Kenny Hates Prospects

Translation: Everyone is out to get me, the UFC never really did me any favors, I'm going to be a brilliant actor so I don't need to fight, I never wanted to rematch Wand all that bad, yadda yadda yadda. Rampage acts like he was never hanging out with Dana and getting bailed out by Dana and having his ass covered by Dana and being marketed by Dana and having his rematches made by Dana, etc. Dana may be a cocksucker a good bit of the time, but Rampage wouldn't be where he is today without him and the UFC. He'd be unmotivated fighting over in Japan or working Strikeforce cards with only the hardcore fans even knowing who he is. You're a fighter under contract to a fight promotion, and that promotion is not obligated to actually LISTEN to your input much less respect your wishes most of the time. If they give you a fight and you don't take it they can drop you and bury your ass. I'd say the UFC did nothing but great things for his career. He'd never even have a shot at acting if it weren't for them. I don't believe Rampage one bit when he says he's retiring. Rampage has just lost his mind once again. I'm not a fan of his at all, but I do hope he gets some help, and maybe he really should think about retiring pretty soon. He's had quite a few episodes over the last year or so now. Maybe it's just the pressure or something though and he needs to kind of take some time off and get all that straightened out.

^Just read this and was coming here to post it. Here's Rampage's whining in its entirety:

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 04:02 PM) hell if you can throw an 80 MPH fastball submarine from the left side, you've got a chance. It doesn't even have to be from the left side either. Just learn the frisbee like Shingo and then pitch in Japan for a few years. That guy made a few million.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 06:50 PM) Because: we also have a hole at OF, and Crawford would fill that hole very strongly. We could probably get Cody Ross for very little and he'd make our D even better out there since he could play RF. Why would we want to give up soooo much for one year of Crawford just because he's fast? Yes he's a great player overall, but he's not going to put us over the top. He's not the batting champion he was touted as in previous years and his power numbers have a lot more to do with his legs than his actual physical pop. Crawford's bat and legs aren't going to suddenly make our offense fearsome. And actually, Kenny has done a great job adding more speed and contact to our lineup already. Our sluggers however are at the ends of their ropes and we need new ones. I say, take what you'd have to give up to acquire a top-shelf fast guy like Crawford, add a bit more, and then bring in a monster.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 05:27 PM) I love Richie Allen's posts. They say what I always want to say but are not as mean spirited. Misery loves company.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 05:22 PM) The White Sox have been no better since acquiring Peavy and Rios. Granted Peavy has been hurt so it doesn't count but I cannot see any reason for anyone thinking the Sox are in perfect shape for a cakewalk next year. I posted this is another thread, but in 33 starts combined, Colon and Contreras went 8-19. Replace that with Peavy and we're already talking about enough of an improvement to be right there around the division lead. Then put a healthy Freddy in there instead of Richard, Torres, Carrasco, etc. and we're gaining even more ground. Factor in the improvements defensively from our infielders as the season has gone on, and factor in the benefits of a more rested bullpen, and we gain even more ground. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 05:22 PM) This is a team that is 11 games under .500 vs. the AL. AJ and Konerko will be a year older. There's no guarantee Rios will be a big contributor. You can't be sure Quentin will be MVP-esque again. The chances of Pods repeating his season this year are slim. Beckham should be better. Dye will probably be gone, but as bad as he was in the second half, he was equally as good in the first half. People are happy Thome is gone, but equaling his production won't be easy. You can't be sure of a lot of things, but Rios is much better player than he has been this year and his career numbers back that up. He isn't hurt either. There's more reason to expect him to be better than there is to expect him to be as bad or worse. And CQ may be an uncertainty as well, but he's battled foot problems and was still gaining strength after wrist surgery. The odds go up the further back those issues become in the rearview mirror. You can bet Dye's offense overall will be at least replaced, if not improved upon. Dye's numbers have dropped very far. And as Thome goes, we have yet to see what the Sox plan on doing with a DH. We need another big lefty bat to replace him, so we'll see what happens. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 05:22 PM) I would take Kubel and Span in a heartbeat. Cuddyer isn't a bad player either. If Minnesota pitches they are going to be good. Detroit's owner doesn't care about cash, he will spend to win. KC should suck, but also should be improved and they had no problem taking the series with the Sox this past weekend, and the Sox were 9-9 against them this season.Cleveland is bad and probably will remain bad for a long time. Minnesota will hang around but they won't be good enough to beat us. I'm just saying that right now. You can be all pessimistic about it, but we're beating some Twins ass in 2010. And the Tigers I'm sure care about all the money they're paying Bonderman, Willis, Maggs, and Carlos Guillen. And I'm sure all the money they'll have to dole out to build a bullpen is going to concern them too. I'll bet they're also wondering how they're going to replace Polanco's production because he's a free agent. And furthermore, that rotation is a great cause for concern, and with all those bad contracts it'll be hard for them to go out and give big dollars and years to a guy like Lackey to anchor it. The Tiggers are in trouble. They've had their run. QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 05:22 PM) It seems every time the White Sox are favored to win they fall very short. The bullpen needs to be fixed. Maybe keeping it almost as is could be the answer. But you can't count on it. The Sox will need a RF and another player who could play almost anywhere and DH. They will need Quentin to stay healthy and find his 2008 form. I have a bad feeling if they bring Pods back that he will be the player most of baseball thought he was when he had to call KW for a job. I'm not enamoured with Figgins but if the Sox spend money on him, I won't be upset. The other thing is we have no idea where they are going with payroll. Contreras, Thome, Dye, Dotel, MacDougal,Viciedo's signing bonus all off the books. That's almost $50 million. Maybe Jenks goes., that's $55 million. Peavy and Rios add a lot and several raises. They should have some money to spend. But I thought that last winter. Pods shouldn't be back as a regular player. I hope not anyway. I'd rather thank Pods for the contributions, see him get overpaid by some other team, and then bring back Kotsay because he's more versatile. The Sox should have some money but we're not going to find out how much for a few months. Jenks and Paulie could go too. I think we need to beef up the OF defense so that it becomes a strength for us, and we also need to at the very least add a solid lefty to the pen and make sure we have a legit closer if Jenks is gone. We need to become a pitching and defense team, and if we do that, with our staff, we can beat anybody.

