CyAcosta41

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 12, 2014 -> 12:13 PM) Poor guy is Ceranno. Can't hit the curve ball. I believe it's more problems with the down-and-away slider. He hits the high breaking pitches fine. Just like everybody else. Except, unlike everybody else, he doesn't have to barrel it up for the ball to go a long, long way. For Jose, it's all about adjustments. He should NEVER swing at the down-and-away sliders UNLESS he has two strikes. Otherwise, let ... it ... go. Most pitchers can't get that sh*t over with regularity, anyway. Abreu is very, very good already ... and he's dealing with major league pitchers and scouting reports who are trying everything to get him out. If he makes the necessary adjustments -- and he seems to be the quick study that most of us could only hope he'd be -- he has the chance to jump from very, very good to simply incredible. This signing/contract might very well go down as one of the biggest steals ... EVER.

Gordon is such an enigma. Count me as one that was carried away with him when he first came up. I'm experienced enough that I didn't go "all-in" in the hype. But, I also didn't think that the Michael Young or even (gasp) Paul Molitor comps were completely laughable. In hindsight, clearly they were. One never makes comps like that without a minimum of 2-3 years of consistent performance. That said, Gordon has NEVER looked better at the plate than he's looked since he's come back from his DL stint this year. The annual "my mind and process is good" puff piece seems different when it's now coupled with good health. And perhaps the real maturity that baseball history shows DOES happen for some guys 5-6 years into their career. The big thing to me is that while (like all hitters) he'll have streaks good and bad, at the moment, he rarely if ever looks OVER-MATCHED. And lord knows for long stretches, if not entire seasons, over the past 2-3 years he's looked over-matched. Against top starters, against the best closers, he looks capable of getting good cuts and squaring up balls. Dude has broken our little Sox fan hearts before. And certainly could do it again. I see the argument about selling when the stock is at least slightly high (compared to where it's been). On the other hand, the GB of the past 4-6 weeks has been the GB we've been hoping to see for so long now. Now that he's returned, do we really want to get rid of him? Especially when guys like Semien, Micah Johnson, Sanchez, and their ilk are no sure things either. I'd listen to offers. But, I wouldn't give him away. It would take a solid offer for me to consider it. And I'd have a lot of anxiety about it. (Not to get into an extended argument about his D ... which gets a lot of play on Soxtalk ... but I think he's overall better than most think he is. Sure, his range isn't all that good ... but he's smart, sure-handed (generally), turns the DP with the best of 'em, and really does have an excellent arm at second.)

QUOTE (Feeky Magee @ Jun 3, 2014 -> 05:03 PM) Still resigned to Aiken-Rodon going 1-2. Anything else would be a nice surprise. I'm with you. Lots of mis and disinformation this time of year. Smokescreens. Perhaps less important in baseball than in sports where trading of draft picks is possible, but as a GM, you're arguably not doing your job unless you play the smokescreen game. You're certainly not having as much fun with it as you could. I suspect strongly that pitchers go 1 and 2. It wouldn't shock me if Kolek was the Astros pick. It would be such a win if position players go 1 and 2. The team that's horrendous with position players, but damned good with pitchers, getting the chance to take their preferred guy -- THE GUY -- at 1-3! It's also the only REAL way we'd ever know who the chosen one REALLY is. If one or more pitchers go BEFORE 1-3, then the post-draft statements from the Sox tell us exactly nothing. If they're taking the first pitcher, their actions will say everything! I can't wait! PS ... Unlike some, I won't freak if we take Nola ... no matter what the circumstances. Dude is SERIOUSLY underrated. He may not have #1 ceiling, but he certainly has #2 ceiling (which is VERY valuable). And he's arguably a lot likelier to actually reach that ceiling -- and quicker -- than any of the Big Three is likely to reach theirs. Arguably. Everything about the baseball draft is "arguably."

