Eminor3rd

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 02:16 PM) Well there were 0 outs, first of all. He gave up two hits to the last three batters in the 7th. Then he comes in and gives up two hits to the first two batters in the 8th (and one run). Gets the third batter to hit a ground ball in the hole at short. Alexei can't find the ears on it; it wasn't going to be a double play like many here have said but he should have at the very least got the force at second. The next hitter gets another hit. That is now five hits in seven batters, and the sixth batter got on via an error (although I think they ruled it a hit). I generally agree, you don't take a pitcher out because of seeing-eye singles or bad luck; those hits are indeed more luck and not a result of his effectiveness. However, given that he's around 100 pitches, and opposing hitters are making contact and finding holes, I think it's fair to assume he was tiring, was losing concentration, or hitters were picking up his release point better. You're looking at one pitch he made to Trout and making your decision for the entire sequence off the location and effectiveness of that one pitch. I don't think many people here have claimed Trout didn't hit a great offering. The point is that Sale and Ventura allowed Trout and the Angels to be in a position where the best hitter in the League hitting a home run tied up what was a 5-0 game in the 8th inning. We all know what Trout is capable of; this is nothing new. Yeah I didn't see the game, so I really shouldn't have a strong opinion. It just so nearly worked out for the best there at the end, seems like.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 12:18 PM) For the 5th or so time, the problem wasn't Chris giving up the homer to Trout. The problem is the other run that scored and the 3 runnners that were on base when Trout came up to bat, SO THAT TROUT'S HOME RUN TIED THE GAME. Additionally, even allowing Chris to face Trout coming off a recent injury in which you absolutely know he is dying to win that matchup. It was an unnecessary risk for injury to the organization's most valuable player. You are really bright. How are you missing this? But what if he grounded out on that pitch? The fact is Sale was able to execute a great pitch exactly how he wanted, so was not Ventura right that Sale was still able to get Trout out? I think if normal things happen at that point, we look and say "Man, that Chris Sale is a bulldog. Kudos to Robin for trusting his ace to pitch over that mess. What a great pitch he threw there to get out the best player in the league." I guess if someone could show that Sale's mechanics were suffering, that would be good evidence that he was gassed. And if he's in there while gassed, that's a huge mistake. But the pitch count alone was reasonable, and that he loaded the bases, by itself, isn't indicative of anything more than a rough patch the third time through the order. Can we look up to see if his arm slot had changed somehow? I feel like I've seen that stuff somewhere but I don't know where it is.

QUOTE (Bigsoxhurt35 @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 12:30 PM) I don't think anyone thought it was a bad pitch. It's wasn't it was good. Trout is just great. But Ventura should be fired, right? At least that's what the thread is about.

Here you go: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-watch-...ething-amazing/

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 09:49 AM) I would say at this point Adams ceiling is a lot higher than Davidsons. Adams has a TOR ceiling while Davidson is resembling many of the scouting reports that we read when he was acquired, a ton of power though maybe not enough contact to make it play at the ML level, so his ceiling has fallen a bit to where he just may be a Mark Reynolds clone. He had 500 PA of 26% K rate in AAA just late year, and showed a 27% in limited action in the ML. Two months or 33% in AAA this year is discouraging, but how could it have lowered his ceiling? He's had larger samples of better performance at this very level less than a calendar year ago. If this was his first taste above AA, you could make sort of an argument that his skills might not translate, and then you'd re-evaluate his ceiling. But what do we have to suggest that he can't be what he was in 2013?

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) And even though Alex Rios had a worse OPS than Avisail Garcia, it still means a 3-4 swing in the standings over just 48 games, since the Cubs won 66? Wow. If Rios is so great that he can make up that much of a difference in the standings in 7 weeks, then why would they have traded him in the first place? The difference between 63-99 and 61-101 and not even remotely close to being statistically significant. Replay the stretch 10 times and you'd see all kinds of results with or without Rios. That's not useful evidence to your point is all I'm saying.

QUOTE (SoxnGiants @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) I'm assuming Semien no longer counts... otherwise he's #5. 1. Rodon 2. Anderson 3. Hawkins 4. Danish 5. Johnson 6. Montas 7. Adams 8. Davidson 9. Sanchez 10. Michalczewski I cannot fathom how Adams the high schooler who fell to the second round can be higher than Matt Davidson, the preseason top 100 prospect in AAA having his first bad season.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 10, 2014 -> 08:32 AM) But there's no way to quantify what affect his mood/attitude had on the clubhouse. White Sox before Rios trade (43-71, .377 winning percentage) After Alex Rios trade (Aug 9)...finished 20-28, for a .417 winning percentage. If you extrapolate the team's record with Rios, they would have been expected to finish 61-101. That he played BETTER for the Rangers, in your opinion, doesn't mean he would have put up those same exact numbers (especially 16/17 in stolen bases) in Chicago for the final 6-7 weeks. I don't mean to pile on, but man, that is a ridiculous argument.

