Kenny Hates Prospects

AJ > Kotsay so this should be pretty easy.

Damn, I'd love to see Nick Diaz vs. Semtex. That would be sick.

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Mar 16, 2010 -> 09:34 AM) 3 years later I still hate Andy Gonzalez' guts. Even if that's not a correct answer to your question. Why does this dude still get brought up all the time? Like anyone actually sat there and watched all those f***ing s*** ballgames that year. He had one 3-error game that was in a way kind of cool to see being so rare, and other than that he just struck out a bunch. So what. His s*** play never cost us anything, in fact, if we would've won a few more ballgames in 2007 then we wouldn't have Gordon Beckham. So thank you, Andy Gonzalez.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 02:12 AM) Tyler Flowers for me if he was on the 25. I don't really hate Linebrink, but I wish he could learn to stay healthy. Awesome post.

QUOTE (Ken Harrelson @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 08:46 PM) AJ's age and his position are going to catch up to him, fast. i hope we either trade him this year or let him go after it. Mercifully, Ken "Hawk" Harrelson 1. Total bulls***. AJ has 2-3 years left at least and if the Sox have any sense at all they'll extend him so we don't have to watch some roided-out return of the Mark Johnson/Brook Fordyce/Ben Davis/Josh Paul/Miguel Olivo/etc. Black Hole of Youth swallow this team for another decade or so. 2. You've finally outed yourself as an impostor. The real Hawk Harrelson loves AJ even more than I do. The real Hawk also lives near AJ in Florida and has been a fan ever since he watched AJ play high school baseball. 3. AJ exemplifies the new era of White Sox baseball. AJ deserves to retire as a member of the Sox organization and then he needs to become a coach so he can show all these little f***ers coming up through the minor league system what it means to wear the black and white. 4. Any "Sox fan" who talks s*** about AJ needs to check the hat on his skull because it probably says Cubs or Twins.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Mar 15, 2010 -> 09:21 AM) I think shiny silver shirts and black parachute pants would be ideal LOL that would be awesome. The Sox should have a "Remember MC Hammer Day" where they do that.

QUOTE (Mattchoo @ Mar 15, 2010 -> 09:53 AM) Would De Aza be a good trade piece to add to any AGon deal? Maybe Alex Gonzalez, the SS.

I love reading the answers so far. Here's mine. Who is your favorite fighter? Tough, but probably Wandy What's your favorite fight? Thinking about it, probably Machida vs. Shogun just because of the controversy. I'm among the few that thought Machida won 3-2, but it was an awesome fight that deserves a sequel, possibly a trilogy, and everybody was talking about it. I love watching Machida and it was so great to see Shogun look truly elite again. Do you remember the first fight you ever watched? If so, what was it? No, rented the first few UFC's at the video store when I could. The UFC was with the other specialty violence stuff and I could only rent it from certain workers that didn't care, like the people who'd let me rent the Shannon Tweed movies and Faces of Death and stuff. Also remember watching some grainy-ass Sakuraba highlights way back when, but I really had no idea what I was watching. Just thought it was cool. Do you remember the fight that got you hooked? If so, what was it? Nick Diaz vs. Diego Sanchez If you could fight any one fighter for honor, who would it be? And how would you want that fight to go? Dan Severn for being the most badass guy in the world. He'd GNP me pretty easily. If you could fight and finish any one fighter, presumably out of dislike, who would it be and how would you end it? Rampage, and Wandy style. If you had the authority to book a 5-fight PPV card, and if you could book any fighter in the world regardless of promotional affiliation, what card would you make? Fedor-Anderson @ 215 catchweight; Shogun-Machida 2; Aldo-Faber; Jon Jones-Mousasi (stealing that one); Florian-Kawajiri If you could make any one change to today's MMA - be it a rule change, time/rounds adjustment, ring/cage adjustment, judging/scoring change, or anything else - what would it be and why? Overhaul the 10-point must system and change the judging criteria, and do it because the current system sucks. Let's say you had a time machine. If you could go back in time and collect one legendary fighter who was then in his prime, and then bring that fighter back to today and have him face a current opponent, what fight would you make, and who would you pick to win? Kevin Randleman vs. Cain Velasquez, and I'd be rooting for Randleman but I'd probably pick Cain. Which current fighter out there now do you think will be known as the best of this current era in 10 years time? GSP Name an athlete from another major non-combat sport that you think could have been a top contender in MMA. Bo Jackson would have eaten people, but he came way too early. If given 12 months of training under a great coach of your choice, how many of Bobby Lashley's current opponents (some nobody, Bob Sapp, Jason Guida, Wes Sims... maybe there's someone else) do you think you would *not* be able to defeat? And keep in mind Jason Guida can't even cut weight without cramping up and quitting, so you might not even have to step into the cage for that one. I say Guida now, but he'd probably beat me in reality. I'd be terrified of Bob Sapp. I think after a year of training I could probably take down Wes Sims though. Which fighter would you be most scared to face if you had to? Jason Miller, because I can't stand that motherf***er and I'd hate to get raped by him. Let's say you're in jail alone with some dude who thinks you're pretty. Which MMA fighter would you most like to have your back? Wandy.

