Flash Tizzle

Suppan really worked over Anderson that AB. Striking him out on a slider over the outside corner was pure Brian. It even appeared to be hanging, although all of Suppan's breaking balls appear to be that way so its hard to tell.

QUOTE (kristofer @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 05:06 PM) ooh i like that lineup I'm guessing you're a Brewers fan. I can't really tell from the skyline posted in your signature, though. I would hope you are, because that lineup is atrocious without Thome and Konerko. I like it from the standpoint of giving development time to our younger players, but honestly, this may be the worst of the season. The only saving grace is we're going up against Suppan.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 05:06 AM) Doubt it. Now they'll just have NASCAR parts and limbs flying out of the screen and into people's faces. I'm thinking for Final Destination 5 they take this formula to the maximum and have some random person foresee the destruction of the planet by a large asteroid. By some implausible set of circumstances he prevents the disaster, and now the whole movie is 6 billion people dying in gruesome and ridiculous ways. I'd pay for that.

I don't know why it just cant be simple. Here's my proposal -- whenever an administrator or moderator comes across an overly negative post, delete it. You know what this consists of. Whenever someone comes across a personal attack, delete it, and then warn the person of the action in a PM. It just seems to me knight this whole rule change goes FAR beyond negativity and personal attacks. You've basically identified Fathom and Caufield as two posters you dont want around, when really, what they do (which you have problems with, obviously) is rare. I do have several problems with your bullet points, Knight: Ridiculous. Are you going to keep track of every poster and how often they post within the threads? You may as well come out and say you're targeting certain members. What does it matter if someone does this? If they come into the gameday threads only when the Sox lose, and have legitimate posts (not just reactionary ones), does it really affect your posting experience here on Soxtalk? This isn't really an example of negativity or a personal attack. How do you know they get joy out of saying "I told you so?" It's annoying to do something like this, sure, but I don't see how the overall tone of the board is affected. It's not an epidemic of posters doing this. Wow, this rule would effectively kill our website quicker than even the most negative person. Again, this is only a fan website. Let's not look at it as more than that.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jun 11, 2009 -> 03:36 PM) Don't care if it sucks. I will be seeing this. There has to be some sort of M.Night twist here, because the whole "person foresees death, escapes death with a lot of people, people who escape now experience grisly deaths," is tiresome. What's especially tough here is there's no way to fight death, and from past movies, no escape. It eventually gets you.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 11, 2009 -> 01:20 PM) In all seriousness, we're trying to cut down on negativity and personal attacks. Whether it be towards another member, or towards a member of the Sox, they are still personal attacks. You need another angle to this issue. You shouldn't be isolating negativity as if it's the culprit alone. Personal attacks, yes, I can understand. But if the team is performing terribly, what else is there to say? It's up to the Soxtalk team to know the difference between what should be allowed and what shouldn't. When you say we're trying to cut down on negativity, I become worried at the extent such a reform will be pursued. If I created a "White Sox loser" thread would it be immediately deleted, despite the fact "White Sox Winner" threads are allowed? I remember this was usually a contentious point in the past with people. WWWSID -- What Would White Sox Interactive Do. If you, or any of the other administrators/moderators find yourselves trying to enforce anything that resembles their policies towards negativity, you're doing it all wrong. Just remember guys, this is a fan website. Yes, it's not a cesspool for negativity; but lets not try to act as if we're trying to appease anyone by enforcing a whole host of negativity rules. This is what I believe took down WSI. Dave Wills began posting, the Red Eye referenced them, and then all of the sudden they acted as if their opinions mattered. Threads determined to be overly negative we're moved into their side forums. Hell, even those that weren't were still moved because they went against their personal beliefs. "If you don't believe the White Sox will make the playoffs in 2005 then dont bother posting" was a common idea I came across. It reminds me of the instance several years ago when Hawk (poorly) shouted out Soxtalk.com, and right after that there began this 'coincidental' desire to shape things up. I believe that's about the time the language filter came up. It makes me wonder why all the sudden things have changed. There's usually a reason just beyond "it's getting ridiculous in here." Really, I have no problem with trying to foster a good fan experience. Its just, when I come across these posts where people say "I cant post here sometimes because of (this) or (that)" it just sounds...so....ridiculous. Is anyone really that sensitive enough that they have their posting experience here on Soxtalk affected by whether or not there is a certain level of intelligent discussion or negativity? If anything, instead of purposely avoiding the website anyone who holds this opinion should stick around and try to change, first hand, what they feel needs improvement.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 10, 2009 -> 02:32 PM) The question winds up being...how much is it worth to them to not have to go through the draft again next year? If the best Washington offers is $15, do they think they can hold out next year and get a richer team with the #2 pick who will actually go significantly higher? The odds of the Yankees/Red Sox/Cubs picking #2 is pretty low. If the Nationals can't sign Strasburg they'd have the #2 overall selection in next year's draft. And considering how the Nationals are the worst team in the league by 9 games, they'll likely pick #1 next year. There's really no benefit of holding out for Boras. The best Strasburg can do is, what, maintain his #1 position, whereas there are any number of worst case scenarios. Another benefit here is if, by some chance, Strasburg didn't sign and re-entered the draft, it'd probably push Bryce Harper another season. I know there was discussion of him possibly going a year earlier. It definitely wouldn't be in Bryce's interest to enter the same draft as Strasburg, especially with the same team selecting 1st and 2nd. The Nationals may have an outside shot of both Strasburg and Byrce if everything goes in their favor, beginning with first securing Strasburg . Now, that's a LOT of money between those two, but also, if everything works out, two tremendous talents that could revive the franchise.

