I am not sure if this is an appropriate spot for this post, but I practically fell out of my chair when I learned that likey ROTY KC Royal pitcher who has the sixth best ERA among AL starters, and a 14 game winner belonged to the Mets last year. Omar Minaya, the GM of the Mets, is a decent GM but like Kenny, has fallen into the 'let's get a reliever from a last place ball club trap' when he dealt Bannister for the now injured and useless Ambiorix Burgos.

 

The GM of the Royals is a genius.

Edited September 3, 200718 yr by chisoxt

I am not sure if this is an appropriate spot for this post, but I practically fell out of my chair when I learned that likey ROTY KC Royal pitcher who has the sixth best ERA among AL starters, and a 14 game winner belonged to the Mets last year. Omar Minaya, the GM of the Mets, is a decent GM but like Kenny, has fallen into the 'let's get a reliever from a last place ball club trap' when he dealt Bannister for the now injured and useless Ambiorix Burgos.

 

The GM of the Royals is a genius.

 

To a degree, the Royals still had/have young talented pitching arms. They are low mileage and throw hard (at least guys like McDougal). He hasn't panned out for the Sox, but he was pretty serviceable for them. I wouldn't not deal with them, as I think they still have some players that will have some good careers, if not with them.

Great post. The Royals' GM is laughing.

MacDougal and Thornton are trash. Players I mean. They probably are great individuals but as players they are worthless. Just let 'em go. And Buckwheat also.

He's the worst of the 3.

First, I count 12 wins.

 

Secondly...it's a name everyone knows and recognizes.

 

Finally, Tyler Lumsden was terrible in AAA for the Royals this year, and Daniel Cortes hasn't touched AA yet. I'd also take Sisco - a former KC reliever - over Ross Gload simply because of upside and potential longevity.

 

So really, I'm not sure which reliever you're talking about, as far as the White Sox are concerned. MacDougal was absolutely outstanding for the Sox last year - the reason the move was made - and he's still got the stuff to be an absolute stud of a setup man or even fill-in closer now. And Gload is 31, while Sisco doesn't turn 25 until the turn of the year. I really don't believe the Sox were duped by the Royals in either deal, but perhaps that's just me.

 

 

Great post. The Royals' GM is laughing.

MacDougal and Thornton are trash. Players I mean. They probably are great individuals but as players they are worthless. Just let 'em go. And Buckwheat also.

He's the worst of the 3.

They got Thornton from the Mariners for Joe Borchard. Bukvich played for the Rangers and in the minors since being traded from KC by the previous GM, Allan Baird. I think he was a non-roster MLB camp invite for the White Sox, so, in terms of what he cost, he was also a good pick up.

The Royals GM, must be one smart guy.

It will be interesting to see if Davies can develop into a reliable 4th/5th starter for the Royals.

First, I count 12 wins.

 

Secondly...it's a name everyone knows and recognizes.

 

Finally, Tyler Lumsden was terrible in AAA for the Royals this year, and Daniel Cortes hasn't touched AA yet. I'd also take Sisco - a former KC reliever - over Ross Gload simply because of upside and potential longevity.

 

So really, I'm not sure which reliever you're talking about, as far as the White Sox are concerned. MacDougal was absolutely outstanding for the Sox last year - the reason the move was made - and he's still got the stuff to be an absolute stud of a setup man or even fill-in closer now. And Gload is 31, while Sisco doesn't turn 25 until the turn of the year. I really don't believe the Sox were duped by the Royals in either deal, but perhaps that's just me.

 

Good post. Especially when you consider as bad as KC has been for an extended period of time, and the amount of guys that they have rushed to the majors, many of the guys have not had the level of baseball education that you need to be successful. I could still see guys like Burgos and Sisco being successful if they have someone take the pressure off of them and give them the things they should have been learning slowly in the minors, instead of under the gun at the major league level. The arms are there, and you can't teach that. You can teach mechanics and mentality.

The Royals GM, must be one smart guy.

Yeah just look at all their recent success.

'd also take Sisco - a former KC reliever - over Ross Gload simply because of upside and potential longevity.

 

I wouldn't. Gload at least sprays the ball to all fields and might have been nice to insert in the lineup this year at times.

I wouldn't. Gload at least sprays the ball to all fields and might have been nice to insert in the lineup this year at times.

 

I know how you feel. Honestly, I do.