People who don't post in this thread suck, but people who do post in this thread are awesome. That's how you tell the difference between people who suck and people who are awesome. So let's find out who is awesome and who sucks. Here's a series of questions that anyone can answer - hardcore fan or not. You can answer some or all. Hopefully it will give some life to this thread, which is way too important to be buried under a bunch of bulls*** that doesn't even matter anyway. Who is your favorite fighter? What's your favorite fight? Do you remember the first fight you ever watched? If so, what was it? Do you remember the fight that got you hooked? If so, what was it? If you could fight any one fighter for honor, who would it be? And how would you want that fight to go? If you could fight and finish any one fighter, presumably out of dislike, who would it be and how would you end it? If you had the authority to book a 5-fight PPV card, and if you could book any fighter in the world regardless of promotional affiliation, what card would you make? If you could make any one change to today's MMA - be it a rule change, time/rounds adjustment, ring/cage adjustment, judging/scoring change, or anything else - what would it be and why? Let's say you had a time machine. If you could go back in time and collect one legendary fighter who was then in his prime, and then bring that fighter back to today and have him face a current opponent, what fight would you make, and who would you pick to win? Which current fighter out there now do you think will be known as the best of this current era in 10 years time? Name an athlete from another major non-combat sport that you think could have been a top contender in MMA. If given 12 months of training under a great coach of your choice, how many of Bobby Lashley's current opponents (some nobody, Bob Sapp, Jason Guida, Wes Sims... maybe there's someone else) do you think you would *not* be able to defeat? And keep in mind Jason Guida can't even cut weight without cramping up and quitting, so you might not even have to step into the cage for that one. Which fighter would you be most scared to face if you had to? Let's say you're in jail alone with some dude who thinks you're pretty. Which MMA fighter would you most like to have your back? - Edit: I mean like which fighter would you want protecting you. I'm not talking about being mounted here.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 11:29 PM) That was my point earlier. There are guys taking minor league contracts who could easily still play or maybe start on an expansion team. Of course, the team would be bad like the Nationals (maybe worse), but it could be done. It could be pretty surprising when you factor in the expansion draft and the fact that the new club gets the #1 pick in the Rule-5. I wouldn't be surprised if a team could be good enough right out of the gate to beat some of the Royals-type teams out there. In this climate I imagine an expansion team could come up with a pretty decent offense, and maybe not a terrible defense either, but the pitching would be the killer. One positive though might be that teams like the Reds would be able to unload Bronson Arroyos and Aaron Harangs at half-salary because the new team needs veterans, and if that were the case it would give a couple teams out there some more flexibility.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 11:06 PM) "Diluting the talent pool" is the reason I often hear against expansion. I quite frankly, think thats crap. The talent pool went from the United States mainly to the whole freaking world. You probably could have made an entire team out of free agents still available in February. There is enough talent to go around.

QUOTE (mmmmmbeeer @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 06:47 PM) The black jerseys are the best of the bunch, imo. Agree 100%. Most badass jerseys in pro sports. I do like the 1919 throwbacks quite a bit though, too.

And didn't Robin himself say he was never the same after that injury? I don't think Robin would call that injury a "minor setback." IIRC the injury bothered Robin the rest of his career and he didn't get better until he had a cadaver bone inserted.

Steroids.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Mar 12, 2010 -> 12:39 AM) They did just that with Danks/Floyd in 2007. There was obviously something they didn't like about Gio (you don't trade a guy twice before he's even pitched an inning at the big league level otherwise). Looks to me that Gio is going to be the traded prospect that finally comes back to bite us in the ass. I don't think Kenny would have gotten Gio back had he not cared much for him. I think the Sox just saw Gio as being further away than he looked to us as fans and so Kenny decided to get something for him then rather than wait. Danks and Floyd though - that kind of just happened. The Sox brought in Danks to ST to push Floyd, and they wanted Danks to start in AAA with the one open spot going to Floyd, but Floyd looked absolutely terrible and so did everyone else, so the Sox ended up in a position where they had to go with Danks. By the time Floyd came up in '07 to pitch regularly we were well out of the race. Had we been contending that year I'm not sure we'd have stuck with Danks so long or even seen Floyd at all. As it turned out, Floyd finished strong, Danks showed flashes of what he had and showed that he was learning, so Kenny went ahead and traded Garland to give them both full shots. It worked out in the end, but I think we'd be fools to think Kenny expected the Danks and Floyd experiments to go as smoothly as they did. I mean it's pretty rare to see someone like Floyd get turned completely around from a guy who couldn't even take the mound without pissing himself to a 17-game winner flirting with no-no's in the span of a year, or someone like Danks go from a AA starter coming off an average season in Midland to one of the best lefties in baseball also in the span of a year. Kenny liked Floyd and Danks, obviously, but it was kind of a perfect storm scenario that got them where they are IMO and things could have very easily gone the other way.