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ May 30, 2014 -> 05:11 AM) Will the real Gordon Beckham show his face? 2014 OPS 1.177 vs. lefties (30+ AB's), .655 vs. righties 2011-2013 .592 vs. lefties, .683 vs. righties 2009 .890 vs. lefties, .755 vs. righties The numbers against righties have stayed within a 100 point range/spectrum for most of his career, but the real dramatic fluctuations have always been against left-handers. Is it a troubling sign for him going forward his numbers against righties look so average/pedestrian? That's a huge differential between the two sets of numbers. Sure ... you can look for troubling signs. You can also see the "glass half-full" aspects of it. I'm far from a professional in this field, but I've always enjoyed studying the Science of Hitting, both in my own playing days and as a true hardcore fan. With Beckham's hands-centric style of hitting (and he is what he is ... that's not going to change), he SHOULD always be a lefty masher ... that is, UNLESS he gets pull happy and tries to yank left-handed offerings to his pull field. In 2009, he just wore out that right-center gap. THAT is his strength. He's capable of pulling the ball with power too, but with his swing that should only be on pitches right on the corner (or even a bit off the plate). Everything else he should be taking back up the middle and to right-center. The glass half-full? He's doing that. Sure, his numbers against lefties are going to regress somewhat. But don't discount the fact that his overall confidence (golly ... everybody likes to feel good about themselves) will help him get back to his best possible numbers against righties too. The guy is too stiff and perhaps a little too high-maintenance psychologically to BE Michael Young (as many had once hoped), but if he plays to his own strengths, his way, he has the physical talent to be a consistent .280, 15-20 HR, 30-2B type. That's solid-plus for a MI. Good stat catch, Caulfield.

QUOTE (Melissa1334 @ May 26, 2014 -> 07:30 PM) to me that isnt the biggest problem, the slot money, its the future money if he pans out. its the year to year arb and hitting free agency. no quintana/sale type deals is what i mean I've been saying exactly this for quite a while now. Subject to the current rules that reigns in Boras a lot more than before, plus the absolutely huge financial risk of going back to school (others have talked numbers about this, so I won't take up bandwidth going through it again, Boras WILL be a pest and make the Sox life miserable in the initial signing. But, realistically, he can only do so much and Rodon would be extremely likely to sign. The elephant in the room is that IF Rodon pans out (and you would hope they expect the 1-3 pick to pan out), then you know for a certainty -- a CERTAINTY -- that Boras will get Rodon to the open market (unless Rodon changes agents or puts his foot down). Everything about the one contract approach is diametrically opposite to the Chairman's way of doing business. I'm convinced that they would prefer ANY other reasonably equivalent player who didn't come with this rather sizable zit on his Bor-ass. But there's the rub. It's entirely likely that if Rodon is available at 1-3, there is NO reasonably equivalent player. The Sox clearly run scared of H.S. pitchers. That might be wise too. And, sure, it might be that despite being scared, they could be secretly salivating over either Aiken or Kolek. All evidence suggests that Hoffman might have been their college arm of choice, but even with incredible advances in TJ-surgery, that's a monster risk to take at 1-3. So, Rodon very well might be the runaway best arm in the draft, the only other option being going for the next tier of college arm, and using limey underslot savings to improve the draft generally. Of course, they could also go position player too. Unfortunately, wouldn't you know that the likely best position player is Jackson -- also a Boras kid! So the same one and done concerns apply. They COULD do what the Cubs are rumored to be doing -- grabbing the Pentecost (sp?) catcher kid underslot, but if you do that, I'm sure this org would prefer to go the underslot route from a pitching perspective. After the fact, wouldn't you love to administer truth serum to get past the public explanations and find out what was really being discussed by the brain trust?

