Eminor3rd

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 5, 2013 -> 08:29 AM) Then good luck selling any season ticket to non-corporate clients.... We still have numerous other options in the trade market/s as well as off-season free agents. Look at it this way...following the M's model, are you better off giving Jordan Danks 250-300 at-bats in 2014 to prove he can't play everyday (the only position he'd fit with his skill set and limited power is CF, and he would be replaced by Thompson eventually)....or putting the likes of a Morse, Ibanez or Bay out there and then trying to flip them at the trade deadline for some prospects? This exact strategy is about to get Jack Z fired this offseason. No one is buying tickets now because the team sucks. Jason Bay isn't going to bring them back. The Sox need to get good as soon as possible to bring ticket sales back. Giving at bats to old, bad players instead of developing young, high-upside players will only slow this process down. No one will come see a 65 win team just like no one will come see a 70 win team just like no one will come see a 75 win team.

I don't get this Granderson thing. He's a super nice guy, I understand, but he's a defensive liability in CF, he strikes out nigh 200 times a year at this point, he can only hit righties, he's going to require an expensive multi-year deal, and he would block most of our best prospects from playing CF at the ML level. It's a bad fit.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 5, 2013 -> 08:26 AM) And yet we have to field a competitive team next year, to an extent, with some experienced veterans (hopefully who have experience playing in "winning" organizations) sprinkled in here and there. Having a veteran back-up for Flowers or Phegley (assuming they don't go after McCann) is advisable. They'll worry about a veteran back-up late in the offseason and pick up someone cheap. And that's only if they think the Flowers/Phegley combo is totally incompetent. If you aren't going balls out to win, you need your young guys to play so they can turn into Major Leaguers. Giving Olivo a ton of playing time does nothing but make you bad now and stop you from improving.

Does anyone else sorta wish Jim Thome could just be the GM? No one could resist the charm -- I bet he could fleece people all over the world. Contract negotiations, trade discussions, you name it. He could just show up to the meeting with a bucket of chicken wings and a jolly disposition and get his way every single time.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 03:30 PM) RICK I REALLY THINK YOU SHOULD TRADE FOR CARL We really, seriously are going to need a Jim Thome talking emoticon so we can type things in all caps and have people read it in Jim Thome's voice. Can someone do this?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 3, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) I agree. I have actually grown fond of Rios. A better than league average right fielder and I don't think, statistically speaking, Hunter Pence comparisons are too far off base. I also think that, especially with the level of outfielders available and the general direction of the franchise that the Sox absolutely must trade Rios this deadline. Rios is the best OF on the market right now. I don't think there's any question that he will not be around for the next contender, and so we need to take advantage of the fact that his value will never be higher.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jul 3, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) Not sure if this has been posted yet but it's a good article about Micker Zapata. It also mentions their plans to sign 2-3 more guys. http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...ws&c_id=cws Lol at the last line of that article. Looks like the author forgot what he was going to type to end it.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 08:56 AM) So the rumors are off of Billy Hamilton and towards pitching? WHY? We need hitters desperately, not more pitchers, unless they have the potential to be elite guys. Billy Hamilton isn't a hitter either, he's just a runner

I would imagine that IF Peavy shows that he's healthy in time, a trade to the Rockies would be centered on the very blocked Trevor Story.

Wow, very nice return for Feldman. Another scrap heap signing turned to gold.

QUOTE (Dizzy Sox @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 06:47 PM) Micah Johnson is having one of the best offensive seasons in the entire minor leagues...I can't see how he doesn't rate ahead of Sanchez, and in fact I would put him behind only E. Johnson, Hawkins, Thompson, Anderson, and perhaps now Zapata. Yeah, he's quite old for his level.