QUOTE (Jenks Heat @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 06:20 PM) Realistically Jenks and Flowers for Crawford, Sonnenstine and Navarro. Long term it hurts the catcher position but you get three years of AJ if you give him an extension and Navarro as a back-up. or you move Jenks for the parts Tampa wants. Crawford doesn't need to play center for the Sox. Sonnanstine blows and Navarro would be a backup catcher for us who is collecting in arb despite a horrible 2009 offensive season. Flowers and Jenks for one year of Crawford is nuts. Our main needs are pitching and defense because we need to complement our strength (starting rotation) in 2010. But if we need a lead-off hitter, hell, Getz's rookie OBP is 64 points above his batting average. A healthy Getz hitting .285 could get on at a .350 clip and steal 35 bases with an even better percentage than Crawford has. Why trade an assload for some other guy to do it?

Crawford would be a dumb move because he'll cost a lot and is heading towards free agency. If we really want him we're better off waiting and seeing what the Angels, Red Sox, and Yankees offer him in a new contract before we make a play. You know Crawford is going to test the market. Upton would be awesome to have, but for what he would cost I'd much, much rather go after Adrian Gonzalez and try to work out an extension (he has two years remaining at a bargain basement price after this year). If Upton costs Flowers + Viciedo + Hudson + more (because he will and there's no way just one of those guys is enough), then go after Adrian. Gonzalez would be our lefty bat and he would put the fear of God into opposing pitchers for the next several years, especially next to a healthy CQ.

QUOTE (Pants Rowland @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 08:19 PM) Funny you mention that, because I think you can make a similar argument with respect to all the extra outs needed due to poor defense. Yeah our defense has been atrocious too. It's f***ed up how we can send out a club so solid on paper and then watch them play like the Pirates.