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 23, 2014 -> 01:07 PM) Again, none of those guys are comparable to Rodon getting drafted at 3 (assuming you meant Jered which was the biggest fiasco ever but still not comparable). Boras will pull shenanigans and probably not sign until the last minute, but he's not risking his client who has already lost mph on his pitches back to school on so little monetary improvement when he's the 3rd pick already. No I meant Jeff Weaver. The Sox had that 5-6 year period when they were constantly getting bit in the butt by Boras -- not signing draft picks Jeff Weaver, Bobby Seay, Bobby Hill; getting obviously used for leverage (in a more extreme way than usual) on the A. Rod to the Rangers FA deal. I've never said (nor do I think) that the Sox will simply avoid all Boras clients. Period. But knowing my Sox history, plus knowing more than a little bit about Reinsdorf the businessman (from my own contacts in the commercial real estate world), I peg him squarely in the "fool me once (or four or more times), shame on you ... fool me again, shame on me" camp. It's my personal belief that a Boras-connection will always work as a tie-breaker against a given player. Tie-breakers wouldn't be needed if Rodon were clearly lapping the pack. However, plenty of people have him falling back to the pack. And, therefore, why take the risk with Scottie-boy (who puts 2-3 of his players in bad situations each and every year). That said, I'm not all that concerned about Rodon and initial signability. Rodon and Boras would both have to be completely goofy to expose Rodon to that level of risk. In this year's draft, I'm mostly concerned about the certainty that Rodon (if he's the level of success that we'd hope he is) would be a one and done contract guy. Is that a long way away? Sure. But you'd be drafting your highest profile first rounder in years knowing what's coming. You ONLY do that if you think the player is significantly better than your other options. As good as he is, it's difficult to say that he's THAT.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 23, 2014 -> 12:34 PM) Seeing the route that Appel took, I don't think you can fairly make that assumption with what we know about this situation. Bingo. And that's why the signability issue is NOT overblown. Because with Boras (Appel, Bobby Seay, Jeff Weaver), the likelihood of shenanigans in the original signing process is exponentially higher than with any other agent. Given the rarity of a 1-3 pick for this franchise, I don't believe the Hahn/Reinsdorf braintrust will risk drafting a Boras guy UNLESS he's clearly THE guy. As good as Rodon is and MIGHT be, there are many who have concerns about him beyond any Boras-factor, mostly centering around over-reliance on his slider and whether his overall repertoire is "all that" if the slider isn't a part of the equation. Then, there's that "second contract" thing. The Boras approach of virtually always going to the open market couldn't be more opposite from the Sox business plan. Again, I think this raises an enormous red flag about the player, UNLESS he's far and away THE guy. And I don't think the Sox believe he is. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Personally, I would be shocked if Miami doesn't select Rodon if Houston passes on him. My feel is that the Sox dream draft is Rodon and Kolek off the board at 1-1 and 1-2 (in no particular order). For different reasons, I don't think the Sox want either one of these guys. If that's the case, then Rodon/Kolek being gone give them the FIRST pick in the draft (subjectively speaking). We're not going to be here often (if at all) during Hahn's tenure. I sure hope we get it right.

QUOTE (southside hitman @ May 8, 2014 -> 01:02 PM) I think there is a chance that we don't want anything to do with Boras and go way underslot with our favorite of the remaining college arms. It would make me sick, but I bet it's being considered. Agreed. I have to imagine it's not only being considered, THAT decision (to avoid the Rodon-Boras tandem, and the complications it brings for (a) signing and (b) long-term control) might have already been made. I say *might* because IF the Sox have identified Rodon as an absolutely superior talent that they're lucky o get at #3 (instead of a strong talent, but one with Liriano like concerns), then I do think they'd go for Rodon despite the Boras factor. I've never once said they run scared of Boras. Instead, I suggest that the Sox are a cerebral organization and it would be foolish to at least not consider any Boras-factor in the overall decision making process. All that said, the way things are shaping up (Rodon pitching particularly well; Hoffman going down with TJ), I can't imagine BOTH the Astros and Miami passing on Rodon (especially because of Rodon's Miami connection). I think Rodon and one of the prepsters are gone when the Sox are on the clock. Then, it's simply a matter of how much they really and truly like the remaining prep arm available. If they don't -- or if they're truly avoiding prep arms no matter what (and I can't really believe that) -- then an underslot college arm play might be the direction, or, taking the first offensive player (have to imagine that's Jackson). Anyone have a Time Machine? The wait is getting tough

For my money, Dan Bernstein (AND Terry Boers) are Exhibits A and B proving that human beings can have such different tastes. When I'm in my car and I accidentally switch to the Score during their show, I trash what's left of my rotator cuff attempting to change the station (to ANY station) before another word assaults my ears. Count me in with those who think they're horrible. The premise of their show (as best as I can tell) is that it offers a unique combination of sports acumen, entertainment, and humor. I don't see any of those things. Not a one; not at all. Then, go one step more and witness the smarmy and often offensive way they abuse their loyal minions and the occasional jamoke who calls in without being in on the joke ... and wwww. I need a shower. It's like walking into a circus freak show. Clearly they've survived because somehow (albeit inexplicably to me) they bring-in the numbers. As I said, we all have different tastes. My dislike for this gruesome twosome is pretty intense. I've gone so far as to boycott their advertisers just because I feel better knowing I'm not feeding the beast.

