Flash Tizzle

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 11:01 AM) Hah, each of the scouting reports on the 6 Great Falls guys had a negative vibe, which is fair enough I suppose. Poreda: lacks a secondary pitch that even grades out to average. Worked hard on improving the slider but they criticized his mechanics. Seemed the writer focused on the negative. Is that your brother fathom??? This is extremely disappointing. We didn't draft Poreda with the intention of developing him into the next Matt Thornton. If he doesn't develop several average secondary pitches by next season, whether in Kannapolis or Winston Salem, then the criticism should be in full force. Also, SSI71 sent me this link: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnered=rss_cws Merkin addressed several issues discussed on this website concerning the upcoming draft. I find it funny how he mentions, in the last paragraph, about hopefully winning every game this point forward. Almost as if he's indirectly commenting on those of us who believe losing here on out is more beneficial to our future.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 05:59 PM) The consensus in the other thread seems to be that Sanchez won't make the list. Of the offensive players at GF, Marrero (2005 draft and follow) seems most likely to make the list. Sanchez was in the PIO two years ago and Kanny last year, and he still is demonstrating poor control of the strikezone. Marrero, a year younger, is repeating the level, but controlled the strike zone last year, and improved upon that this year with a big power spike. I just noticed your post in the other thread. Similar to Northsidesox, I based my opinion upon his personal page on MiLB.com. There was no mention of previous time in the White Sox organization above Rookie ball. You quickly quoted my post before I could delete it. /shakes fist. Damn. Angels and Brewers should have quite a few players on the list, judging from league statistics. If Marrero is on the list, it'll obviously be near the bottom.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 10:41 PM) THe more I think about it the more Rex needs to be back. Michaels and Madden brought up a good point and the thing is if you get rid of Rex you are quitting for good on him and going to Griese who is just a stopgap solution (and that my be enough) but this early in the season I Think you still have to see Grossman (I would completely give up on him if it weren't for so many other guys playing so badly around him and a lot of the things Rex has messed up on actually have been due to the other guys and not really him). I recall a quote I heard before which said, "there's no such thing as a knee-jerk reaction in the NFL concerning quarterbacks." Teams dedicate so much to the position, and you just don't see anyone go back and forth between quarterbacks early unless it's for good. Personally, and I base this on nothing more than my own opinion, I believe these next three divisional games will decide his fate. Then it'll be Grossman or Griese to finish out the season.

QUOTE(knightni @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 10:37 PM) In order for the WRs to catch about a third of Grossman's passes, they would have had to be #1 in a trench for the worm-burner throws #2 In the stands for thetimes he threw the ball away #3 On the sidelines for when he threw it out ofbounds over their heads #4 Underneath Grossman on the ground for everytime he got sacked because he never tries to move around in the pocket I'm not completely absolving Grossman of blame. Although there have been numerous passes dropped or interceptions made from missed routes by an absolutely horrendous WR core. Grossman, under ideal conditions, is probably an average quarterback. Problem is he doesn't have the weapons or the protection to succeed. Any change made at QB is just to put out a new face, because no one could possibly see Griese or Orton as an improvement.

Where's our Romo?

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 10:30 PM) It's great hearing Jim Miller on Comcast analyze what's wrong with the team. Too many idiotic members of the media will go the easy route and just blame it on Rex. I didn't even see you post this. He's been a great addition. Certaintly better than Azuma.

Listening to Jim Miller on CSN Sports Net, I've really enjoyed his analysis of the Bears game. He's done a great job this season identifying issues on offense. Especially educating the viewers (including myself) who aren't familar with WR routes and may initially blame Grossman for an INT or incompletion.

If Grossman is replaced, it'll probably be for good. I can't imagine them going back and forth. As much as I hate to say it, we'll probably have to endure several more games of Grossman. Next three opponents are within the division. If they are in any way comparable to his first three, by Game 7 that'll be it.

Ha, Amazing. Somone really needs to grab a hold of Barber's hair before the end of this inevitable TD run.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Sep 22, 2007 -> 07:29 PM) Someone should bump that thread so we can all laugh at ourselves. I'm sure I had some gems in there. Here is one thread devoted to the subject: Baseball Prospectus Here's another interesting preseaon thread I came upon. Its contents oppose Hawk's belief that no one could have seen our troubles prior to April: Why Crucify The Whole Team Already? I love this quote of mine, first posted on February 26th: (After providing BP's projected standings) And while the draft hasn't been panned as 'one of the worst in recent memory,' recent comments from Baseball America concerning a potentially weak class is of no shock to me.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 22, 2007 -> 01:25 PM) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXIvGhldO_0 Here's an edited version of the press conference, as featured on Jimmy Kimmel Live. Absolutely hilarious.