I'll make one more guess here: Brent Morel goes to Oakland as part of a deal for either Craig Breslow or Rajai Davis. Morel seems like the type of player Beane would covet. CJ also seems like a Beane type.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 10:16 PM) Who was the last guy Rodgers was right about? If you find out let me know because I have no idea. All I can recall are the times he's been so very wrong.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 22, 2009 -> 02:49 PM) That was an awesome rant. I laughed at the "I hate this team." Was your last sentence supposed to be in green? If not you are the classic "Wait til next year" kind of guy. Sometimes next year is a lot worse, just ask the Royals. Not saying it will be, but KW is gonna have his work cut out, especially with the Rios/Peavy contracts possibly hindering some other moves. I figured if anyone liked it, it would be you. No, I really have high hopes for the 2010 squad. This division is still going to be trash next year, but the difference is the Sox will be a ton better. The Sox ***SHOULD**** basically walk into the playoffs next season, and if they can get there, our rotation could be the best one in the playoffs. 2010 will be cakewalk. Edit: also the Tigers let Magglio's option vest. They're still paying Bonderman, Willis, etc. and that rotation is definitely top-heavy with little at the bottom. Rodney is a free agent so they'll have to overpay for bullpen arms again, and I believe Lyon is actually a FA too. Zumaya should still be hurt like always. The Royals are the Royals and the Indians traded everyone. The Twins are our only 2010 competition but they'll be in a new park where a lot of their bulls*** won't work anymore. Their rotation isn't as strong as ours by any means and their offense outside of the Big Two will still be pretty lacking.

Rios is going to bounce back big next year and our rotation is going to be STACKED. Great post TBolt.

...which means that if we finish with one of the worst 15 records then we don't have to give up a first round pick if we sign a Type A free agent or two. So that's good. But f*** this team anyway. We're 7 games back with an elimination number of 6 because this team is a bunch of scared little pansies who can't play in the big scawwy Metwodome (ahh poor babies) and they can't hit a bunch of rookies and minor league scrubs either, and it took them like 3/4 of the season to learn how to catch the damn baseball. So f*** them. Now if they can do anything right they'll f***ing lose for the rest of the season to get us better draft position. I hate this team. This division is dogs*** and we could have won it. This whole division should be banned from the playoffs. If the Sox can't win it then no one deserves it. f***. But 2010 is going to be awesome and we're going to win it all then.

Contreras + Colon = 8-19 in 33 starts. That's a full season's worth of starts right there. And I know wins aren't the best stat for rating pitchers, but I'd say that in this case those win-loss numbers are much more indicative of their performances than their ERAs and WHIPs this season. If we swap all that out with a healthy Peavy we're going to be talking about at least 6 more wins, which would put us right in the thick of it as it stands now. Now take a healthy Freddy and replace everybody else and we're talking about a division-winning ballclub just off a legit 5-man starting staff. Add the trickle-down effect where the bullpen sees less work and I think we'd have seen some better performances there as well. The 4th and 5th starters this year have really blown prior to Freddy and Peavy showing up and are a huge reason for where we are.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 07:25 PM) Throw Rios suckage in there too. Aside from the dropped ball in CF, Rios helps us in the field. Even when he's not hitting he can still save runs. Dye OTOH doesn't help at all when he's not hitting. CQ's offensive struggles mean a lot more than Rios' struggles, by FAR. I don't understand why we would acquire a guy who was hitting around .260 or whatever and then expect him to be our offensive savior. Rios is here for defense now and everything else in the future. If anything, Ozzie hasn't been playing Rios enough. Same with Kotsay. When you aren't scoring runs the last thing you're supposed to do is weaken your defense. That's Baseball 101 and Ozzie's still sleeping.

