He also has 1436.7 IP on his arm. Freddy Garcia got to 1427.3 going into the 2006 season, had a solid year, and hasn't really been the same pitcher since.

 

That's a lot of mileage, and with a knot in his shoulder, I wouldn't trust him long-term.

I'll miss Jon, but I won't say that's a horrible deal yet. I'll see what he does this year, the contract he signs, what Cabrera does this year, and what happens afterwards with him (whether he resigns and remains solid or if he is let go and the Sox get 2 picks for him, and then what those picks amount to).

 

Nice, reasonable, rational, thoughtful post. What is it doing here at Soxtalk?

I wouldn't call him a stud, but he's an above average pitcher who is entering his prime...

 

I agree with you, why not call him a stud though? He's damn good.

He's been really good over a pretty long period of time.

But because he pitched for our Sox so many took him for granted.

Again, one game is not a full season, but if we're serious about winning a pennant, we need 3 solid starters. Losing Garland IMO potentially wrecked our rotation. We shall see.

I'm pullin for Danks n Floyd.

I agree with you, why not call him a stud though? He's damn good.

He's been really good over a pretty long period of time.

But because he pitched for our Sox so many took him for granted.

Again, one game is not a full season, but if we're serious about winning a pennant, we need 3 solid starters. Losing Garland IMO potentially wrecked our rotation. We shall see.

I'm pullin for Danks n Floyd.

 

I do agree that people have taken Garland for granted.

 

I do wish you'd pull for Contreras too though.

the kitties on the verge of dropping two to the Royals. I hope we don't go into detoilet 0-3 against the 0-3 tigers.

how much do programs cost? i remember they were $15 during the World Series!

He also has 1436.7 IP on his arm. Freddy Garcia got to 1427.3 going into the 2006 season, had a solid year, and hasn't really been the same pitcher since.

 

That's a lot of mileage, and with a knot in his shoulder, I wouldn't trust him long-term.

Much different sort of pitcher, though. Anything can happen, of course, I just don't think that comparison is very meaningful.

Much different sort of pitcher, though. Anything can happen, of course, I just don't think that comparison is very meaningful.

 

Yes, but when there is a history of having a knot in his shoulder, I'm not about to sign him to a long term deal. I've never heard anything about Buehrle and arm problems at all, which is why his extension was fine. Vazquez's was 3 years and he's never had arm problems. That shoulder of Garland will always provide lingering concern for me.

Great quote from Ozzie after yesterday's game....I just read it in the Sun-Times:

 

''Last year after the first game,'' Guillen said, ''you looked around the clubhouse, and it looked like they all owed something to someone.''

 

Hah....that one made me giggle...

Singleton praises Danks.

Heyman

The Boston Globe reported that both Chicago teams have been the hottest pursuers of Coco Crisp. Crisp's $5 million salary is a detriment, and I was surprised to see the White Sox already had the fifth highest payroll, at $122 million. I also heard the Cubs backed off a little once they signed Reed Johnson.

I don't know what's more surprising...that the Sox could possibly still be interested in Crisp given their seeming glut of OFers or that a national baseball writer would be unaware of the White Sox payroll.

If getting Crisp would mean Owens would not be anywhere near the MLB roster, I'd be for it... as long as Crisp didn't cost us anything of value.

 

Also, our offseason acquisitions of Swisher and Cabrera have yet to impress me. But, it's still early.

If getting Crisp would mean Owens would not be anywhere near the MLB roster, I'd be for it... as long as Crisp didn't cost us anything of value.

 

Also, our offseason acquisitions of Swisher and Cabrera have yet to impress me. But, it's still early.

The 3 walks in 5 AB's for Swisher don't do anything for you?

 

Yeah, they're a bit cold, but you could say that about our whole 1-4. I don't have a problem with Thome hitting .188 right now and you shouldn't have a problem with Swisher right now. Even if he's struggling with the bat, he's still going to get on base, which is a luxury we haven't had in recent years.

The 3 walks in 5 AB's for Swisher don't do anything for you?

 

Yeah, they're a bit cold, but you could say that about our whole 1-4. I don't have a problem with Thome hitting .188 right now and you shouldn't have a problem with Swisher right now. Even if he's struggling with the bat, he's still going to get on base, which is a luxury we haven't had in recent years.