QUOTE (tommy @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 10:38 PM) I still think Kenny will let this team compete till the end of June. Unless we're out 10 sooner than that. Danks vs Verlander Floyd vs Jackson Two huge games coming up. If we lose those two we're 7.5 out. It's not 10, but it's far enough to know that we're not good enough to compete in even a s***ty division.

5.5 games out. If we lose tomorrow, and it's highly likely with Verlander pitching well and Danks struggling, then it should be time to seriously consider looking forward to next year and beyond. And yes, I realize we have done well against him in the past.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 10:20 PM) Baseball Prospectus loved the Mitchell pick. What'd they say?

What I ultimately want to know is, regardless of what you think of Mitchell as a player, does anyone here REALLY believe the White Sox are capable of correcting his problems? This is what I'm concerned with. He obviously needs help in correcting his swing, and I just have doubts that we're the organization to help him out. If it works out well, then obviously everything's great; but I've seen enough of Anderson and Fields to know our recent track record hasn't been very good. Hopefully changes within the system since then can make Mitchell a legitimate player for us.

That was just a terrible AB from Beckham.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 09:58 PM) It's really too bad we got rid of Crede. He was very clutch in these situations. I wish we still had him around.

Dead obviously didn't rise from his grave that AB.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 08:18 PM) wow, are we really going to lose to one of the lousiest pitchers in the league. Has Hawk yet mentioned how good he was several years ago, in the NL, when he had 3-4 mph on his fastball, to use that as an excuse why he's good tonight? He has been good in the past for pulling a similar stunt.

I'd like to know how many times we have had a bunt hit and a successful sacrifice bunt in one inning in the last five years? I'd say under 10.

Beckham really needs to quit this first pitch swinging s***. I'm already tired of it.

You know, I'm glad Guillen told him this. I'm not suggesting it's encouraging for a young pitcher to here, but it's entirely within his own power. You want to remain here? Don't give up 5 HRs over your first five appearances. Don't walk walk the leadoff hitter every other outting. He shouldn't be babied. If he never wants to return, do what few White Sox prospects do and succeed immediately. It's entirely within his control.

http://mike.westernave.net/chat/chatroom.html

The selection of Fuentes and Heathcott should give all of you an indication of the variability among Baseball America and how organizations view players. Where are these guys in comparison with how they were valued on Baseball America? Just from the list posted several pages ago, neither were in the Top 30. And Scheppers, Wheeler, Brothers (three players with respective rankings of 9, 16, 17 remain).

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 07:05 PM) You're gonna wear out your horn if you keep tooting it dude. Well, Fathom did say Eric Arnett wouldn't be out of the Top 15 and look at that prediction. That would have been my selection, but honestly, I don't mind Mitchell. This draft wasn't thought of as very deep in outfielders, and I can't remember where I heard it, but there was an online article that suggested whenever there is some consensus (ie, this draft is weak on catchers, weak on outfielders, etc.) it causes legitimately good players to drop because -- with scouting -- people see what they want to see. Everyone has good numbers. It's just a matter of looking at someones swing, or delivery, and deciding if it can be harnessed into something special. Also, where the f*** are you guys following this draft? MLB doesn't seem to be updating their site and its not on TV.

If we didn't have three picks in the first 61 overall I'd be whining for the White Sox to take a chance on one of these prep players projected to drop due to signability concerns. However, we're still in a good position with 23 and 38 to find decent players. There's no question, if one ever existed, that the Yankees are going to draft the highest profile prep player, regardless of salary demands. It's obviously a question of whether they'll sign this person, but looking at their draft, and how their first two selection are at #29 and #76, you know they're shooting high. I'd really hate to see another Rick Porcello type of situation occur where top talent falls well out of their projected slot. The recent rule of having your draft slot (minus one position) guaranteed for the next season should be motivation for teams to sign a good name and take the risk of losing it.

When I first noticed this thread title I thought it was a thread from the future, depicting where Beckham will be in a few more games.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 9, 2009 -> 11:34 AM) Tanner Scheppers put up one hell of a final outing in St. Paul. Was pitching in the upper 90's and topped out at 101. It was against a lineup that included former White Sox prospect Anthony Webster (who, IIRC, was one of the guys traded in the Carl Everett deal). http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/?p=964 If Scheppers is there and the Sox pass, I will f***ing throw a hissy fit. He has such a special arm and imo, if he's healthy, he's the 2nd best player in this draft. If there is any reason Scheppers drops 23 spots to us, I'll guarantee he'll just pass right on by. Although I believe there's no way gets by Detroit.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jun 8, 2009 -> 08:59 PM) High horse or reality? Anything this org does is second guessed on this negative site everyday. If the Tigers went out and signed Freddy to a minor league deal, there would be conniptions on this site. High horse. Jesus man, what has happened to you recently? It's almost as if I can sense you're burned out from something, whether it be Soxtalk or life in general, just from reading the increasingly aggravated (and sometimes strange, such as the one above) posts. It must be that chat curse. When people leave, they never seem to be the same. How can you discuss the concept of reality when none but a few would have cared if another team signed him? He was junk when he left the White Sox, he was junk last season pitching against the Sox as a Tiger, and I can't imagine he's any better now. Also, OF COURSE everything the organization does is second guessed. Cmon, when you have an active network of several hundred Sox fans communicating daily you're bound to have some people disagree with a decision for even the dumbest reasons. This shouldn't come as a surprise.