Very cool to get a headline talent out of Latin America. $600k is plenty to nab a couple organizational guys as well, which is usually ALL we end up with in a given year.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 02:10 PM) And I completely agree with you. It would be lunacy to think otherwise, as it would be quite tough for one player to completely destroy a whole team. However, I felt like the Reds built their team around Dunn (was their highest paid player his final couple years there, I believe), and getting rid of Dunn and them becoming better wasn't completely coincidental. Unfortunately, you can tell I have too much Hawk in me and I agree with him that winning is a whole lot more than stats (although I don't go as far as he did with TWTW stuff, he made himself out to look like a complete idiot when he was saying that stuff on mlbn) and have to do with the culture of a team and their clubhouse. The point is that it is one thing to get a feeling about something and entirely another to insist it's true after you actually go look at the facts. No one is saying that a clubhouse cancer isn't a real problem, but you've made that claim without pointing to anything suggesting he's a clubhouse problem and also held to it in the face of all kinds of facts that refute it. There's nothing wrong with your opinion, it's just that this claim isn't really a matter of opinion.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 12:05 PM) I honestly did not see that post. But you can also look at his career stats with two outs in an inning, runners in scoring position with two outs, bases loaded with two outs, his decline in stats once the game enter the 7th-8th-9th (but is extremely good in extra innings), etc. With all these stats available, you can take a hand full of stats and make them show one thing, but then take another and they would show something else. And I am not a fan of the BR leverage stat. There are so many variations and different situations in baseball where sure, one situation based on runners on and how many outs might seem like high leverage, but there are so many different circumstances than can affect the degree of pressure. Stats are great and all, but when you actually get to watch a player every day for a couple years, I think you can throw the stats out the window. You are gonna learn much more about a player from watching them vs. live pitching than stats will ever tell you. And from what I have seen from Dunn, as well as read and heard from others who got to watch him every day in Cincinnati, the man is always around losing teams. I never said he is the sole driving force for these said teams being losers, but I think its a little more than coincidental. If you want to cast it simply as just bad luck, be my guest. I'm not going to try and make you out to be a village idiot, but don't try and make me out to be one either because you disagree with me. That is a ridiculous thing to say. Hundreds of experiments confirm the human brain's infallibility to remember things in proper perspective, so we use statistics as an objective measure of things to get over that hump. Decades of science disprove the bolded statement. Not everything can be measured, but when things CAN be measured, the raw evidence will always be more reliable than you or anyone else's selective bias. Show us the evidence that Adam Dunn is a loser that makes his teams worse -- several posters have shown evidence to the contrary.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 2, 2013 -> 12:16 AM) You don't walk over 100 times and strikeout 1/3 of the time by having great discipline. You do it exactly like Dunn does and being extremely selective. Obviously to walk as much as he does requires a level of plate discipline, but from what I have seen (I don't believe you need stats to backup everything you think if you have actually had a chance to see the player everyday for the past 2 1/2 years) he sits dead red for a pitch to hit out of the park, and if recognize early that it is not his pitch, he lets it go. The walks come by him being such a threat to hit a home run that pitchers are careful to avoid leaving anything out over the plate that he can hit out of the park. And him focusing on home runs and walking has certainly been in his best interest because it has made him a lot of money. The question though is if his style of play in the best interest of the team? I'd say possibly if he wasn't relied on to be the top hitter of the team. The bolded line above seems like a contradiction to me. Are you suggesting that he would have better plate discipline if he was more willing to swing at pitches that are harder to hit? And what does this have to do with him being a losing ballplayer who makes his team worse around him? There's nothing wrong with you questioning whether or not his skill set is a good fit for this team, but that's not what you said said before.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 06:52 PM) I'm shocked if you honestly believe this. Baseball is a game of ups and downs and GMs aren't going to overreact to one bad month like Soxtalk does. Teams are actually scouting him and will know if his June struggles are cause for concern (which I don't think they are). +1000 to this