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 09:34 PM) However I think it's fair to say this, personally I take much of what Baseball America says with a huge grain of salt. Yes they have a certain amount of insight but they are getting most of their opinions (rankings) from area scouts and scouting directors, many of whom have their own sets of biases. I may have an uneasy feeling we'll be selecting high in a weak class, but even I acknowledge it's still too early to determine whether certain raw players around selection 40 (according to the AL executive) don't soar up next season. No one knew who Phillippe Aumont or Jarrod Parker were this time last year. Tanner Robbles was being touted as a Top 15 player. It could be possible the 'raw' talent refines itself next season, especially within the high school ranks

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 09:19 PM) There is a new article up on Baseball America, which included this excerpt from an American League scouting director, talking about the 2008 draft class: "It definitely looks like it's light on players, period, at least in the upper echelon—the highest profile, top-of-the-board type of players," an AL scouting director said. "There's not very good college talent in that first, second, third pick range. If you're picking 25th, you might have a better chance at a decent college guy (whose value matches the pick), but the upper echelon of this class is not that good. "The same in the high school ranks. Once you start getting into that 20 to 40 range, there are some that are real good, but I don't think it's a good year to be picking in the top 10 for value, when you consider what you pay for those players. If you have to pay $1 million-plus, I don't see that many guys that you would want to give that money to." I have to admit I'm not too familar with many collegiate or high school players this far ahead of the draft, but that excerpt is just too funny. I remember posting a comment several months ago suggesting that if we were to have decent draft position, major league insiders would say how weak the draft class was. It wasn't based on anything more than a hunch. Doesn't it make perfect sense that we'd find ourselves in such a class? Oh well, I'm still expecting a stud. They'll have to make due at whatever position.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 08:55 PM) This season is a f***ing joke. Kudos to Fields and Thome, but my God -- they haven't hit Santana in five years and NOW they bust out the bats? Sigh... With a win tonight we're unlikely to catch the Tampa, who'll be 4 losses ahead if their score holds up. That's completely unreasonable with eight games remaining. At worst, I hope we're still in the Top 10. Recent drafts have proven that talented players are available around this position. Still, it just aggrivates the hell out of me that moments such as tonight happen. Especially now, at this point in the season, when it seems everyone else is losing.

Well, if this score keeps up and the Sox win we're looking to drop out of the Top 5. It's really unbelievable how nearly every team in the Top 10 has lost or is currently losing.

I knew this would happen. Santana waits until now to give up five runs against our ballclub.

QUOTE(southsida86 @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 07:02 PM) What bothers me though, is that upper management doesn't. If we're intent on competing next season, and the team performs similarily to 2007, there can't possibly be any other option but for Williams to rebuild. At its worst, next year should be a definining moment in the direction of this franchise. Williams will have to do quite a bit of spinning over the offseason to assure fans next season's team has an opportunity to compete. If the 2008 team fails to improve, what excuse could he possibly have to give hope for 2009? Even injuries won't be enough, in my mind. The problem here, if such a scenario were to unfold, is we're hoping upon hope those with value (such as Vazquez, Konerko, Jenks) still have it. And Williams is capable of obtaining legitimate talent in a trade. This upcoming offseason he'll need to receive a lot in my mind for foolishly holding onto Garland leading up to the trade deadline.