QUOTE (ptatc @ May 6, 2014 -> 06:45 PM) Wow. We may be the only two left that think this way. Really? With absolutely no intention of offending anyone, I've always believed that the VAST majority of hardcore fans, including all those who have played at the high school level and beyond, prefer everything that goes with the chess-match aspect of baseball over cro-magnon "piñata ball." And that's despite the media's interest in glorifying the shameful McGwire-Sosa-Bonds "chicks dig the long-ball era." The big bombs are an amazing part of the game. I enjoy the occasional slugfest too (as long as my guys win). But, baseball is so much bigger and richer than just that. You're not exactly the only two left.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ May 2, 2014 -> 10:38 AM) The best case scenario for the White Sox if Rodon wants 1-1 money is him going 1-1 to Houston. That guarantees the Sox either Aiken or Kolek. My feeling, exactly. I think the wise Rick Hahn is talking up Rodon at every opportunity precisely because he wants nothing to do with him. And, more accurately, nothing to do with the Scott Boras Freak Show. For those that say the new rules diminish the Boras-factor -- could not disagree more. If Rodon was in a class of his own, with no warts (and I don't think either of these things are NOW true), and you had the opportunity to draft Rodon at 1-3, then you do it and deal with Boras the best you can. But, there are other options. Good options. Hahn is an attorney. There's this concept known as "negligence per se" ... meaning, more-or-less, negligence so very obvious it's universally recognized as negligence. A franchise who rarely has a shot at a #3 pick who then hitches their wagon to the Boras Mule ... man, if that isn't negligence per se, I don't know what is. Boras could be a thorn in THREE (3) related, but conceptually different ways: 1 -- Demanding 1-1 money (or more) at 1-3 ... and if the Sox don't pay, they lose the pick when he goes back to school (getting next year's #4 pick is NOT a valuable consolation prize in my world). 2 -- Same as above, but the Sox pay. And paying 1-1 at 1-3 seriously impacts signability and overslot candidates for the rest of their draft. 3 -- THIS ONE CONCERNS ME THE MOST -- with Scott Boras in charge, you have absolutely zero future chance of locking in a quality young arm long-term as they've done with Sale and Q ... and as the Sox need to do going forward to compete financially. Personally, whenever I think of this draft, I assume there is NO Rodon. Since the Sox (IMO) want no part of all of his baggage, he may well as not exist. So, best case for the Sox is that he goes 1-1 or 1-2, then they're getting the SECOND pick in THEIR universe, choosing from amongst Kolek, Aiken, Hoffman, or even Jackson (I know that he's a Boras guy too ... but very different situation), LESS whichever one of the above is off the board. Can't wait for this draft already!!!

For me, the mystery of Erik Johnson's "stuff" has been the great unanswered question of this young season. From his first pitch in his first 2014 regular season game, you could see that he had just a shadow of last season's stuff. I had expected BETTER stuff than late last year because all reports had been that he was already running on fumes when he had his late season call-up and we could expect more from him. The guy has alway been regarded as a guy with "plus" overall stuff -- not devastating, but certainly "plus" -- featured in an overall repertoire that included a heavy 93-95 FB, a sharp slider, and, at times, a hammer curve. All that combined, and factoring in a workhorse frame, the near unanimous consensus was that we had a like #3-#4 on our hands, with some thinking he could turn out to be a #2. Instead, what we've seen all year this year (even in his one better results start where he flashed marginally better stuff, but still a lot of smoke and mirrors) wasn't a guy with "plus" stuff, but instead a guy with closer to (gasp) Axelrod stuff, who had to get by on pin-point location and competitive drive. Axelrod in that rare game or two has a chance of surviving with that, but it's difficult for a guy like Johnson to be a bulldog when it's clear his confidence in what he brings is gutted. Until Robin's comments that indicated the Sox are also wondering where that "stuff" went, the Sox and all the covering writers had been completely silent on this pretty obvious problem. Sure, I'm also worried that we may be dealing with an injured arm here. But I'm somewhat comforted to learn he hasn't been sitting 88-90 because the Sox wanted him in that range for better movement (or whatever). Come back, Erik Johnson's stuff!

