras The difference between your rotation(with Johnson and Loaiza) versus my rotation(with Perez and Garland) is only an ERA of 3.93(Johnson and Loaiza combined) versus 4.12(Perez and Garland combined). So our rotations are about even. Your bullpen is a little better since you added Julio. However, my bench would probably be better with guys like Gload, ect. So which roster do you think it better for 75M? This only further proves my point that the Sox would be better off going after a starter on the FA market.

That is my entire point. The Sox would have almost no money to address the 5th starter need(not to mention the other needs), and will probably have to stick someone like Grilli or Diaz in that roll because they have few other options. You are being foolish if you think that Loaiza would get close to 15 wins as a 5th starter. There are 4 reasons why. 1) Loaiza is back to his 5.00 ERA career averages(maybe even worse). 2) Have you looked at the offense that the Sox have in your suggestion? It would be one of the worst in the AL, so Loaiza would probably get some of the worst run support in the majors(not good for a starter with an ERA around 5.00) 3) If you only want Loaiza to go 5 innings, than he won't figure in most starts. 4) The 5th starter gets 5+ fewer starts than the 1-4 guys. Loaiza would be LUCKY to have 10 wins given those 4 above reasons(welcome to a team that has other weaknesses thanks to the addition of Johnson). These are issues that you need to look at critically. Please stop overhyping Sox prospects. I would venture that the Angels would prefer a bag of balls over Borchard. The guy has absolutely no trade value. A 25 year old outfielder that has gotten progressively worse in the minors and who looks absolutely lost in the majors(can't even hit his weight) simple won't get you anything but a jock strap, so please don't pretend that the Angels would be GRATEFUL to receive a player like Borchard. Diaz has some value, but got beat up pretty bad in the majors and his stuff looked average at best. Sure the Angels are really looking to move Guillen, but they will get much better offers than garbage like Borchard and Diaz. Lets not forget that Guillen is signed to a reasonable deal, which means half a dozen small market teams would be interested in a realitive bargain like Guillen(increasing his cost in return). If the JR is willing to spend 75M, which is a big if, than I think the Sox could put a better team on the field than the one you suggest. That .280+ BA thing is so misleading that you really should be able to use it. Hairston has put together one full season in his career(hit .233 in that season). That means the offensive juggernaut know as Willie Harris will probably be getting significant PT. This past season was the 1st time in 4 years that Vizquel posted a BA over .280(including 2 seasons with a sub .255 average). Thomas is a big health concern who hasn't posted a BA above .280 since 2000. Guillen is a good player, but not a 4th hitter on a good team. Gload hasn't shown that he can consisnant start in the majors(very small sample size). We will have to see if Rowand's season was a fluke. The power wasn't a surprise, but the high BA raised many eyebrows. Uribe(see Rowand above). Crede is Crede(enough said). Davis is a below average offensive player. It is worth noting that the below lineup has terrible plate disipline. There is a good chance that Thomas would be the only player with more than 60 walks. The power would also take a significant hit. A decrease in OBP(which was already below average) and a significant lose in power would have devasting affects on the offense(Beane would certainly frown on that offense).

I think it would take a little more than your above package. Most teams would rather have 2-3 difference makers instead of a bunch(4-5) of so-so prospects/young players like you suggest. Furthermore, I am a big Gload fan, but thinking that he will put up anything close to what Konerko put up is just foolish(even on the road). Any way that you slice it, Gload is a significant downgrade from Konerko. You make an already weak pen into an extremely weak pen, and haven't you been the one preaching about how a strong pen is a key element to a sucessful team? The current pen doesn't have many proven players, but there are a decent amount of options to fill the back end of the pen(Cotts, Adkins, Diaz, Grilli, Munoz) which allows them to pick the 2-3 that are performing the best. If you trade 2 of those guys, than the Sox have almost no options if the 2-3 remaining guys struggle, thus significantly weaking the Sox pen and creating another hole.