Do your thing, Santana.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) Edited for accuracy 1. At the end of May, a dreadful offense nonwithstanding, the team had a 24-25 record and was 7.5 games out of the division; 4 behind the wildcard leader. The team wasn't quit dead, yet. 2. What's so young and inexperienced about MacDougal, Thornton and Aardsma? They were key contributers to our past (and ongoing) bullpen woes. 3. If they collectively quit trying in June then there should be a large amount of roster changes, right? I take it this is exactly how you feel, since no one would possibly root for a group of similar people entering next season. Maybe they didn't have that killer extinct, or the guidance of Rowand to push them forward. Oh, but wait -- according to Hawk they've never given up.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 12:59 AM) Tizzle's got to be kidding or I've caught him in a mess. Can't root for the Cubs and be a good Sox fan, can you? Just asking. I don't care about being a 'good Sox fan.' You act as if it's a job, with certain requirements and obligations I have to fulfill. If it were a legitimate job, I would have been fired several times for continualy criticizing the organization and doubting the team (even in September of 2005). Here, under this hypothetical scenario you've created where the Cubs face the White Sox tomorrow, under a similar set of circumstances, you bet your ass I'm still rooting against our team. You need a moment of pure excitement to brighten up your mood. Click on the link below and I dare you to resist the urge to begin snapping your fingers and tapping your feet.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 12:08 AM) Good deal, but I was referring to Tizzle since he said he was officially actively rooting against the Sox every game the rest of the way. And besides the Cubs I'd think Santana would be one guy we'd all want the Sox to beat the most of anybody. What bout you Tizzle? Root for Cubs if they played tomorrow? Or Sox? ..... HEY CHICAGO, WHAT DO YOU SAY? CUBS ARE GONNA' WIN TODAY! GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GOOOOOOOOO!

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 07:21 PM) It finally happened, a game thread that didn't reach page 2 while the game was in progress. Good stuff. That's about to change: As of today, I've officially reached the point where I'm openly cheering for the White Sox to lose. Not that I'm against certain players performing well (whether to heighten value or just to show progress); but rather, just hoping the game ends with the opposing team scoring one more run. Preferably 1-0 in Garland/Vazquez starts, and X+1 in every other. What's great is with Santana pitching against us tomorrow, within the confines of the Metrodome, I'll probably be quite happy. YAYAYAYAYAYA What do you have to say about that, Greg? Try to control the tremors in your fingers when you type a response.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 06:35 PM) But really, it was a pleasant experience. Flash is as I expected (intelligent, friendly, funny). Except for the fact that he is Jim Thome's face. R U SRIOUS? I look nothing like Jim Thome -- except for the fact we're both white. Why are you trying to mislead everyone into thinking my jaw can cut steel?

QUOTE(michelangelosmonkey @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 09:42 PM) * Increasing Contreas Trade value. * Increasing Garland trade value * Gavin floyd getting confidence * Positive results from Richar, Fields, Owens and young relief pitchers. * Psychological positives. * Not having to read headlines all off season like "From first to worst in two seasons", "From World Series to worst overall in two seasons." From Penthouse to outhouse". All seem WAY better than the SLIM advantage #1 overall pick brings. Since 1965 there are THREE #1 overalls with OPS above .900. Why is this complicated? There are 1500 amateur players taken...with #1 you have a choice of the top 1500. With #4 you have a choice of the top 1496. Virtually zero evidence you are more likely to hit gold with #1 over #2 or #3 or #4. There is some evidence of top 10...but within top ten? Couldn't the first several options happen whether or not the White Sox win? And I don't believe psychological positives matter much. At this point in the season, they're probably dead and looking forward to the offseason. Next season is completely different. If Williams undergoes major roster changes, they'll be new life injected into the club regardless of how 2007 concludes. Here's a concept you fail to understand -- considering our draft history, the Whtie Sox need EVERY benefit possible within the draft. You suggest there's no evidence you're likely to hit gold with a #1 pick, yet, when I browse through our recent draft history it doesn't seem we hit gold with anything. Why not cheer for the possibility of selecting high, and perhaps, receiving our Ken Griffey Junior, BJ Uption, Joe Mauer, Alex Rodriguez? There's going to be quite the lull between our first and second round pick. We don't exactly have the compensation round to fall back upon.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 08:31 PM) With the way this season has been going, did you really expect anything different? When certain posters are upset that some draftee we wanted got picked right before the Sox pick, that will serve them right. No, those certain posters still wont budge from their stance winning meaningless September games (the previos season) was better than losing for the purpose of gaining draft position. We'll have to wait until those drafted ahead are producing in the majors for anyone to acknowledge their mistakes. And even then, I'm sure they'll just shrug their shoulders and say something such as "it is what it is." Here's one prevailing question the 'winning' crowd has yet to answer -- what's the most beneficial part of winning out the remainder of the season? Name me ONE legitimate benefit. I could give you one benefit to losing out the remainder of the year -- having the opportunity to draft a HOF calibur player at #1. Yes, that player may still be available wherever we select; but they'd also be there at #1. As I see it, there's much more substance to our argument than the constrasting view held by Greg and the Gang. Atleast we're facing Santana on Friday. Although would it shock anyone if the White Sox mounted their highest offensive output, post-changeup era, against him?