Love this particular type of move for this particular type of team (i.e., a team with budget issues who happen to have a unified franchise pitching philosophy with a good track record of success). Any time you can bring in a big arm (a 93-95 mph type) with decent control -- Noesi qualifies both ways -- bring him in and see if your in-house expertise can teach him a cutter and/or change, or possibly refine his mechanics. Sometimes the differences between two good arms is little more than minor differences in repertoire, repeatability of mechanics/pitches, and, of course, the confidence that comes with having success. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" I have no problem with the White Sox being the Statue of Liberty for wayward pitchers. Bring 'em all in. Give us first shot at 'em. Sure, 75%+ won't amount to much, but if you can recycle junk into value once a year, you've just bought yourself a lot of extra spending money for use in other ways. P.S. Obviously I'm being somewhat hyperbolic. Don't bring 'em ALL in. But absolutely bring many in. It's not as if our system is so deep with homegrown talent that we're eliminating opportunity for our own.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Apr 25, 2014 -> 11:40 AM) I got a chuckle outta this. Thank you, Scott Carroll. You too, SCS. And poof ... I'm instantly a Scott Carroll fan, pulling for this dude to do something good with this unexpected opp in the Bigs. Baseball needs creative, funny, and good guys (okay, given that he's the first two, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt on the third). Heck, the world in general needs those things too. Thank you, Scott Carroll.

It would be unlikely -- historically unlikely -- for the two H.S. kids to go 1-1 and 1-2. But suppose they did ... and the Sox had the option to choose between Rodon and Hoffman? First of all -- GREAT problem to have. We know the Sox lean in favor of more proven college pitching over high school pitching. The Sox rarely have the opportunity to draft this high and their "be competitive each year" approach makes it unlikely they're drafting this high very often, if ever. Even if the Hahn regime is new, the others (KW, JR, etc.) are still involved, especially with something so important to the franchise. This is a team that has traditionally been VERY conservative about pitching (other than being somewhat more open-minded about pitching styles -- see, Sale, Peavy, Danish). Given that, I simply can't see them taking a huge gamble on a H.S. pitcher when they also really like some of the college arms. So, if that's true, it's Christmas Day for the Sox if Aiken and Kolek are off the board and they can choose between Rodon and Hoffman. Nationally and even here on Soxtalk, both college pitchers have their defenders and detractors. While Rodon may garner more over-the-top superlatives than does Hoffman -- (a) it's not as if Rodon doesn't have his critics (and more are popping up all the time); and (b) Hoffman has many very strong boosters as well (with the Verlander comps; the #1 starter stuff comments; the workhorse body/arm comments). If this is truly the choice -- Rodon vs Hoffman -- if I were the betting man (that I am), I'd lay good money that the Sox take Hoffman. And with very little discussion. Lots of reasons/feelings for this, the biggies being: (1) I think the Sox love the workhorse frame concept, all other things being equal; (2) the Boras factor (IMO) is bigger than most people will admit -- they won't totally steer clear of a Boras client, but it's undoubtedly a big-time tie-breaker in close calls (Boras is a negative not only for the initial money demands, but also because of the certainty that he's going to try to get his client to the open market at the very first opportunity -- this last point is absolutely contrary to what the Sox are setting themselves up to do); and (3) the Sox truly need the right-handed stud (Hoffman over the L.H. Rodon) to pair with lefties Sale/Quintana (anticipating people saying, you don't care about that with a draft pick -- I believe you DO care when you're talking about a #3 pick, especially when that #3 pick is a college pitcher, someone who you're drafting because you believe him to be a fast-rising stud). Anyway, just my take. Reasonable minds can and will differ.