QUOTE (Jeremy @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 06:06 PM) Because a player's previous season is by no means perfectly reflective of how he'll perform the next season... 1. In 9 full seasons Bradley has played 100 games 4 times. He's played over 120 only 3 times. 2. OBP doesn't mean s*** when you're a power hitter not hitting for any power, and you're not hitting for average either, and you can't even run when you get on base, and you can't play the field worth a s***. Argue that if you like, but .257/.378/.397 hitters do not cut it as DH's and they barely cut it at all in the Major Leagues unless you're talking about a C, CF, or SS. 3. "In some previous years" yeah okay. Darin Erstad lit the world on fire in some previous years too. Bradley played in 232 games combined over a 3-year span from 2005-2007 which is a bit more than a season and a half. Then he signed with Texas as a reclamation project, had a career year in a hitters haven, then the Cubs picked him up at max value when anyone who had been paying attention could forsee a major decline. Bradley slugged over .500 3 times in his career and his career mark is .450. And in Texas he didn't slug because he was "relieved of playing in the field," he slugged because he played in a pitchers hellhole with an infield of concrete where flyballs carry. Career AAAA/MLB bench player Ramon Vasquez put up a .795 OPS in Texas the same year, then he fell back to his .237/.344/.289 normal AAAA-ness. 4. No, Bradley at a similar salary to Thome would be a bad option because the lowest career OPS Thome has posted since the age of 22, aside from the ONE season in Philly (where Thome got hurt and missed almost the whole season) which you're cherry-picking in an attempt to bolster a terrible argument, is the .851 OPS this year. Conversely, Bradley has only topped Thome's lowest OPS 3 times in his career. Thome is older but his skill set will last longer than Bradley's will. And on top of that, Thome's 2009 OPS is 76 points higher than Bradley's, and still, despite only getting into 8 games for the Dodgers, Thome has appeared in only 9 fewer games this season than the everyday-playing Milton Bradley. Look at their games played and there is no comparison, so don't try arguing that Bradley is even within 50 miles of Thome's jockstrap in any positive, meaningful category whatsoever, including age-based reliability. Bradley could very well be out of baseball before the Cubs finish paying his absurd contract. In fact, Thome could play another 2 years and Bradley might not make it through 2010. Give him a s***ty start to next season and a well-publicized blow-up and suddenly Milton Bradley is playing in the indy leagues. Careers end that fast. 5. Nearly every contender in baseball, every single year, needs a reliever. A healthy Linebrink posting his usual above-average first half will be wanted by lots of teams if the Sox cover some salary to make the deal more market-friendly. Milton Bradley OTOH is essentially a pinch hitter in the NL and a DH in the AL. It's not very difficult to imagine which player would be easier to move. Add in Bradley's character issues, injury history, and larger contract and it's absurd to think Bradley would be easier to move in a deal than Linebrink. 6. Ugh. Read the post. The attitude is a reason why other teams wouldn't be so willing to take him off our hands should we try to move him. I personally don't care about Bradley's attitude. I'm saying we shouldn't get Bradley because he sucks, he's overpaid, he lacks versatility and therefore value, he's practically immovable without a release, and there's no reason to expect such an injury-prone and statistically inconsistent player to somehow gain about 100 points in OPS just because of a trade. If you remove the overpaid part of the equation, then you still have a guy who sucks, lacks versatility, is practically immovable, is statistically inconsistent, and very injury-prone. No thank you very much.

QUOTE (SouthsideDon48 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 04:59 PM) Here's my predictions of who will get traded away: 1. Jon Link 2. Clevelan Santeliz 3. Stephan Gartrell 4. Jon Gilmore 5. Brent Morel I picked these guys because they're giving me the vibes that they'll be included in packages in trades to other teams. I'm still holding out hope to see Link/Santeliz/Gartrell on the major league team, tho. Thank you for making a list. It's nice when people read the first post of a thread and respond accordingly. You are officially in the running for this: I'd bet against the first two, although they are definite possibilities to be moved like anyone. The reason is that the Sox need a lot of help in the bullpen so I imagine they'll put as many contenders in the pool as possible. But then again if they've already made their decisions they could start cutting some of the depth lose.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 05:08 PM) I think you may be right about Stefan Gartrell and Jon Gilmore. I've got a gut feeling Gartrell will be dealt. Phil Rogers jumped out of the bushes a few weeks ago to call Gartrell possibly the biggest sleeper since Maggs. I'm a little surprised that Gartrell hasn't been added to the AFL roster because organizational hype through Phil Rogers + AFL appearance would pretty much spell Kenny flashing his cards.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 04:30 PM) That's a $53M rotation in 2010. Talk about spending your resources unwisely. There are few players in baseball more overpaid than Carlos Zambrano especially if you move him to the AL. I've always liked Zambrano. He seems like a bit of a headcase sometimes but let's not forget, he's Ozzie's friend, he's a Sox fan, and he beat the s*** out of Michael Barrett. His screaming and pointing would be pretty popular if he were doing it for us in the Metrodome while shutting down the Twins. But for $18M, and with our current rotation getting paid what it is with raises due to Floyd and Danks over time, we just wouldn't be able to afford it.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 02:04 PM) They offered him a one year deal, for less money, when the Cubs were offering him three years, and a higher annual salary. That is pretty much like saying the Sox tried to bring back Robin Ventura. The Rangers offered him a smart baseball deal. It was a lowball offer compared to the Cubs, but that's only because the Cubs are run by a tree full of monkeys.

