Lip Man 1

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/here-are...ris-sale-trade/ Mark

SI: You got those games correct. Mark

July 23, 2009 It had only happened 17 times before. On this date the Sox Mark Buehrle became the 18th pitcher to ever throw a perfect game when he shut down Tampa 5-0. Buehrle was helped in the top of the ninth inning when Dewayne Wise, an otherwise mediocre player, made the catch of his career, leaping above the wall in left center to snare a ball hit by Gabe Kapler. On the way down he started to lose the ball then snatched it out of the air with his other hand. Buehrle completed the task in 2:03, the exact same amount of time as his no hitter in 2007. He became only the fourth pitcher to ever throw a perfect game and a no hitter joining Cy Young, Sandy Koufax and Randy Johnson. We've got the audio AND video of Wise's catch and the final out of the gem. Announcers are Ken "Hawk" Harrelson and Steve Stone. Courtesy: Comcast Sports Chicago. http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2016/07/t...ehrles-perfect/ Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jul 23, 2016 -> 06:03 PM) If we will jever know what really happened why did you respond to a bunch of hypothticals and says if it happened the front office is this. You could just have easily said all of the hypothticals about the front office being in the right and then player being wrong. Why did you choose to pick the group of hypothticals where the front office was made to look bad? Because the front office has made themselves look pretty bad for almost 10 years no? LOL. Or have you not seen the records since 2007? They get NONE, Zero, nada benefit of the doubt in most cases because they haven't earned it have they? Mark

Tommy Stokke ‏@StokkeTommy 3m3 minutes ago Not a joke: Source says Sale blowup was because he didn't want to wear throwbacks, so he cut the jerseys up so no one could wear them. IF this is true then that's really stupid by Sale. In this case I can't blame the Sox since this was a big promotional night. I understand the uniforms look like s*** but it's just for one game. Sounds like the trade talk plus another crappy year by the franchise has gotten to him. Mark

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jul 23, 2016 -> 05:35 PM) There are far too many ifs and could bes in this post to be of any use. Just say you don't like the front office and are on Sale's side . I guess reading is a skill "I don't think anyone will ever really know what happened but IF Sale went off on Robin, Kenny or Hahn and IF it was because he was tired of the BS, tired of the losing in this screwed up organization..." Everyone else is speculating as well. Don't see why you singled mine out unless you simply are on the front office's side. The same front office that has driven this franchise into irrelevancy the past 10 years. Those are the conditions I'd support him. What actually happened may be different as could my support for him. Mark

It's turned into some night eh? LOL. I don't think anyone will ever really know what happened but IF Sale went off on Robin, Kenny or Hahn and IF it was because he was tired of the BS, tired of the losing in this screwed up organization, two things: 1. I'll give the guy a standing ovation 2. I can almost guarantee you he'll be traded. JR will stand by "his guys" over one of the best pitchers in baseball. That's so JR, so White Sox. Remember loyalty is far more important than winning or accountability. Again IF he's had it with losing, I can't blame him. About damn time someone on the field cared about it. Mark

QUOTE (SI1020 @ Jul 23, 2016 -> 11:00 AM) No, I remember that go go era very well. Those 63-65 teams were good and fun to watch but they lacked a Frank Thomas caliber bat. However even if there were extended playoffs back then I don't know that the outcome would have been that much different. The 1949-64 Yanks were a well balanced juggernaut. In fact between 1951-64 the Sox went 118-174 against the Yanks, a .404 winning pct. The 1964 team had one of the best one year pitching staffs of all time but the team still lost to NY the first 12 times they played them. They won the last 6 but it was too little too late. If they go just 7-11 it's the Sox vs Cardinals in the WS. The Sox just could not beat the Yanks when it counted back then, traumatizing my childhood greatly. Let's list the corrections: 1. I went through this in a column a few years ago. If MLB had a two division format say starting in 1951, the Sox would have gone to the playoff six times between 1951 and 1967. 2. Just like now, playoffs would have been a crap shoot. The Sox would have had as good a chance as anybody because of that pitching. You usually don't have a lot of high scoring games in the post-season. Jerry Koosman told me it's actually harder to win in the playoff then the regular season because it's a short series. Koosman said one bad call by an umpire, one fluke injury like a twisted ankle, one fluke play and you could be eliminated. 3. The Sox lost the first 10 that year to New York but as Sox announcer Milo Hamilton told me the reason the Sox lost the pennant that year was because of a key DH loss to the Washington Senators against two pitchers who were terrible that year. The Sox to their credit won the last nine straight to close the 64 season, unfortunately the Yankees won 23 of their last 30 games that year. Pretty tough to stop anybody who does that. Mark