QUOTE (Vance Law @ Apr 18, 2014 -> 03:40 PM) And the Phillies and the Yankees. As I didn't think there would be a database of these occurrences, I thought I had to rely on games I actually watched. Sox games. But alas: http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/fieldPitch.shtml sort by year. My favorite- Vance Law pitched 8 innings in his career GREAT resource. My favorite is the immortal Mario Mendoza (he of the .200 B.A. "Mendoza Line" fame -- played parts of 9 years in the Bigs and 5 times his B.A. was under .200). Nice to know that there is a Mendoza Line for ERA as well -- he had 1 appearance, pitched 2 innings, 3 runs, so a 13.50 E.R.A. As many others have said, this kind of problem, happens often in exactly this kind of setting -- hotly contested game, playing match ups in the late innings frequently, then running out of pitchers because the game winds up going unexpectedly long. IMO there is shared blame for this -- on the one batter, one walk pitchers for ... SUCKING. And on Ventura, not for this happening in general (because it can, will, and does happen regularly in the Bigs), but because his refusal to have bullpen roles makes it much more likely to happen. We may never have got to extra innings if Lindstrom had pitched the 9th. As presently constituted, nobody not named Webb or Lindstrom should EVER see the 8th or the 9th. Then, we really need a designated long reliever on the staff (Axelrod or similar). If the dude doesn't pitch early because of the blowout, he's almost always available as the last guy out of the pen in just this kind of game. Once we blew through all the other relievers, the long man pitches as long as necessary 5, 6, 7 or more innings ... whatever it takes. My biggest problem with RV as a manager isn't that he makes the occasional mistake, but I don't have great confidence that he's actually LEARNING from him mistakes and making adjustments.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Apr 15, 2014 -> 10:18 AM) If he's going to improve, it's going to be on recognizing ML breaking pitches. I don't think he can do that in AAA because he won't be seeing those high quality pitches. Sin duda, dude. Spot-on. To me, part of the "art" (as opposed to "science") in baseball is having a feel for the subtle distinctions in this great game. You simply can't paint with such a broad brush and lump everyone together, as if meaningful differences aren't there. Specifically, while certain players have absolutely been "rushed" to the bigs, to their detriment, you can't say the fast-track is wrong for everyone. There is a long history of a narrow subset of players -- players with solid fundamentals and high baseball IQ -- who are best served learning what it takes to be an effective MAJOR league player by actually playing against MAJOR league competition. Marcus clearly has advanced strike zone understanding and a simple. workable, and (my opinion) sustainable line-drive stroke. Eminor's cited stats conform to what I see. His rookie deficiencies --and they're relatively minor and absolutely correctable -- requires that he continue to battle against and sometimes struggle against MAJOR league competition. We'd learn absolutely nothing by him putting up another round of 2013 style numbers in the minors. One of the few beauties of this type of rebuilding year is that there is no reason that the Sox can't give him this opportunity to learn on the job -- just as they're doing or were planning on doing with Eaton, Abreu, and Avi. All of these players are different (as players always are), but the theory of having the luxury of learning on the job applies equally to all of them. I think one of the pleasant surprises of 2014 is that Marcus Semien has worked his way into the company of Eaton, Abreu, and Avi (AGAIN, for his particular skill set). Hopefully he'll be able to play plus second base, or POSSIBLY at least adequate shortstop, and the Sox might have a really solid middle infielder for the next 6-8 years.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 15, 2014 -> 07:41 AM) Well, a 63 win season is a pretty solid black mark overall too. I'm one to lurk on message boards, occasionally post to discuss, but rarely debate. That said, this one really surprised me. Really? Do you really think RH deserves ANY of the blame for the 63 win debacle that was 2013? That wasn't simply a volleyball hovering over the net and you found it impossible not to spike (truth being irrelevant)? If you really think 2013 is a a "pretty solid black mark" AGAINST HAHN, then I have to say I couldn't disagree more. Kenny, Jerry, Coop, Manto, the entire coaching staff, and every player who played on last year's deserve a heckuva lot more blame than Hahn for 2013. If there was anyone who ever inherited a complete mess, it was Rick Hahn. He had little to no ability to do anything about 2013, other than take his lumps and stay true to a sensible, long-term plan. There would have been plenty of GMs who might have paid dearly for some minor 2013 improvements which would have cost a lot more in the long run (in terms of locking into silly long-terms deals with players who simply didn't long-term matter). If anything, I think Hahn deserves a heck of a lot of credit for "taking it like a man" in 2013, so that he could best show his stuff going forward. Not every sound baseball decision works out. Sometimes you square up a ball and line out hard to a fielder. But, that's infinitely more desirable than doinking one with a bad swing and winding up on base. One is sustainable and eventually leads to success; the other are doinks. LOVE having Rick Hahn as the Sox GM. The likelihood of a 2013 type mess is what opened the job for him. Blame him if you will, but I don't, and I'm happy to let it dirty him up a little if it means that it enabled the Sox to have a really good GM for the long haul. For my money, Hahn has been truly impressive in his short time on the job.

