ChiliIrishHammock24

On another board I talk baseball on, we have a minor league thread where we all brag about our teams top prospects. Well, in talking to a Blue Jays fan, he listed the stats for their top 5 2010 draft picks this year (This, after I gloated about Sale and Petricka every chance I get. ). Anyway, he listed like 3 starting pitchers, and they all had like 3-4 starts, but no more than like 9-12 innings. I asked why his starters were relieving, and he said they are starting, but the Jays have a strict limit on 1st yr. draft picks that they can not exceed 50 pitches in a start due to having pitched in HS or college earlier in the year. I thought that was pretty smart (although hard to evaluate a starters outing if he only goes 3 innings or so). Got me thinking about if we had a cap on our starters at all. I mean, I am sure they are not to go over 95-100 pitches, but I was wondering if say, they had a perfect game going, if they would be removed after a number of pitches or if it was just up to the manager on a game-by-game basis. I noticed that Petricka has yet to exceed 5 innings this year, so I was thinking maybe a limit is 5 innings, or maybe it's something like 75 pitches or something.

QUOTE (girlslikebaseballtoo#26 @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 08:41 PM) Petricka to Kanny tomorrow. Awesome. 38 K to 7 BB and 25 H in 34 2/3 IP is very encouraging. So far so great with our high picks. Sale, Petricka, and Wilkins all doing awesome.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 09:32 PM) Yep. If you claim him, you have to be ready to take on his contract. So then how often does "blocking" actually occur if the team may end up getting stuck with the player they didn't even want?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 06:24 PM) This game was played in Citi Field in NYC, which is a pitcher's park. OTOH...we can kinda make the "going to a stronger league and to an even better power hitter's park" argument for why Jackson isn't going to improve. Oh, I thought he was referring to the trade itself and not just this particular game.

So, if a player is claimed off Waivers, can that team decide "Ah, nevermind"? Or can the team who placed him on waivers say "Too bad, we are giving him to you for free". I know they have like 72 hours to work out a trade or whatever the time frame is, but can the team just decide to give him away for free to the other team (like the Rios situation), and the recieving team not be able to stop it? Basically, I want to know if there is a risk to claiming a player you don't intend to actually acquire (like in a blocking situation).

QUOTE (scenario @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 08:23 PM) Sure you can question why. I wouldn't try to deny you that. Your original post said you were confused why this was happening. I was just explaining that Coop requested it. That's why it happened. He has every start for the rest of the year planned out and didn't want to change things around because of the double-header. That might sound like a routine normal thing to do, but I think it's pretty significant. Because it means they're targeting who they want to line up against certain teams late in the year (like the Yankees in late August and the Red Sox in September) ... which is pretty exciting when you think about it. Ok, now THAT makes sense to me. Thanks.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 07:31 PM) Some other things worth mentioning on waiver trades... Teams waive pretty much every single player on their roster during August. This is done to mask the players that they are looking to trade. It is also done because each team can only claim so many people per day. I also believe you can only waive 5 people per day. I think it's 7.

QUOTE (scenario @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 08:00 PM) Coop met with Ozzie. Showed him a schedule he put together for the rest of the year, and said to make it work he wanted someone from the minors to handle the 2nd game this Tuesday. Ozzie said OK. End of story. There was no debate. I don't understand why this matters. I made a case for why I think it should be a certain way, not trying to convince Ozzie or Kenny to do it that way. It was quite obvious that Torres would be pitching on Tuesday when they announced Jackson to pitch on Wednesday yesterday. Just because a decision has been made doesn't mean I can't question why.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 07:12 PM) Conor Gillaspie, 2008. Hmm, you're right. I forgot about September call-ups though. Sale should be up this month.