Cheat - On what issue would Cashman disagree with me on? Cheat - Let me get this straight. The Sox shouldn't give proven players 5-6M/yr over 3-4 years. Instead they should continue to morgage the future for 1 year rentals. That plan has gotten the Sox nowhere over the past couple of years(except a bleak future and depleted minor league system). If you think critically about the issue, than you will realize that the Sox wouldn't have to continue to sign FA if they had good prospects to fill some of the holes at a cheap price, but by trading them for one year rentals they don't have that luxery. With the Sox limited financial spending ability they can't fill other holes when they take on big contracts of 1 year rentals, so it gets the Sox nowhere and continues an endless cycle. Something to think about. Besides, a FA pitcher signed for 5-6M/yr will probably be easier to move than Johnson and his 16M/yr contract(assuming that production is realitively similar) if the Sox are out of contension. CWSOX45 - Would you be willing to trade Garland, Rowand, and a top 10 prospect for Johnson(and maybe 4-5M)? The thing that most of your guys are forgetting is that he has a 16M/yr contract. Arizona might eat a little of that contract or take a big contract like Konerko/Lee, but they also have the options called the NYY. I am sure that GS would eat all of Johnson's contract, so Arizona has choices if it doesn't want to eat that much of the contract. Also, can we please get this straight, Arizona isn't moving Johnson as a salary dump, so please quit saying that. The point is that a trade like above(with Johnson adding roughly 9-10M to the current payroll) creates two more holes, not to mention the other exsisting holes(5th starter, setup reliever, leadoff hitter, RF) with no money to spend to address them. If the Sox were an ace pitcher away from winning the WS, than I could justify this trade, but the reality is that the Sox are a .500 team with multiple holes to address and a limited budget. Adding Johnson and neglecting the other needs(as well as creating more needs) would make the Sox a .500 team at best. Why is this so hard to understand? Santo=dorf - Your example proves my point whether you realize it or not. There are literally a dozen teams that would be interested in Vazquez despite his contract if the Yankees are serious about moving him(including the Sox). This helps shows that big contracts can be moved. CWSguy - Sure a top 3 of Johnson, Garcia, and Buehrle would be great in the playoffs. The problem is that there is no way the Sox would make the playoffs if they add Johnson(and his huge contract) while neglecting other holes(and creating new hole by adding Johnson). Beck - You keep suggesting that the Sox HAVE to spend 8M+/yr on a #3 starter, but the amazing depth of quality middle of the rotation starter will dulute the pay that they receive(classic supply/demand). I guarantee that the Sox can get a quality middle of the rotation starter on the FA market for under 6M/yr. Is 6M/yr that bad for a quality middle of the rotation starter? witesoxfan - Replacing Garland with Loaiza is a pretty significant downgrade based on the way that Loaiza pitched this year(and in his career). Who are the Sox going to trade to get Guillen? Will it not create other holes? Are you suggesting that the Sox have an unlimited payroll? You do realize that if a trade of Johnson for Lee, Garland, and a prospect occured, that they would already have a 70M+ payroll? Do you honestly think the Sox would go after a another big FA? I doubt that either the Angels or Baltimore would do those deals. The Sox offense would also be dreadful.

Thats not true. Pitching is always in demand, even so-so pitchers with semi-big contracts. Look at the past trade deadlines and you see numerous examples. Furthermore, with the depth at starting pitching in the FA market, there is a good chance that some quality pitchers will sign for bargain prices(5-6M/yr). I also doubt that the Sox will spend 8+M/yr on a starter since they do already have a large sum of money invested in current starters. It simple makes more sense for the Sox to go this route instead of giving up a bunch of talent(and opening more holes with no money to address them thanks to Johnson's contract) and taking a risk in Johnson(age/injury will catch up with him sooner or later).

I think you are underestimating what Arizona got for Shilling. Sure it didn't turn out as planned, but Fossom and Lyon are not comparable to Cotts and Adkins. Fossom was a pretty talented young lefty who had some sucess in the majors mixed in with some struggles(similar to Garland). Lyon was a young power arm in the BoSox pen who had closer potential(not quite as good as Marte, but closer to Marte than Adkins). De Rosa was one of the BoSox top pitching prospects(Tracey would be a good comparison). So if you want to look at the Shilling trade for a comparison, than it would be similar to the Sox giving up Garland, Marte, and Tracey. Furthermore, Arizona will probably learn from the Shilling trade and request more PROVEN major leaguers instead, so please quit pretending that the Sox can get Johnson for a marginal prospect and a bag of balls. Like I mentioned in a previous post, you brag about how good Johnson is and would be for the Sox, than want to offer Arizona garbage in return. If he is so good, than why would they take garbage for him? Furthermore, as Rex pointed out in the other thread, this isn't a strict salary dump(although they do want to free up some money). Johnson is the only reason that fans go to Bank One Park(trust me I live in Arizona...he is also the only player that most Arizona residents can name on the team). The only way to justify trading Johnson is to improve the team in the short and long term. Finally, you have to also realize that most of the big boys will be after Johnson as well, which would make it easier for Arizona to reject the trash you think the Sox should offer them.