Let him pitch against the Cubs. Fine by me. He's probably not going Sunday either since Robin will be cautious. Mark

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 23, 2016 -> 10:34 AM) I don't agree that the probably is "much greater" either. You are counting on the White Sox to scout and develop a lot of young talent, all to arrive and succeed all within the same narrow window and giving up your best players to do it. The failure rate for teams without large market resources for failing at rebuilds is much higher than is being talked about here. There certainly are no easy answers, easy solutions and all involve some risk (that's baseball friends). But I am curious to hear as exactly as possible how you would get the team out of this mess. Thanks. Mark

And the bullpen urinates away yet another game...LOL 6-21 now vs. Cleveland, Kansas City and Detroit. Mark

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 22, 2016 -> 12:23 PM) The point is not to get prospects. The point is to get more great players on their roster. They cannot do that without taking the risk of getting them while their young and unproven. Or to put it another way the object is to get as much TALENT as humanly possible by ANY and all available means...signing free agents, making trades, signing international free agents, the rule 5 draft, the June draft. Doesn't matter how you do it, you've got to get talent. The Sox have some but nowhere near enough so you do what you have to do. I go back to Roland Hemond and Chuck Tanner when they took over as they both told me that was the objective to get as much talent as possible if that meant trading their better players (Aparicio, Berry) so be it. Like Chuck told me, "Mike Andrews wasn't as good of a player as Aparicio (even though he was ending his career) but together Andrews and Luis Alvarado made the team better, they gave the team better depth." That's why those guys traded or acquired 18 players in a 24 hour period at the winter meetings before the '71 season. History shows the Sox went from 56 wins in 1970 to 79 in 1971. That was also partly because they had an actual manager who knew what he was doing. Let's not forget that aspect. Mark

QUOTE (LVSoxFan @ Jul 22, 2016 -> 09:41 AM) Someone here once said that JR's M.O. is that he won't pay big bucks for management or unproven talent. While the latter might make sense, how's the former workin' out for ya, Jer? That was me based on JR's comments himself, but by 'management' he meant field managers or head coaches. He's never said anything about front office executives one way or the other. Mark

http://m.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article/190...trade-deadline/ Mark

QUOTE (captain54 @ Jul 21, 2016 -> 01:37 PM) The other question is.. who in their right mind would want to come here and deal with this mess? .. not to mention, deal with an 80 yr old owner who probably is not gonna be entirely open to a whole lot of sweeping changes? Legit point plus that person would have to know they'd be working possibly on a short timeline since there is no way to know how long JR will continue to own the franchise. It's not like said person knows he'll be around for 30 years. Like I said, the Sox have no quick and easy solutions. Everything is intertwined and you simply can't solve the issues going from A to B to C in a logical progression. Simply a very bad situation. Mark

He Gone: Very good post. Congrats to you. There is no easy solution I'm afraid to the Sox numerous issues. Maybe the simplest one is that they desperately need new ownership to get out of this rut of mediocrity. A new owner will bring in their own people and hopefully they'll be better at their jobs then the current group (how can they be worse?) Mark

The best move they can make and the FIRST move is for JR to s***can most of the folks on the baseball side and bring in people from winning organizations to look at the many Sox problems with a fresh set of eyes and new ideas. Mark

http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/cant-tr...x-or-the-bulls/ Not saying I completely agree but the point is certainly valid. Mark

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jul 20, 2016 -> 12:36 PM) Says JR wants to do "whatever it takes" and then says there may not be room in the budget for "el primo free agents". Lol. Dunt: According to the original poster Stone said JR needs to do "whatever it takes." Mark

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 20, 2016 -> 04:43 PM) Ironic, as he already won a game for Texas this year Well played and true. Thank God he's finally out of the organization. Mark

A good team sweeps the Mariners...the Sox are not a good team. The bullpen s***s the bed once again. Mark

Saw this on another web site and thought it was interesting. Just wanted to pass it along. The comments/ summery are the original posters: "Stoney was interviewed by Rongey and Bernstein, Tuesday afternoon show on the Score.. He didn't hold back when asked about where he thinks the Sox are, where they are headed, etc 1) he basically said Robin blew it by sending Robertson out there cold, on 9 days rest on the 7/18 game 2) the Sox are kidding themselves if they think they can acquire hitters and position players from their prospects and mid level free agents to compete for a postseason spot while the "core" is intact, over the next couple of years..the offense as it stands, is no where near the caliper you need to realistic think you have a shot at the postseason, this, or next year 3) he said he knows for a fact JR wants to win...badly... And for that to happen, he's going to have to make some "uncomfortable" decisions and do "whatever it takes" 4) He thought it was a slim to none chance JR is selling .. But given JR's age, he might have to think outside of the box, citing the poor record from 2006 to present and consider, FO personnel changes, if need be 5) there's Teams out there with great farms, and near ready prospects, who need pitching. So don't necessarily shop Sale and Quintana, but listen to all offers. Especially if the budget isn't there for the el primo free agents." Mark