That's a weird, panicky move by Strikeforce. They'd be better off continuing to promote well-matched fights between C-level veterans and rising stars. The freak show route will get them attention but if they want any staying power they need to deliver quality and showcase the sport. Last I checked, the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, etc. all were outselling the Faces of Death series and regular season games were kicking Jerry Springer's ass. Shock value can cause a bit of a stir at first, but the only way to permanently capture the interest of sports fans is to give them a high-level athletic competition. Strikeforce should be doing everything they can to show the world on CBS that they're not the XFL to the UFC's NFL. But moves like this are confusing, as is the development of women's divisions, when just down the road the PFC is stacked with lighter weight mens fighters that the WEC hasn't signed yet.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) I was just listing guys who I think will be traded, not guys that will be traded for major leaguers. My list consists of guys who need a change of scenery, guys who've exhausted their status as prospects and have nothing left to show, or in the case of Armstrong, may have lost the upper hand to Flowers. I think if you opened up competition for second base between Nix, Getz and Retherford, C.J. would out hit both of them. He's just a tremendous hitter. He put up better numbers in B'ham in one year than Getz did in two. And I like Getz, I just think C.J. is miles better. I see then. I don't think those are really trade candidates though, more like minor league free agents, future retirees, DFA guys, etc. Maybe a couple get traded for small cash considerations or something. I hope you're right about CJ and he gets a shot.

To be fair though, Texas liked him and wanted to bring him back. The people over there said he was a great influence on the other players, so it's not like every team thought he was a horrible guy. I think the main points are that Bradley makes a lot of money, he's a DH-only player, he's having a well-anticipated sucky season outside of Texas, and he'd be very, very hard to trade should we get him and look to move him later. The clubhouse issues don't prove a whole lot because again, the guys in Texas loved him. Have a little pity for a guy who has to put on the Cubbie blue about 200 times per year.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Sep 21, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) AJ was "Clubhouse poison." Jurassic Carl was INSANE, Floyd was a pushover, and Jenks was a punk. People change in our clubhouse, this might be Ozzie's biggest strength The difference is, AJ was a Major League catcher, which we needed. Carl Everett (the second time) was our DH, which we needed because Frank was out. Floyd was a young SP, which we needed. Jenks was a young, cheap power arm, which we needed. I don't see any hole on this club that Milton Bradley would fill other than DH, because we certainly wouldn't want him in the OF, and why would we want a guy who isn't even hitting for power to be our DH? Why would we want to pay even Linebrink's salary to a guy like that when we could probably get Thome back for the same amount? Besides, Bradley is never healthy for a full season anyway. Thome is a better health bet than Bradley is. Linebrink is a sunk cost. We're better off eating that and hoping we get something out of it on OUR field rather than taking on an even worse contract and expecting that player to perform in an even larger role. At least when Linebrink sucks we can - in theory, not practice when it comes to Ozzie - hide Linebrink's ass as the last man in the pen. But if Bradley sucks for us then we still have to play him every day because if we're paying him that much money then we're not going to be bringing in a real DH as a backup plan. And at least if Linebrink suddenly becomes good again he'll be a player who fits an area of need for other teams, whereas Bradley would be basically untradeable to the entire NL and wouldn't be wanted by at least half the AL because of character issues, or intradivisional issues, or because we simply don't want to help out another contender. It's simple: Bradley-for-Linebrink, like Peavy-for-Zambrano, is just the wishful thinking of Cub fans who still haven't realized that unlike Jim Hendry, our GM is not a complete buffoon. The Cubs gave an assload of money to a career cancer with major health issues who just happened to have a career year in the best hitting environment in baseball. Now they're going to have to pay him to play for someone else. Let's just let those Cubbies enjoy their misery.