Flash Tizzle

Crede's back problems are terrible for this organization. If he were healthy we'd have an additional trading chip to unload before August. Or, the most likely scenario, Crede would have remained a member of the team until the offseason then traded. Now, I wouldn't be shocked if Fields were in LF and Crede back at 3B entering 2008. It's not a terrible move (especially since it removes one more hole for Williams to fill), but I hate delaying Fields development at 3B for Crede to put together one good season in his walk year. And you know, just to make our lives miserable, he'll have a mediocre season and the organization will wrestle with granting him arbitration.

I'm still holding out high expectations for Williams to pull of a substantial trade which benefits our ballclub. I just won't accept any excuses to the contrary. Certaintly no "standing pat" nonsense. Sorry, those are the expectations which have to be met if we're looking to overcome weak drafting practicies, reluctance to sign high priced free agents (esp. those not familar with a discount), and a contributing farm system. It's not just empty rhetoric. Seriously -- I question anyone to list the ways this team can improve over this season if not for a literal heist in a trade which produces immediate results. You all know full well Williams will be shuffling through the garbage heap of free agency and through other teams, looking for the next "Coop project" or "diamond in the rough." It may have worked in 2005, but I'm tired of hearing about grinders and Gavin Floyd types which were once highly regarded, have talent, but have yet to put it all together. Regardless of someone's perceived value on this board and across the internet, it's his job to find talent to benefit our future. Primarily positional prospects. It's my belief Jon Garland must be out of here by August 1st. We'll only be through the entire contract negotiation soap-opera with Garland as what occured with Buehrle. And since it's unlikely such a high percentage of the overall payroll (perhaps 40%) would be tied up in three pitchers, why hold onto Jon? So people can give the same excuses for Williams potentially receiving less in a trade as they have with Buehrle? Even if one were to suggest to deal Garland in the offseason, I rather do it now and gain the additional value from a half-season more of work for whatever team acquires him. Does anyone actually believe we're going to reach the post-season next season? Honestly now, unless dramatic changes occur which improve the roster (primarily the offense and bullpen) how exactly will this team compete with Cleveland or Detroit? I can see the replies now -- "how can you expect to compete with those teams when the strength of the White Sox is weakened with a Garland trade." From my perspective, if our current collection of starters isn't enough to overcome such a deficit in the standings, what difference will next season be? Anyways, if there's one area of the team our minor league system can be expected to provide several interesting options it's pitching. I'd love to get rid of Contreras, but he isn't going anywhere right now. A dropoff from Garland to Gonzalez or Floyd may be all be certain, but considering the large discrepancy in payroll I'd rather take his impending salary (as well as the prospects obtained) and slowly build for the future. Everytime I hear people such as Chris Rongey suggest the "talent is here" and "don't expect much changes in the roster beginning next season," all I can think to myself is "90 loss team." Two straight seasons. There's nothing anyone can do unless a similar formula is ressurected in 2008 as it was in 2005 -- shrewd, cheap pickups who produce alongside a stellar pitching staff. Oh, and those pesky divisional opponents with something called talent need to revert back to mediocrity. I'll still be here every day to point out these losses form 2007 onwards, as well. So atleast all of you have that to look forward to.

I'm sure we're bound to witness a repeat of the 1st inning for many more years to come. Atleast we have upcoming pitching prospects comparable to Miller. Right?

Miller is succeeding without consistently throwing his breaking ball for a strike. Hell, even his fastball has been difficult to control. Whenever the moment arrives when these particular pitches are harnessed, we're in trouble. Atleast we'll have an opportunity to draft our Miller next draft. Boras or not, the excuse of poor draft position due to our record will no longer be valid.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jul 21, 2007 -> 05:19 PM) ERA's E Wassermann 20.25 B Logan 5.81 D Day 12.27 Well, you know what they say -- immediate success and White Sox prospects just don't go together.

What the hell is Guillen screaming about? It appeared from his body language he was suggesting to Lugo (?) his side may be hit next time around. I'm guessing his anger stems from Lugo after he struck out.

That's why Guillen put the shift on for Hinske yesterday!

Embarrassing. Please, Williams, begin the trading and let this season end.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 09:02 PM) Too bad we didn't get Marmol instead of Aardsma. I know he's the player I wanted in that trade, even before his success this season.

I just can't get over Guillen walking out to the mound, talking briefly to Contreras, and leaving him in. Who cares whether or not he's feeling well? The results on the field suggest something different. No use defending Guillen in any way. This game has beem atrocious to watch.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 08:51 PM) He's trying to get you a better draft pick dammit. We were bound to lose anyways. Problem is (grand slam leaves just as I'm typing this), Contreras loses any value due to this ballgame. This is just embarrassing. Even if someone were to believe Contreras should have started the inning due to his pitch count, after the first two batters reached, it became more than obvious he should have been removed. So, what excuse does Guillen have for, first, leaving in Contreras after a mound visit; and second, leaving him out following the HBP to load the bases?

Is this a joke leaving out Contreras? Does Guillen want to win this ballgame?

