Flash Tizzle

QUOTE(HeGone33 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 02:32 PM) Judging by your sig, I'll never win an argument with you cause appearenly all you do is question moves Kenny has made and anything related to the farm system. Since when is this about winning arguments? If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Although I don't believe it's wrong, in this instance, to openly question their evaluation of Brian Anderson considering they traded Rowand and Young with the belief he'd be their next CF. I question Williams moves when I don't agree with them. And those quotes within my signature were from Williams himself. Who, I'm guessing, understands our farm system needs to pick it up.

Best revenge Pierzysnki could have had in homering off Padilla. I'll also mention why I believe placing Mackowiak in CF is a bad idea. Floyd and Danks are auditioning for jobs. Do we want either to be effected by a misplay (or three) in CF for Mackowiak? I'd like to believe our coaching staff understands any runs charged afterward an error/misplay should be taken into consideration, but you never know. I realize it also depends on the situation. If there are two outs, no one on, and Mackowiak misjudges a single it shouldn't unravel either pitcher. However, just the possibility of something happening would be enough for me -- if I were Guillen -- not to have Mackowiak in.

QUOTE(HeGone33 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 02:12 PM) My point was they know a lot more than you, I and everyone here and thats why they have the jobs they do. I'll sit back and leave it to them, afterall, these moves did bring me the pleasure of watching my team win a world series. Well, what does that say with ALL the information they had (that we apparently didnt') on Chris Young and Brian Anderson, that Williams traded Young with the idea Anderson would be our future CF? Attempting to acquire Rowand sort of suggests a major f*** up to me.

QUOTE(HeGone33 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 01:40 PM) Im saving this one. I might just be able to bring it back in a few months and laugh. Ur right about Brian not being the deciding factor in our success, but him not doing well limits the amount of slack there can be with the rest of the lineup. I'd rather have someone in there who we KNOW can perform. It's much easier to accept his problems considering his defensive abilities. Here's how I judge Anderson and Rowand based upon imaginary metrics. Let's say we were to judge both players offensive and defensive abilities according to a scale ranging from 0-10. Would it be out of line to conservatively state Anderson is a 8 defensively, 4 offensively; whereas Rowand is a 6 defensively, 6 offensively? I don't believe so. I understand these are completely subjective. It's just, in my opinion, Anderson's defensive abilities (combined with his offensive ceiling) don't really justify a Rowand trade. What exactly would be the extended future of Rowand here, anyways? Let's say we trade for him -- does he leave in 2008, or does Williams give him a long term deal? What about Anderson? Having him around always has the additional benefit of costing five million dollars less. Do the small differences in both players justify 5+mil dollar gap? Especially considering that Suzuki character would look good in RF, and any wasted money can't go towards him.

What I wish this organization would consider is giving Anderson the full-time position for this season. Then, after 2007 concludes, decide whether he's your future centerfielder based on another year of maturation. If he's not -- pursue Rowand on the open market. He'll be there for the taking. If Anderson has made strides, we're better off remaining patient. Anderson certaintly won't be the deciding factor in our success. There are eight other players on the lineup, including the VAUNTED pitching staff, who should be held accountable before him.

QUOTE(Beltin @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 12:22 PM) Great team marketing asset, right? Well, until he opens his mouth and begins mumbling words.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 11:42 PM) supposedly price hit 99 four or five times during that game....casey weathers was sittin 97-98 in game 2....both guys are down right nasty Friends I spoke to today told me Price's 'stuff' is unbelievable. Best they've ever seen in four years of collegiate baseball. I didn't ask them about Weathers, though. I'm definitely interested in watching Vanderbilt this year in the College World Series.

QUOTE(danman31 @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 11:49 PM) And still should be. Well, I'm sure he'll be traded for Rowand before anything materializes.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 11:32 PM) Woodson was news to Dan and I last year. Did Dan just happen to watch him throw, or did someone within the White Sox organizaiton suggest this kid has a real good arm?

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 10:07 PM) This Alex Woodson guy best have the best pure stuff Ive ever seen for all the talk ive heard about him and lack of performance, he had like 1 really good start to begin the season if I remember right and rest of the time was meh. This is why I could never accurately predict our Top 25 prospects. There may be a handful of interesting pitchers low in the system, but until they reach A ball -- and begin pitching/hitting well -- their names are hardly mentioned. I honestly had no idea who Daniel Cortes was before Williams included him in the MacDougal deal last season. This Alex Woodson character is news to me, as well. Several months ago I browsed over the statistics of various pitchers in Rookie/Low A/A, but nothing really stood out as to make me say OMGrosso. From those who have seen him, does Woodson actually project as a starter? It appears the organization converted him from the bullpen as recent as two seasons ago. I'd have to imagine he begins in A/A+, logs ~80 innings, and perhaps is promoted to AA for the remainder of the season if all goes well.

Last Friday, UIC traveled to Nashville to face #1 ranked Vanderbilt. While they lost all three games, the first two (2-1, 1-0) were hard fought decisions. David Price, as one may expect from the nation's top pitching prospect, dominated in Game 1: -9 innings, 4 hits, 1 earned run, 1 walk, 16 strikeouts. If Tampa Bay doesn't draft him first I may cry. Hell, even if he goes first Kansas City still has Cole St. Clair or Matt Harvey to choose from. People may think I'm crazy, but I could definitely see the Royals turning themselves around within the next three/four years if Hochevar/whomever is drafted this year project to their abilities. Their offense certainly won't be a problem.