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 05:56 PM) I completely understand plate discipline. So you are telling me all the times Dunn has had a full count and let a pitch go right down the middle for strike three, he was practicing good plate discipline? I tend to think he was sitting dead red for a pitch to hit for a home run, and if he didn't get it, he was hoping for a walk, which is a terrible approach, in my opinion. What piece of information do you have that leads you to believe that's the case? Because in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I tend to believe that people will act in their best interests -- so I would assume Dunn would want to do the thing that would make him successful.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 05:39 PM) And by the way, I don't really care about OPS, or mainly OBP, when it comes to 3-4-5 hitters. To me, I look at AVG, SLG, extra base hits, RBIs, and their stats with runners in scoring position and late/close situations. You don't need your number 3 hitter up looking to walk like Dunn does so much, you need him up there driving in runs. Walks are a by-product of a good plate approach in which the hitter swings at good pitches and takes bad pitches. No one LOOKS to walk. But they have to accept a walk, because if they don't then pitchers never have to give them good pitches to hit. For the LIFE of me, I don't understand why people cannot grasp this.

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 05:10 PM) Gotta disagree with you here. Not all OPSs are equal IMO. If two guys have equal OPS, I'll always take the guy who has the higher OBP rather than SLG. Also, walking a lot is great, but when you hit .200, it's going to be tough to get that OBP above .305, which is exactly what's happened this year for Dunn. OPS is bad anyway. Use wOBA.

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 04:19 PM) I completely disagree with you . Sox throws in some money plus you have Rios for another 1 1/2 years plus an option. A team in the West will be willing to take that risk because that division is for the taking. Look at what San Fran gave up for 2 months of Beltran. They got Zach Wheeler. I don't think getting Skaggs is a pipe dream. Would I do it if I was the GM of Arizona-NO. But they are desperate and need offense immediately in their outfield. Many trades like this have happened in the past. Everyone thought that Wheeler was an overpay though, even at the time.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 02:41 PM) Eminor, I thought I made my position clear. Trade all everyday players except maybe Beckham and maybe Tank. Keep ALL pitchers except Peavy, Crain, Thornton. Then why get upset when people talk about draft picks?

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) The problem is that we are building this system with a lot of all or nothing hitters. Raw power is great, Juan Francisco has a ton of it, but he is on his third franchise in the last three years because the cannot make enough contact for that raw power to play. I think that the approach needs to be more balanced that going after Courtney Hawkins one year and then going after virtually the same player the next year. I just want to see more guys that are consistent contact hitters in the system that can set the table for the power hitters. I agree with your premise about the danger of too many low contact guys, I'm just saying I don't think it's fair to call him an "all or nothing" hitter at age 16. Right now, he's nothing but a 16 year old kid with tools, he hasn't even developed his skills yet. No one knows what type of player he will become.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 02:26 PM) Eminor, a couple of people have alluded to it, not just me. I happen to think he's a 'loser' like the one poster's comments on Dunn. I personally think he dogs it. He was our best player last year. This year he's got decent numbers that are dropping. He had that one abysmal year after immediately sucking after the Sox acquired him. I don't know if I'm allowed to bash players, so let's just say I don't like his style. If Rios is a great player and I'm being unfair, then I guess I am a bad fan. I just don't understand what you want out of this team. You hate even thinking about the team rebuilding, yet you are in favor of driving one of its only good players out of town because you don't like his style.

QUOTE (Paulstar @ Jul 1, 2013 -> 12:19 PM) I suppose it is also a coincidence that Dunn finally starts to hit once the White Sox are one of the worst teams in baseball? I didn't say it was Dunn's fault for the Reds being bad. However, I don't think it is a surprise that both the Reds and Nationals let him go and then both teams proceeded to become much better. Of course there are other reasons for their turnarounds as well, but I don't think you can ignore the Dunn effect. Honestly, I think Dunn is a loser because of two main reasons. The first reason is because he is not a very clutch hitter and that leads to reason number 2, he thrives in non-pressure situations. He is notorious for putting up big numbers when it doesn't matter. This line of thinking is ridiculous. There's just no evidence for this at all.