Such angst, my White Sox fan brothers. I know some of you are youngsters. But, for me at age 55 -- in no way thinking I'm speaking for anyone else but me -- I try to spend AT LEAST the first month of every new baseball season enjoying the game, focusing on the positives I can spot (instead of the negatives which any seasoned fan can invariably spot), and basically just renewing a life-long love affair with the great sport of baseball. Why deprive yourself of a period of pure joy? There's plenty of time to strategize, and analyze, and criticize. In my opinion, there's a positive mental health benefit in giving yourself the gift of just enjoying the sport you love. At least for a little while. Especially after this winter of the endless Polar Vortices! Go White Sox 2014. Enjoy the season, everyone!

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Mar 31, 2014 -> 09:14 AM) If the Sox refuse to deal with Scott Boras at all, they shouldn't be a franchise. I think his reputation is inflated at this point. If Rodon is there at three and he's the BPA in the Sox's eyes, I am all for pulling the trigger. The difference between 1-3 slot money and 1-1 slot money isn't huge like when Appel fell to 1-8. Straw man argument, man. I never suggested otherwise. IF Rodon at #3 is the proverbial BPA, then you take him. Without a doubt. But that wasn't my hypothetical. IF Rodon at #3 is plus or minus considered the same tier of prospect with two or three other guys, then all sorts of factors enter into what breaks the tie, one certainly being any "baggage" that he comes with. It's nice macho chest-thumping and all to say, screw Boras, I'm not scared of him, but disregard of history and practices is negligence per se. He's baggage and I'm certain that attorney/owner JR considers him just that. Deal with him if he's representing our guy, but consider his involvement a negative when breaking ties. Obviously, just my opinion, but Boras is as much of a known quantity as anything in baseball.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 31, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) Derek Jeter is a first ballot HOFer who has multiple WS rings and was the captain of the Yankees for years. He has conducted himself with nothing but class. The hatred he gets is beyond confusing to me. He is exactly what you would want your sports heroes to be. Spot-on "yes." Considering the entire package (keep it clean, boys), Jeter has been a "one of the very best of his generation" style players. Would have loved him to be the 20+ year heart, soul, captain, and SS on my team in a heartbeat. I think the so-called "hatred" starts because people tire of the unflagging NY bias of NY fans, exacerbated by the infuriating overall East Coast bias of ESPN. As great as Jeter is, no player, he included, is without warts. For example, despite "The Play," all those Gold Gloves and pretending that he's much more than a competent defensive SS is just silly. Treating him like some sort of God rather than simply what he is -- a great player -- can get tiresome for those who don't drink that particular kool-aid. Paulie Konerko? Our #14? One of the franchise's best overall players, a really good hitter for a really long time, and an incredible asset for our beloved team. I love the guy. But his overall situation, nationally and within the history of baseball, is very different from Jeter.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Mar 31, 2014 -> 04:15 AM) I never said that I hope that the Sox don't sign their pick, what I said was that blow isn't as bad as you're making it out to be. Joshua ... And, in return, I didn't suggest you actually hoped that they didn't sign their pick. Rather, I thought I carefully avoided arguing with you, but concentrated on my personal opinion. Namely, the Sox have an improving, but still barely adequate farm. ... one that is sorely lacking in legit high-ceiling guys. For any team with a system like that -- e.g., the White Sox system -- I personally believe it would indeed be truly horrible to let a draft pass you by without bringing into the system, A.S.A.P. (meaning, NOW) the kind of high-ceiling talent that the #3 pick in the entire draft should bring in. Understood that current rules provide something of a consolation prize in next year's #4 if we aren't able to sign this year's #3. Sure, that is something. And it's possible that next year's #4 could net a better player than this year's #3. But not a single person on Earth knows that answer. What we do know, is that not signing this year's #3 means we had a chance to bring in one of the top 3 players available in the entire draft this year (and who knows, it could be the VERY TOP player based on the team's subjective analysis) and we let it get away. Not as improved overall this year as we could be. (And yes ... someone could make an argument that foregoing a high first round pick this year opens the budget for going with multiple overslot picks in later rounds ... but the viability of a strategy like that is way outside of our discussion here). A team with a currently or perennially strong farm might consider this a glancing blow, but for a team like the White Sox, I'd be hard-pressed to consider it as anything other than a "horrible" result (even though MLB protects us against ourselves, somewhat, in the following draft). And full-circle back to my original point: such a scenario turns from "horrible" to "inexcusable" if this happens because we decided to play ball with The Evil Prince himself, Scott Boras.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Mar 30, 2014 -> 11:06 PM) I agree with everyone saying that the team needs to draft a stud with this pick, but in the unlikely scenario that the team can not sign its pick the blow is not that bad because the team is guaranteed the fourth overall selection in next years draft (To go along with what I am hoping is another top ten pick). Well, in my opinion, it's a horrible blow if we forego signing our top pick this year. The overall talent level of our system is definitely on the rise, but true high-ceiling talent is sorely missing. We need it and we need it as soon as possible. There isn't just one top talent available this year. There are perhaps 5-6 pitchers and maybe, MAYBE, 2-3 position players. To waste time by foregoing a true talent this year because we've got protection by the #4 pick next year makes no sense. My point was unless we have a very firm commitment otherwise from Boras/Rodon (accepting #3 money, perhaps in return for the Sale "quick to the bigs" path), we're playing a very dangerous game potentially wasting a valuable #3 pick asset on Rodon. As for hoping we get another top ten pick next year -- I don't. Unless we're in the top 5-6 picks, there is often very little difference in picking 8-10 and picking 18-20. I hope we have enough Big League success in 2014 to avoid a top 5-6 pick.