Jesus

The need to scapegoat courses through the veins of Soxtalk.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 01:39 PM) Comes down to Rodon now. No one else will likely get their full slot other than him. If you get him so sign for $5M, then you have a really decent shot at signing Montes de Oca. 1 (3): Carlos Rodon, LHP, /$5,721,500 2 (44): Spencer Adams, $1,282,700/$1,282,700 3 (77): Jace Fry, /$726,000 4 (108): Brett Austin, /$485,400 5 (138): Zach Thompson, /$363,400 6 (168): Louie Lechich, /$272,100* 7 (198): Jake Peter, /$203,800 8 (228): John Ziznewski, /$162,100* 9 (258): Brian Clark, /$151,400 10 (288): Jake Jarvis, /$141,300 14 (408): Bryce Montes de Oca, /$100,000 I can't see Rodon going underslot. I'm guessing we get him right around $6m

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 01:31 PM) It doesn't say he signed for slot, just what slot value is. Here's hoping though. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/06/whit...ncer-adams.html

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 11:27 AM) FB is a pretty common abbreviation for Facebook. I'm guessing they either have different wordings for Facebook and Twitter and they use these abbreviations to differentiate between them. Normally when they get C&P'd to these social networking sites, they will remove this. They merely forgot to. Or it could stand for Fartbreath Noesi, which is really an incredibly terrible thing to say, but at least they abbreviated it. I'm pretty sure they meant "Fat-Butt."

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 12:56 PM) LOL. In all seriousness, if the Sox scrape together half a million dollars, plus a full ride, it will be interesting to see what he does. I don't know how anyone could turn that down.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 11:56 AM) Could the Rodon pick be the tool that is used to fix the rift between Boras and the Sox organization? It so it would have big implications down the road in free agency and re-signing Viciedo as he becomes arb eligible after this season. I'm pretty sure that rift only exists on Soxtalk

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 10:56 AM) I don't care who he brought in. The point is he should have just gotten Chris out. I can definitely see the argument in this part of it.

That's not even remotely close to enough of a sample to be predictive.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 11:35 AM) More than anything, gut/intuition/logic said Putnam was better to use against Hamilton than Petricka. Well, to be fair, maybe Ventura's gut said Petricka. With this bullpen, I think we're grasping at straws here looking for a scapegoat. They're a bunch of similarly half-decent arms with consistency issues -- sometimes they're going to blow up on us. Even a guy who has three good outings in a row is just a guy who had three good INNINGS in a row. It's just not enough to predict any kind of dominance or crappiness. There's really no clear best guy, so going with who is rested or seems ready is a reasonably defensible move pretty much every time.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 09:46 AM) I don't think a lot of people are upset he faced Trout. I think people are upset because he gave up two hits in the 7th, and then a few more to start the 8th. 95% of managers would have pulled him then before things got out of hand. Instead, Robin leaves him out there. The next batter hits a ground ball in the hole that Alexei did his patented slide to get to, and I don't know what you guys are thinking, because there is no chance he was going to turn two, but he certainly should have gotten one out there. So then Robin is probably thinking ok, they are not hitting the ball hard off him, and he still is coming with good velocity, I'll let him get out of this jam because he probably has a better chance than one of my bullpen guys...the next guy proceeds to hit the hole between 1st and second and we have bases loaded, but still with a 5-1 lead. Except...Mike Trout is coming up, followed by Pujols. Who do I bring in? If I had to get Mike Trout out with the bases loaded, who would I want to face him? Well, I guess my best, Chris Sale...so I'll leave him in again... Obviously it is easy to criticize Robin here because of the end result...but the bottom line is, Chris doesn't have to throw 100 pitches every time out. He was starting to get touched up a bit, and after the double to lead it off, then the base hit by the next batter...just get him out of there. There was absolutely no need whatsoever to leave him in coming off a recent injury in a high leverage situation there. This isn't a division rival. This isn't late August or September in a huge game. This is June 7th in a rebuilding year and you are jeopardizing your most important piece of the puzzle. Gotcha, thanks for the summary.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 9, 2014 -> 09:02 AM) For future reference, Chris Sale at 108 pitches, Robin is an idiot if he lets him face the next hitter if the game is on the line, let alone Mike Trout. Soxtalk would rather see Petricka face him. People are acting like the hits he had given up were rockets all over the place. If that is how you really feel, one thing is certain. Chris Sale INAA. I didn't see the game, but this is what it sounds like to me. I'm confused. Ventura allows Sale to face Trout at 108 pitches Hahn should be on the hotseat if he doesn't fire Ventura immediately. I've looked over the thread but I'm failing to see the fireable offense.

Solvin' captchas for a good cause. 25 down.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 8, 2014 -> 08:45 AM) Has someone shared this info with the sox brass? Rock? lol

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 6, 2014 -> 01:58 PM) I'm trying to think if I was Spencer Adams if I would take the payday, spend 3 great years of my life in buses across the minor leagues, or if I would go to college with the potential of getting a 5 million payday by waiting. Tough call. If he wants to be a baseball player, he should take his million bucks and get into a professional player development system.

Re-signing Dunn is less an issue of money and more an issue of player development, IMO. The rotating DH with four full-time OFs makes a lot more sense for a team that is developing young OFers like the White Sox

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2014 -> 02:53 PM) It is also a lot of repetitions. Which he's presumably been getting in an MLB player development environment for at least seven years.