QUOTE (flavum @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 07:11 PM) It's already been decided. Freddy is going to get extra rest, and start Thursday. Buehrle and Torres will go Tuesday, Jackson on Wed. Starting Friday, the rotation for the rest of the season should be Danks, Floyd, Buehrle, Jackson, Garcia. Yeah, we already know that.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 06:59 PM) Kotsay Has anyone from this years draft been called up to the majors already? This story about Sox promising Sale majors in August is dead on so far. I don't think so. In fact, I can't even think of the last person to play in the majors the same year he was drafted.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 06:41 PM) Because it's the only way to keep someone from having to pitch on short rest. Garcia + Buehrle (both on normal rest) Jackson D1 Floyd Buehrle or Garcia (either one on 3 days rest - this is the one we're trying to avoid) Garia or Buehrle (normal rest). I would rather have Buehrle or Jackson pitch on 4 days rest vs. Baltimore, than then Torres pitch vs. Detroit. I would do.... Tuesday - Buehrle & Jackson (6 days rest) Wednesday - Garcia (6 days rest) Thursday - Danks (5 days rest) Friday - Floyd (5 days rest) Saturday - Buehrle or Jackson (4 days rest) Sunday - Buehrle or Jackson (5 days rest) Have then both pitch on Tuesday, and whoever has the shorter outing of the two would pitch Saturday vs. Orioles, and the other would pitch on Sunday. I just think a Buehrle or a Jackson on 4 days rest would pitch better vs. the Orioles than Carlos Torres would against the Tigers. Plus, it would save having to send someone down for Torres to come up.

QUOTE (justBLAZE @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 03:40 PM) The more I think about it and thanks to Kalapse I think, Torres will be called up to pitch the DH, Viciedo will be send down, and after the Torres gets sent back down, Teahen will be back. It still confuses me as to why we need Torres to pitch in the DH.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jul 31, 2010 -> 09:07 AM) He should be DHing every night unless it's a really really tough righty (give Kotsay a start or two per week). Andruw Jones is just horrible at the plate. He is not horrible at the plate, he is just HR or nothing. Better than Kotsay's single or nothing.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 05:11 PM) The Sox made Edwin Jackson wait in a hotel room instead of coming to the ballpark till 3:00 ET while Kenny worked the phones. The Sox were clearly making efforts to move him. Good. I hope Edwin plays with a chip on his shoulder now trying to prove to Kenny that it is a GOOD thing that they couldn't work out a deal to trade away EJax.

QUOTE (AWhiteSoxinNJ @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 04:01 PM) AL vs. NL. Hitters park vs. Pitchers park. Let's all relax a bit before putting Hudson in the Hall of Fame. Umm what? Chase Field is NOT a pitchers park....

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 04:16 PM) And that is your right. Just expect to catch s*** for it all year too. I shouldn't have to, but sure, if it makes you guys feel better to be a broken record, then fine.

Gio dominating us today makes me hate Nick Swisher even more.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 04:02 PM) Umm, I can understand. But then you came in this thread with your THE BRIDGE schtick, so you have to expect to take some s*** for that. How? It was a thread about Lillbridge kicking ass today, and that's what I call him. I would have called him the same thing during the game today after his 3-run triple had I been at my computer at the time. If using his nickname is "my schtick" then fine, I'll be using "my schtick" all year with Hot Fire, The Bridge, Q-uperman, G-Force, and any other nicknames I may start using this year.

Teahen is 1/2 with 2 BB. He is 4/6 with 2 BB overall in 2 rehab games.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 03:55 PM) Jeesh, take a joke buddy....it obviously does get under your skin... It gets under my skin that every time I call a player a name anything other than their birth name 3-4 people comment "Such a dumb name" "stop calling him that" "give it up". Yeah, THAT gets under my skin because it's annoying. Don't like any of the nicknames i say? Great, sounds like it's pretty easy thing to ignore. I ignore every time I see the "Klutchsay" nickname. I think it's pretty dumb, but you know what, if it makes that person happy to say it, then that's fine, I don't need to start a fight.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 03:48 PM) Admit it, self-appointed nickname guy, the Stealth Elf is exponentially better than The Bridge... Why should I care? I don't freak out about what other people want to call players, so why does everyone else have to? Call him Lent Brillibrige for all I care, and it won't get under my skin.

I find it laughable that not only did we have to give up Hudson for Jackson, but Holmberg was to be added from our end as well. Insult to injury.

FEAR THE BRIDGE!

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 1, 2010 -> 03:22 PM) I sort of agree. Not a great game. If it wasn't for The Bridge smashing the ball to right, and Carson missing the ball by a good 2 feet, it would be a very gut wrenching 9th inning right now.