Thome, he has put nothing but good swings on the ball, but the hits haven't really come yet... Swisher, while he has a great eye, has swung the bat pretty weak. I really have no gripe with Swisher as I do like him as a player, it's just the fact we gave up so much for him.

 

I am thinking the move to leadoff has messed with Swish's mentality a bit, as he may be trying to swing for just contact instead of power. Swisher, IMO, is a guy who should be hitting for power, and be in the middle of the order. Who knows.

Pierzynski's ability to spray the ball for hits stems from applying coach Harold Baines' theory, with the support of hitting coach Greg Walker, of driving the ball where it's pitched, rather than trying to pull every pitch.

 

Harold finally gives his input. Such a great hitter, you figure that he could help some of our hitters become better.

 

 

 

Harold finally gives his input. Such a great hitter, you figure that he could help some of our hitters become better.

 

Harold said what I was saying for my whole life... hit the ball where it's pitched. That obviously doesn't mean that you automatically have to hit everything based on where its pitched, but don't try and pull (or push) everything either.

Harold is one smart man. Hope the Sox do that all year. Hit it where it is pitched.

Novel concept.

The 3 walks in 5 AB's for Swisher don't do anything for you?

 

Yeah, they're a bit cold, but you could say that about our whole 1-4. I don't have a problem with Thome hitting .188 right now and you shouldn't have a problem with Swisher right now. Even if he's struggling with the bat, he's still going to get on base, which is a luxury we haven't had in recent years.

Personally speaking I hope somehow Ozzie sees the light because Quentin should be playing a lot, a whole hell of a lot. I really want Swisher and OC to do well atop the order and Quentin to rock because if they do that early, maybe, just maybe, Ozzie will back off his obsession of Owens.

 

I understand he isn't the only person in baseball obsessed with having speed at the top (after all, it has been done for the most part of the past 100 years of baseball) but it should be qualified with the fact that the player shoudln't be preventing a better player from getting ab's.

 

Thome, he has put nothing but good swings on the ball, but the hits haven't really come yet... Swisher, while he has a great eye, has swung the bat pretty weak. I really have no gripe with Swisher as I do like him as a player, it's just the fact we gave up so much for him.

 

I am thinking the move to leadoff has messed with Swish's mentality a bit, as he may be trying to swing for just contact instead of power. Swisher, IMO, is a guy who should be hitting for power, and be in the middle of the order. Who knows.

Realistically the Sox didn't give up much at all for him. I know the guys were the Sox best prospects but given the contract he is signed to it was an absolute bargain. Thats not to say Gio/Sweeney/DSL won't have fine major league baseball careers its more that I don't think any of them will ever be the type of player that Swisher is and will become (as Swisher, imo, hasn't peaked yet) and the fact that they have him signed to a bargain of a deal is even better.

 

Especially when I consider the alternative which is the funds that would have been tied to Hunter or Rowand (I do think Rowand's contract, given the market, was a good value).

Realistically the Sox didn't give up much at all for him. I know the guys were the Sox best prospects but given the contract he is signed to it was an absolute bargain. Thats not to say Gio/Sweeney/DSL won't have fine major league baseball careers its more that I don't think any of them will ever be the type of player that Swisher is and will become (as Swisher, imo, hasn't peaked yet) and the fact that they have him signed to a bargain of a deal is even better.

 

Especially when I consider the alternative which is the funds that would have been tied to Hunter or Rowand (I do think Rowand's contract, given the market, was a good value).

I think DLS has ace potential... And if he becomes a 1 or 2 and lights the world on fire when comes up, I'm going to be pissed.

It's Nintendo DS!!!

 

Pierzynski has been working with a vision-training game on his handheld device with the hope of improving his ability to pick up the baseball. So far, the reviews are good: two home runs, a .529 batting average and a team-high seven RBI through four games.

 

''With his hand-eye coordination and ability to hit the ball the other way, he should be a big RBI guy,'' teammate Paul Konerko said.

I think DLS has ace potential... And if he becomes a 1 or 2 and lights the world on fire when comes up, I'm going to be pissed.

going to be?

 

It's Nintendo DS!!!

Wow, I guess that vision training is actually good for something.