QUOTE (chisoxfan09 @ Mar 12, 2010 -> 12:06 AM) Maybe he can talk Agon into coming here before we ship him out. Gonzalez doesn't have a NTC so that won't be necessary.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Mar 11, 2010 -> 11:49 PM) That's what I was going to say too. See if the Cubs want him, and pay half his salary or whatever. The only good thing Linebrink has ever done for this team is talked Peavy into coming here. I doubt the Cubs can afford him even though they probably think he's a great pitcher on a sweetheart contract. IIRC Linebrink didn't really talk Peavy into coming here. Linebrink tried to but Peavy said no. Then Kenny traded for Peavy at the last minute and thankfully Peavy okay'd the deal before Linebrink had a chance to come in and blow the save. Linebrink's sales pitch to Peavy was probably like, "Yeah, there's homeless people all over the place, and they just piss wherever they want to, and the South Side is a total dump overrun with gangbangers, and so yeah, you'd really love it here. It's great."

If he starts out the first half like he played in the second half then he'll be put through waivers and sent down to work on things in Charlotte. If he has another strong first half however and then falters in the second, expect the Sox to keep running him out there.

The Ritchie trade sucked because we gave up value for a bunch of crap, but at least that deal didn't come back to haunt us. The first Swisher deal we did the same thing, except that one may come back to haunt us. It's kind of pointless to argue over though, since DLS is probably the only guy who would still be here anyway. Kenny didn't want Sweeney anymore and wasn't going to give him a real shot (remember the Sox playing garbage in the OF in '07 instead of calling up Sweeney?) and Kenny also wouldn't have let Gio give it up like Oakland has done. Gio still needs a lot of work and Kenny wouldn't let that happen here while trying to contend. The only thing to wonder about regarding the first Swisher deal is what might we have gotten from another team for that same package. Not saying we definitely could have done it, but the one I always think back to is Hamilton, since that was the year Hamilton went to Texas for Volquez. In hindsight, a Fields + Sweeney + Gio + DLS package for Josh Hamilton and change would have been pretty sweet for us, and it would have been very hard for the Reds to pass up.

One other thing, too: the plight of the Rays and so forth should be considered, but really, teams like the Rays shouldn't be forcing MLB to make major changes anyway. The game runs off big teams in major market cities and it's these teams that keep the league afloat. The most important clubs are the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Cubs, Sox, Angels, Dodgers, Cardinals, Phillies, etc. and fair or not, they just have to come first no matter what. But hopefully the draft issues can be fixed if nothing else. Also, any realignment that would cut into the amount of Red Sox-Yankees games is never going to work. Both teams wield too much power and would never go for that. And the floating teams idea is pretty retarded too, I mean why reward the Indians for sucking with a bunch of premium games against the Yankees and Red Sox, and then hurt the Twins by bringing the Rays to the AL Central? Besides, how many Indians fans would rather see a bad Indians team get handled by the Yankees when they could potentially see a more competitive series against the hated White Sox? But yeah, the system will never be perfect. The one thing I'd like to see though is a more balanced schedule and I proposed an idea in this thread that would help create that. But no matter what you do, there will always be problems. For example, there will always be Detroit Tigers-like situations, where a club goes from a bottom-feeder that lasts like a decade or more to a top contender and WS team that MLB can hang it's hat on, only to end up swamped with bad contracts a couple years later and facing attendance issues plus very limited FA dollars. And unless the MLBPA wants to allow owners the ability to include buyouts in each year of a multi-year contract, that will always happen. So there's really no answer IMO. K, I'm done rambling on this topic.

QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Mar 11, 2010 -> 01:26 AM) That floating realignment of Bud's is just a terrible idea. Here's what I would do: Keep all divisions exactly the way they are. Shorten spring training by one week. Shorten the season to 150 games, cutting mostly interleague play. Include one "Double-Header Saturday" in June, July and August across MLB. 3 division winners in AL and NL all make playoffs, as always. Top 2 Wildcard teams in each League play a one game playoff to determine who wins the Wildcard. Eliminate the "you can't play a team from your own division in the 1st round" rule. (How stupid is that one?) Extend first round (LDS) to Best-of-7. I don't like the Wildcard because it puts you on completely equal footing with division winners, who deserve a greater advantage/reward for winning their division. You played 150+ games darn it, winning the division is a big deal! In my plan, you couldn't "clinch" the Wildcard. You want to "clinch" something and get an automatic playoff berth? Then win your division! Everybody loves single elimination Game 163s, so why not institute them every year? That would make the Wildcard race more interesting down the stretch, make the playoffs more reachable for small budget teams, and by forcing the 2 Wildcard teams to use their best starting pitcher in the Play In Game, give the division winners a deserved advantage in the LDS. With players staying in shape year round, there's no reason for spring training to be as long as it is. It's just the owners trying to milk as many profits out of spring as possible. The regular season could be cut by two weeks also, to avoid November baseball. For competitive reasons, no playoff series should ever be less than a Best-of-7. Heck, I'd at least take at token look at the Best-of-9 World Series of ol'. The bottom line is there's nothing better than playoff baseball, and, after playing a long season, division winners deserve a longer victory lap. Plus the better team would win more often. Also, you could schedule a day game or two in the World Series, which fans have been clamoring for. With the 2-4 weeks you'd be saving with the regular/pre-season shortenings, you would have some room to play with. (Neutral site World Series? I'm skeptical, but open minded. Maybe 1 or 2 games in each team's park, then the final deciding games Superbowl style. I wouldn't implement that one right now however.) Now, with the shorter season the players would have to accept a modest payscale decrease. I think they would sign off on it, realizing they're still raking in the cash and now have three extra weeks away from work (as long as the owners don't turn it into a cash grab). Revenue changes would have to be carefully scrutinized to keep the balance. All that is somewhat far fetched, but it keeps the integrity of the game while integrating some new and old ideas and greatly improving competitive standards. Thoughts, anyone? I really don't like the two bolded parts. 1) Shortening ST doesn't help anyone. It just makes the players have to work harder when they're there, and it gives them less time to work on things while also providing less time for the players on roster bubbles to prove themselves. The players would just have to get ready earlier. Besides, cold weather cities are just going to have more problems if the season starts earlier. What MLB needs to do is find a way to make ST more lucrative for all clubs in baseball. Perhaps a couple prospect showcase games, maybe some All-Star break type festivities, something like that. MLB needs to get more people to ST. 2) Shortening the season is a terrible idea. Baseball is supposed to have 162 games per season and shortening it just makes records harder to achieve. I don't see any reason why there would need to be fewer games. Realignment and stuff is all way, way down the list of priorites anyway, or at least it should be. The biggest problems in MLB right now have to deal with the arbitration process, the comp pick process, the Rule-4 draft, the lack of ability to trade draft picks, the fact that MLB just looks the other way when teams completely ignore slot recommendations, the problems in foreign baseball academies, the Japanese posting process, etc. The international signing system is probably the most scrutinized of all, but it also might be the most fair system of all because at least all teams have an equal shot at a player if they can afford him. But even this system is bad because dealings are shady, undeserving players get big money, etc. and it's also begging to be exploited by American players in the future. I also think there needs to be a draft lottery so that way teams like the Nationals and Pirates don't automatically benefit from tanking all the time. But there are a ton of issues that need to be addressed before realignment is considered. And really, there's no perfectly fair system. A salary cap would be bad for baseball, and you can't make small-market teams put all their money into on-field talent just to chase .500 when what they really need is superstar prospects down on the farm. There will always be teams like the Rays, A's, Twins, etc. that have to find ways to compete with other higher payroll teams (although Target Field is going to help the Twins for a bit). Maybe an idea would be for MLB to redistribute revenue sharing money in a way where, for example, 20-30% of funds from the top-10 teams in the league go toward subsidizing farm system costs for the bottom-10 teams in the league, and maybe this would help an organization turn over a bit quicker and at the same time help out with the idea of parity. But then there's the issue of s***ty management just pissing away money and teams still not ending up profitable. I imagine as long as baseball is around these issues will be around.

This:

He's not that hard to find, just pay more attention next time you're picking up your food at the drive-thru window.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 10:06 PM) I don't think it took someone in player development to tell that Rogers was nuts in his excitement about Silverio. Rogers was just putting out there what he was fed. The poster IIRC also went so far as to say Silverio wasn't a prospect, not just some overhyped prospect. And really, there are legit guys signed out of Latin America every year that get talked up like Silverio was being talked up, so the hype alone wasn't surprising.

LOL, I clicked on the link above to Silverio's stats, and guess who signed him? Victor Mateo, who was fired for his involvement in the Wilder scandal.