Damn Serb, you weren't kidding awhile back when you said you were tall. Now I'm only 80% sure I could kick you ass. Good luck on the business, though.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 12, 2007 -> 06:32 PM) Yeah, I can't think of a single team in the AL Central who made or nearly made the playoffs based on a miraculous 2nd half within the last 2 years. Completely different circumstance and you know it. I'll literally vomit if I have to hear comparisons to Cleveland or Houston if we're 7+ games out of the division and/or wildcard, midseason.

Friday against the Cubs should be roughly the half-way mark for Spring Training. At which point, "it's only spring training" shouldn't be mentioned. For the veteran pitchers, in particular, they'll have three or so starts after the 16th. This is not including any time devoted to Floyd or Danks. Garland needs to unhinge this mysterious knot, Vazquez needs to wakeup, and Buehrle needs to push any memory of post ASB out of the coaching staff's minds. Quickly. This year more than ever we can't afford to fall behind, only to hear the same people moaning "it's only spring training" switch their focus to "it's only April!" The American League central is too tough to fall behind early and expect a miraculous second half.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines It's arriving to a point where "it's only the beginning of spring training" no longer applies. Even our coaching staff realizes it.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 10:42 PM) so let me throw it back at you...say a team is willing to give up a guy like Nick Adenhart (the caliber player, not the name - I'm not gonna do a ton of research on this) who does have that talent but has not pitched at the AA level yet...do you still make that move, knowing he may be 3 years away from cracking the bigs, and 4-5 years away from being a top of the rotation starter? I would approve such a move contingent upon the statistics and scouting reports. Three years away from the big leagues fits in well with several veterans (Contreras/Garland) having left or about to. Basically, anything that is immediately shunned across baseball as a terrible move by the opposing team should be the only condition for Williams trading Buehrle. I've actually heard of Franklin Morales and would love to acquire him. The point, as I see it, is finding a pitcher whom you know we'd hardly have a chance of drafting with two compensation picks. I'd love nothing more than waking up tomorrow to find out Williams traded Buehrle for Tim Linecum. Even if he is relatively raw and several years away from the majors.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 10:05 PM) On a sidenote...if we acquire another starter and Danks/Floyd pitch well would anyone be shocked if Kenny was just picking up another arm which basically gave him the right to move Buehrle or another starter. Maybe Kenny and Mark have talked in close doors and came to an understanding that regardless a contract won't work. For example, the two sides tried things this past week and in the end Mark wasn't willing to go 4 years unless he got like 18 mill per year and Kenny was understanding considering the market and the two have stayed quiet and now we look for another starter and than quickly move one of ours (I'm not saying it will happen or that this has happened, but if we are acquiring a starter my guess is there is a chance it would be to open up the gates for another one of our starters to head out or at least buy Danks a bit more time in the minors and Floyd more time to work on the changes he's made). No, I wouldn't be shocked. If our coaching staff is concerned with Buehrle they may feel trading him now is most beneficial to our ballclub. However, it can't be ignored the staggering amount of expectations and/or critcism such a move would place upon management, coaching staff, scouts, Danks/Floyd etc. If a starter is dealt, it can't be for anything other than a legitimate #1/#2 SP prospect. I don't care if it's Buehrle's walk year; Williams can't possible justify trade him at this juncture unless a return package undoubtedly favors us. No "fair deals" or Gavin Floyd projects. It has to be a sure fire, top of the rotation talent.

Where are those damn parameters!?

If I were to compare our top prospects to current major leaguers, based on 3eb's criteria, I'd select the following players. This is, of course, assuming they meet expectations/potential. Which isn't guaranteed, but for the sake of argument, I'll post them anyways. Josh Fields: Troy Glaus/Chad Tracy Giovanni Gonzalez: Scott Olsen/Doug Davis John Danks: Nate Robertson/ Jarrod Washburn Ryan Sweeney: Garret Anderson/ Sean Borroughs Lance Broadway: Josh Fogg/ Jason Marquis

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 04:19 PM) IF Mac stays healthy we won't regret that trade. Although at least the prospect we gave up also has had some health issues. That said I love Tyler's arm and attitude when he is on the mound and healthy. And like most deals it was a fair trade from both sides. If Lumsden refines his curveball and begins striking out more batters, we'll regret it rather quickly. I've always been a fan of Tyler's (as you know) and was rather upset when he was traded. What disappoints me even more than MacDougal possibility for injury is the fact we dealt Lumsden to a divisional team. I know I'm not looking forward to facing him for 5+ seasons.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 04:06 PM) You b**** and moan about our scouts not going anywhere outside the US, yet when they seem to be branching out in other parts of the world, some that other franchises haven't even been to, you b**** and moan. Which is it? What use is scouting outside the US when you're not even looking at the right places? Is it that difficult to concentrate on the areas of the world (such as Latin America) where 30% of baseball players originate from? There's a reason Brazil hasn't traditionally produced much baseball talent -- it's not a popular sport in that country. You need competition from youth to teenage years to actually judge someones abilities. Perhaps people who we consider talented in Brazil have flashy tools -- in comparison to fellow countryman -- but lack the overall talent to succeed in higher levels.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 03:58 PM) Brazil has a population of 180 million. The Dominican Republic, for a counterexample, has a population of about 9 million. So? I guarantee more teenagers grow up aspiring to be baseball players within the Dominican Republic. If Orlando and Gomes is the best we could find in a country with 180 million people, that's either an indictment on our scouts or the players being produced within the country. Which is it?

Who the hell scouts in Brazil, anyways? DJ was right -- how many major league players come from that country? I'm sure young children rather play soccer than baseball.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 11, 2007 -> 03:49 PM) The next Soriano at the plate. You can't be serious.

Very powerful man, that Fields guy.