bubba phillips

With the win Friday night, the White Sox were officially eliminated from the race for the first pick.

This is absolutely priceless!!! Especially calling it "pitchers duel". I don't care whether this is a real picture or a photo shop. I hope others appreciate it as much as I do. It's better than the "Kramer and Newmann" picture of the Oakland pitchers. (Seinfeld characters for you young un's).

When the Sox started the first quarter of the season with a winning percentage of .250, several fans on the mlb.com board (since discontinued) were afraid the Sox might break the MLB record of worst team of all time (1962 NY Mets were 40-120). Obviously, their fears were unwarranted. We're much better than that. Now another record will not be broken: most losses by a White Sox team. The wonderful 1970 team had a record of 56-106. Last night's win was our 57th, so we cannot lose more than 105 games this season. Baby steps.

Yep. Yet another outfielder who can't hit.

That's a load of crap---all umpires should have the same strike zone. Of course none of them follow the written guidelines: knee high to "letter" high and across the plate. The robo ump info should be used for grading umpire accuracy. Set the standards (90% accuracy?) and then dump the bad umps if they don't improve after a period of time.

I think this goes back to about 2 months ago when Renteria DID stand up for Moncada and pissed and moaned that the kid wasn't getting any calls. The writer at mlb.com noted that umpires remember those things and will probably hold it against the kid for the rest of the season. Looks like he was right.

Covey is proving once again that he's ok as a relief pitcher for an inning or two, but he still sucks as a starter.

Yes, yes I do. I hate the Cubs that much.

My goal for the White Sox this year is to lose fewer than 100 games. Why? - psychologically, the record looks less horrific when the losses are not in triple digits. Teams with 100+ losses are treated with as much disdain as the teams that WIN 100+ are glorified. - fewer than 100 losses puts a better spin on the progress of the rebuild. - dropping from 3rd to 5th or 6th in the draft is insignificant. You'll still get a quality player (assuming the Sox know what they're doing). This year's draft had players picked late in the first round that many "experts" felt had top 10 talent. The chances of losing less than 100 games looked very promising after the Bosox series. With 24 games to go, we needed to go a mere 7-17 the rest of the way. But the current 6-game losing streak is making it interesting. Especially since 9 of the remaining games are against Cleveland and the Chubs.

That's 22 dingers in only 361 AB's. Over a full season of 600 at bats, that would project to 37 HR's. I think he's clinched a spot on next year's team. With Jimenez coming on board next year, I think that makes Delmonico the odd man out.

As if that makes that much of a difference. As an organization, we still can't pick and develop draft choices nearly as well as most of the successful teams in MLB. As an example, of our 5 starting pitchers, only one (Rodon) was a draft pick. We had to trade to get the others, relying on teams who knew what they were doing in the MLB Draft.

Yea, that's 5 great losses in a row, all at home, all against mediocre teams.

It wasn't really a White Sox collapse. Between late July and late September, Cleveland had a record of 40-13, while the Sox were treading water at 28-26. The Indians took 12 1/2 games off our 16 game lead and THAT'S what made it scary. But thankfully everything turned out well.

This is NOT Moncada's 1st year in the bigs. He had 199 AB's last year and now has a total of 722 for his career. His BA this year is lower than it was last year. How many at bats does he need to prove himself? 1000? 2000? By the way, he now holds the MLB record for most strikeouts in a season by a switch hitter.