I know Boras represents Rodon, but anyone out there know (suspect) which other likely Top Ten candidates are represented by The Evil Prince? I suspect that Rick Hahn and company is more likely to engage with Boras than the Sox were in the KW regime, but, all things being equal, I believe that Jerry and Company will forever avoid Boras and his machinations whenever possible.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Mar 30, 2014 -> 05:30 PM) The reason they are talking him up could be because they don't want the decision on whether to take him at 3 or not. I don't believe there's any way they take a Boras "client" at three. I'd be surprised if it were even an option. I'm fairly certain I've never before agreed with a thing the venerable Marty has said. Until now. In my opinion, talking up Rodon (as the unquestioned class of the draft) is all about maximizing the possibility that Houston or Miami snag him at #1 or #2. It's always appeared that the Sox will do business with a certain Mr. Boras if absolutely necessary, but greatly prefer to stay away from all of that gamesmanship whenever it can be avoided. It's pretty obvious by this time that Rodon has just as many question marks about his "future ace" potential as 4-5 others. That being the case, it's a White Sox winner if he's off the board by #3, therefore leaving them everybody else but one (Miami's history leads me to believe that Kolek would be their likely choice at #2) when their turn arrives at #3. If Rodon should drop to #3, the ONLY scenario where they'd draft him would be if they had a deal agreed to on-the-spot. The Sox NEED to hit it big with this year's selection. It's crap shoot enough with projecting talent, but why would they risk a catastrophic result of a non-sign at #3 when Scott Boras is sitting at the other side of the table? Boras is the acknowledged master of applying leverage. You don't think he'd be in-their-grill about "we know you need to sign our guy?" He's had guys go back into the draft numerous times before. No thanks! With other options available at #3 who have more-or-less similar ceilings and floors as Rodon, it would be lunacy for the White Sox with the rare #3 spot in the draft to willingly sign-up for a cage match with Boras. None of us know who they actually like the best (my own suspicion is that it's likely Hoffman, Beede, and Aiken), but I can't imagine the likelihood that Rodon ends up being drafted is any greater than 1%. Even with the new CBA bonus caps. P.S. Outside chance they go Jackson in the first round, then go pitching prospects with the next 6-7 picks. Jackson is going to be a stud. Strike that, Jackson IS a stud.