QUOTE (BrianAnderson @ Jul 19, 2016 -> 02:54 PM) That might be true, however look at this roster. Just take a giant step back and lose all Sox ties to it. Then ask this question - can this team win a WS? For you to answer yes to that question, then you keep going and try to acquire pieces. If no, then you try retool. Here's the first thing - although we are all fans and love to dream, trading something like Sale during the season isn't happening. He just won't be the first player moved, they lose all leverage on all other players like this. You move someone like a Robertson when you have internal answers in Fulmer and Burdi and Jones in the pipeline. That's the smart move. But take that line away for a second - the FO sees this as such: Rodon should take a step forward next year (though honestly I was expecting that this year too). Shields should be very serviceable as 4/5. Now you have a solid staff lined up to throw 200IP from 1-5 (just pluggin in Miguel Gonzalez for kicks next year). With that pitching staff you shouldn't have to rely so much on your bullpen, but even at that, you should have Robertson, Jones, etc. next year. Some of the arms that were injured and then throw in Burdi. Plug maybe a decent FA. You move to the offense. One can make a case that around the infield diamond we are fine next year. We are fine in Lf/RF. We are not fine at DH. We are not fine at C. We are not fine at CF. Not saying its possible - but let's say somehow you acquire a Dexter Fowler, Ian Desmond (should have had him this year except were being giant morons), Colby Rasmus or Carlos Gomez (on the cheap, personally don't like him at all) At Catcher I'm not plugging in anybody - its a terrible position with not much talent out there except LuCroy. Somebody else has a better minors system than us to get him. At DH get me a Carlos Beltran for a year, or something. Or maybe you make some trades giving up decent trade chips, but ones you can afford to knowing if it fails, that you are rebuilding anyways, so who cares. Spencer Adams, or a decent trade chip to get someone like a Volgbach from the Cubs. What I'm saying is you spend money or trade and you can have a lineup that is decent, pitching that is good and defense that is above average. If that team can get you to the playoffs -- hten you have Sale and Q to lead you. At that point WS is possible. Which is why the FO will keep plugging until the tear down next year if they don't produce. Think of that lineup Fowler Eaton Abreu Beltran Melky Frazier Anderson Lawrie Avila Not too shabby. Beltran could probably be overpaid at a 1yr deal with a ok buyout. or 2 years at the most. Fowler/Desmond would probably take 4/60, but is tradable in a tear down. So you really aren't adding much risk. Of course the big question would be, would the players acquired actually produce? Or would they be the latest in a string of acquisitions that as soon as they put the Sox uniform on fall on their faces. Mark

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 19, 2016 -> 12:35 PM) We were stupid for getting him work in a blowout game a couple weeks ago, now we're stupid for not getting him work in blowout games The difference was Robertson hadn't pitched in at least 10 days before he came into the game last night since he missed the Atlanta series and was off during the All Star break. I agree you don't use a closer in a non save situation but these were extenuating circumstances and throwing on the side (and I personally know this) can never replicate what goes on during a game. Mark

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Jul 19, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) We lost a game (AGAIN) that we should have won. But, I think the move to bring in Robertson in the 9th was sound. Sale was getting a bit wild and was obviously tiring. Robertson is your closer and hadn't pitched for a long stretch. That is becoming a disturbing norm with this team though. We haven't played good solid ball and we go stretches where our best relief pitchers , specifically Jones and Robertson aren't getting work. I don't think there can be any argument they need to be in meaningful games to stay sharp. DR wasn't real sharpy but the umpiring didn't help nor did some questionable catching moves by Navarro. However, you need to work over those things and DR couldn't do it. I am concerned how DR enters a game and gives up a hit to the first batter seemingly all the time. The lack of some clutch hitting doesn't help either. I think we had like 11 hits and score only three. One a solo homer and the other a two run shot. It is what it is I guess and hopefully we start getting things straightened out. Let's start tonight! Given that Robertson hadn't pitched in awhile, all the more reason to give him some work in the blow out games in Anaheim in my opinion so that he wasn't rusty when he was really needed. Mark