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 08:44 PM) This might be the worst managed game I've seen by Ozzie in his career here. I know our bullpen hasn't been good, but Jesus, you'd think Wasserman -- promoted for his ability to retire RH -- may have been better served facing Ramirez. Contreras only came out because of his pitch count and the opportunity to win the game. Classic Guillen. And, what's worse, is he left him out even after the first two hitters reached. Now make it the first three batters. This is just terrible.

QUOTE(winninguglyin83 @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 08:41 PM) bring on wassie now Why do that when Contreras only has 87 pitches and a possibility to win the ballgame?

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 08:03 PM) Like I said earlier today, the way this nightmare season has gone, we'll hold on to Contreras and then trade Garland for a medicore package this offseason. Garland shouldn't be on this ballclub August 1st, yet alone this offseason. Buehrle's extension made that decision all the more clear in my mind. I'm curious, for anyone resistant to the possibility of trading Garland, do you believe this organization signs an extension with him? Is it possible that over 37 million (conservatively) is thrown among Vazquez/Buehrle/Garland? I don't believe this will happen, even with the possibility Gonzalez and Floyd somewhat equalize the salaries. If the choice is unloading Contreras to rid ourselves of his remaining contract, or receiving a generous package for Garland, I'd rather take my chances with Contreras. We need an influx of talented positional prospects more than we need Contreras to pitch for another ballclub. The thought of Williams holding onto Contreras AND receiving a mediocre package for Garland in the offseason is just not a possibility in my mind. He has a job to do. I'll be absolutely furious if nothing is done entering August 1st.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 20, 2007 -> 08:05 PM) I wish we weren't hearing quotes from teams in the market for starting pitchers like "there's nothing out there that's an improvement". One problem is our manager doesn't care about trade value for his starting pitchers. Who knows, perhaps if the bullpen was stronger he'd be willing to remove Contreras earlier. But since such a scenario doesn't exist, all Guillen can do is leave out Contreras to pitch, eat innings, and ultimately limit the amount of relievers used before Jenks.

Last play was completely on Guillen. Hawk/DJ couldn't have been more correct. How in the hell do you call a shift after witnessing an attempted bunt along the third base line the previous pitch?

"The world is very different ever since the robotic uprising of the mid 90's." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbqnY0XAzdQ...ted&search= Due to this thread's presence on Soxtalk I decided to watch the first episode on OnDemand and was pleasantly surprised. Especially with the "Humans Are Dead" video. I'll have to catch up with the remaining episodes.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 13, 2007 -> 09:16 PM) Times the Sox have been Shutout by Opponent since 1990: '07: 8 (through 88 games) '06: 6 '05: 7 '04: 8 '03: 8 '02: 7 '01: 4 '00: 3 '99: 7 '98: 9 '97: 8 '96: 2 '95: 6 (144 games) '94: 2 (113 games) '93: 14 '92: 11 '91: 12 '90: 7 After the Baltimore series concludes, the White Sox' next 12 games are against Cleveland, Boston and Detroit. The shutout total is bound to increase at some point during this stretch.

QUOTE(Brian @ Jul 13, 2007 -> 07:46 PM) Based on Dye's comments a few weeks ago, it's a no brainer. Trade him off. I'd still rather hold onto him. What could the Sox possibly receive for Dye? Regardless of how much of a distraction he is, this team isn't doing anything this season. Keep him around to possibly heat up entering October, then grant arbitration and accept the draft picks when he departs. All we should do at this point.

QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Jul 13, 2007 -> 07:52 PM) Eggy - 5 IP 1H 9K DLS- 6 IP 1H 9K Nice lines so far tonight. Make it 7IP 1H 10K for DLS. I give DLS three more starts before he overtakes Gonzalez for organizational lead in strikeouts.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 13, 2007 -> 02:49 PM) I'd do Morales and Stewart straight up for Garland I would first and foremost inquire about Morales. We're talking about a pitcher possessing Liriano-esque qualities. Unfortunately, those qualities also include an injury risk. I'd accept it for someone capable of being a frontline starter.

"In terms of...."

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 10, 2007 -> 07:21 PM) Haeger's probably just being called up to pitch out of the pen. The rotation will be Garland, Buehrle, Vazquez, Contreras, Danks. No trades will be made. I'm almost positive this is the case. Standing past is absolutely ridiculous. It honestly upsets me to even think about the possibility of not trading any starting pitcher. How exactly is the ballclub expected to improve in future seasons if not for the trade of someone holding value? We've been over the various options for acquiring talent, and this team has practically none of them working in their favor. Since Buehrle's presence on this ballcub is assured, Garland should be traded. This entire scenario with contract extensions and the possibility of not receiving top value (because of time remaining on a contract) in return will only be rehased again next season. We're not winning anything within the immediate future whether Williams realizes it or not. I'd rather have whichever package is received for Garland and Contreras, in addition to the likely struggles of their replacements, rather than have both pitch meaningless games. 2010 should be the goal. Perhaps by then, DLS will be available.

I know what I'll see on this list come next year. 2007: The night Chicago died.