 

As has been explained before though, there's no difference between 66 wins and 86 wins if you don't make the playoffs, except draft differential. The Sox are in a position to make a top 3 pick, and even before the season, there was not much use of Gload in the future, and Sisco atleast has the stuff to be a very good setup man in the future. All Gload was ever going to do with the Sox was be a 4th OFer, because he wasn't playing 1B but 20 games a year (depending upon injury of course), and that has as much value to the Sox as, quite frankly, Andy Gonzalez or Luis Terrero.

Let's take a step back for a minute here....Ambiorix Burgos has NASTY stuff and is only 23. He may be injured this year, but the Mets have basically penciled him in as the closer for the future.

 

It's too early to say who the winner of this deal is. Obviously Bannister is having a great year, but let's also keep in mind he was injured for a majority of the 2006 season, so I can see why Omar Minaya pulled the trigger.

 

 

In all fairness the Mets brass for whatever reason did not like him and shopped him around to alot of teams, Royals said spin the wheel make the deal.

The Sox are in a position to make a top 3 pick,

 

In all of sports, a top three pick is the least valuable in baseball. I'd rank Basketball #1, Football #2, and Hockey #3. I have no idea about soccer, arena football, and NASCAR but baseball would be somewhere behind them as well.

I know how you feel. Honestly, I do.

As has been explained before though, there's no difference between 66 wins and 86 wins if you don't make the playoffs, except draft differential. The Sox are in a position to make a top 3 pick, and even before the season, there was not much use of Gload in the future, and Sisco atleast has the stuff to be a very good setup man in the future. All Gload was ever going to do with the Sox was be a 4th OFer, because he wasn't playing 1B but 20 games a year (depending upon injury of course), and that has as much value to the Sox as, quite frankly, Andy Gonzalez or Luis Terrero.

 

This is where we disagree. To me there is a big difference between 66 wins and 86 wins.

86 wins means it was a decent season.

My gawd, to some I guess we are at the point unless we have a shot at the playoffs we should just be the worst team in baseball.

Sports for me will never be that.

I would rather have the Bears contend this year, then lose their final four games and get a s***ty draft pick than lose every game and get No. 1.

I'm just saying maybe Gload as the fourth outfielder would have actually hit .290 or .300, put the ball in play and maybe by example help the lineup.

I also understand where you draft pick people are coming from, but I really don't understand your position. And it frustrates me (I know nobody cares) to read comments in the game threads from Sox fans so happy when we lose in embarrassing fashion again like tonight (4 hits).

 

I'd rank Basketball #1, Football #2

 

That sounds about right to me.

 

I looked over every NFL draft since 1970, and I could only find three legendary defensive players taken with a top 3 selection: Lawrence Taylor, Bruce Smith, and Randy White. Julius Peppers is well on his way, but that's still pretty weak.

This is where we disagree. To me there is a big difference between 66 wins and 86 wins.

86 wins means it was a decent season.

My gawd, to some I guess we are at the point unless we have a shot at the playoffs we should just be the worst team in baseball.

Sports for me will never be that.

I would rather have the Bears contend this year, then lose their final four games and get a s***ty draft pick than lose every game and get No. 1.

I'm just saying maybe Gload as the fourth outfielder would have actually hit .290 or .300, put the ball in play and maybe by example help the lineup.

I also understand where you draft pick people are coming from, but I really don't understand your position. And it frustrates me (I know nobody cares) to read comments in the game threads from Sox fans so happy when we lose in embarrassing fashion again like tonight (4 hits).

I guess to some, when it's September, and you are 2 games in the loss column away from the worst record in baseball, what's the point of going out there and winning 18 out of the last 20 games? There is no point. Moral victories are pretty shallow this time of year, unless it's generated by prospects that can be part of a better package later.

 

what's the point of going out there and winning 18 out of the last 20 games? There is no point.

 

What's the point of being a fan at all then?

Why not just be a fan of the draft?

Finish last every year and enjoy the draft.

The point is ENJOYING BASEBALL SEASON.

Enjoying victories instead of seeing your team get about five hits per contest.

Fifty below zero winter days are here soon enough.

Edited September 7, 200718 yr by greg775

What's the point of being a fan at all then?

Why not just be a fan of the draft?

Finish last every year and enjoy the draft.

The point is ENJOYING BASEBALL SEASON.

Enjoying victories instead of seeing your team get about five hits per contest.

Fifty below zero winter days are here soon enough.

 

With the way this team played this year, it may as well have been 50 below in June.