Reddy

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 08:12 PM) You can't tell me CQ at 29 doesn't have great bat speed and isn't still a great prospect. I just read an article saying SD wants to lock him up with a multi year deal. So now we go with DeAza, Rios and Tank? With Lilly as the 4th outfielder? I am hoping for the best. I think the loss of CQ is HUGE to our lineup though. HUGE. the first bolded is laughable. 29 =/= prospect the second: you're just wrong.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 08:11 PM) A young flame throwing lefty built like Jose Contreras. Dude, you need to read up on him then start your argument again. my bad. got two of the guys mixed up. we got four new pitchers, don't have em all straight yet since they're no names. how bout this: a young flamethrowing lefty AND a guy built like Jose Contreras who started the futures game 2 years ago. I'm ok with it

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 08:05 PM) What do you mean he didn't have value, you just compared the prospects received for him to Konerko, Danks, Thornton, Buerhle, Garland. 3 of which were Ron Schueler's doing. KW fleeced SD. i did no such thing. I didn't say these two guys are going to pan out at all. I'm just saying that nobodies CAN turn into somebodies. That's it. And Castro was a highly touted prospect until he had a bad year. You'll cut CQ a break on his s***ty seasons but not a young flamethrowing lefty build like Jose Contreras? I want these guys to be good so, so badly. Mostly just to pull this thread back up in a couple years.

QUOTE (DirtySox @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 08:02 PM) Good luck my friend. You aren't going to change the minds of the pouting anti-rebuilding club. i know i'm just having fun while my roommate watches Community on hulu. (Roku is amazing)

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 07:59 PM) Yeah I'm a troll because I'm defending a proud White Sox player (not a guy stealing a paycheck like Rios) with statistics. It'd be easy to just agree with many on here and be considered a member of the club, not a troll. whahahahahhaaaaaaaattt!? using STATISTICS? I thought you agreed with "statistics be damned!" you also used your statistics badly. you proved the antithesis of your point... since you showed that Quentin never played a full season in his career.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 07:59 PM) Exactly my point, although I would venture to guess KW's percentage is a little lower than average. That's why trading anything of value you have for prospects is stupid. repeat after me: at this point in time, Quentin didn't HAVE value. Quentin. Didn't. Have. Value. There you go.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 07:51 PM) Actually knew everyone but Buerhle but its nice to know the guys KW acquired for Quentin are guaranteed to turn out like the above. It is interesting you didn't list all the other players that have been acquired that we didn't "know" and never will, but that would be accurate and ruin your post. Trading Quentin isn't wrong, trading him for garbage is. Just call it a salary dump and leave it at that. All you need to know about the Quentin trade, David Kaplan loved it. hahahahaha and you think every OTHER teams' prospects have all panned out huh? Yeah this is definitely unique to KW and the White Sox. 95% of ALL prospects don't pan out.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 07:30 PM) Unfair. Unfair. Unfair. He has been great the past year and a half mentality-wise. Carlos Quentin was a gamer. I truly hope we have other hitters (aside from Paulie) who can get as hot as CQ does. I can't believe a lot of people on here mock Carlos for his injuries but refuse to mock Jake for the same reason. The guy had 483 plate appearances last year, but he's hurt all the time. Rite. I can't believe the mocking of our own on here sometimes. Last year - CQ 483 plate appearances, 421 at bats. 2010: 527 plate apps. 2009: 399 plate appearaances, 99 games. 2008: 569 appearances. So in the last four years, he's played 118 games, 131, 99 and 130. One out of four years he's hurt a ton. Give me a fricking break regarding CQ. He's a stud IMO. hahaha so many great things about this post. 1) his 2011 was mediocre. I repeat. Mediocre. An .838 OPS, while not bad, is not ideal coming from your cleanup hitter - or a guy you're going to give $7.5 million to. 2) Jake Peavy had an injury NO OTHER PITCHER HAS EVER HAD and somehow has bounced back and is able to pitch at the major league level. That's an amazing accomplishment. All of his struggles have stemmed from that SINGLE injury 3) You proved yourself that Quentin is fragile and injury prone. He's never played a full season for us. NEVER. NOT ONCE. NOT A SINGLE TIME. You can't pay a guy elite money for 66% of the playing time.

QUOTE (mcgrad70 @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 04:18 PM) Wow, you have no issues with a roster that's probably closer to last place in their division than first. It's this acceptance of mediocrity and blind loyalty to this ownership that will keep this Sox mired in the dumps for decades. Reinsdorf's act would have played out a long time ago anywhere else except Chicago. Michael Jordan not Frank Thomas is the reason why Reinsdorf has remained viable this long. Sox fans would have a cardiac if someone like Arte Moreno took over. Imagine having an owner committed to winning rather than one who constantly whines about the cost of winning. All we do is talk about accounting issues. It's Reinsdorf's responsibility to put people in the seats - not ours. Let him find something else to do if he can't deal with the economic realities of what it takes to be an elite organization. 120 million dollars - that's chump change - he needs to spend at least half that much on improving the sorry state of his minor league organization. And mark my words, you will never see him pay a luxury tax to get the Bulls and their long-suffering and loyal fans a championship. Chicago needs sportsmen to run their franchises - instead of these ma and pa run organizations that eat off the team's profits to survive. This town deserves way better than what we have. I'll now await the expected barrage of criticism from the Reinsdorf lemmings. he put up $130 Million and we still sucked. what the hell do you EXPECT him to do? and for the record - the Cardinals, Tigers, Rangers, Brewers, Dbacks and Rays all made the playoffs with a lower payroll than ours. Our payroll was more than the Rays and Dbacks COMBINED. $$ =/= Winning

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 03:56 PM) I honestly don't get why people are so upset about losing him. Between the streakiness and the constant injuries he made a poor middle of the lineup bat. He's a perfect example of why you can't just look at stats in a vaccum. Yes he put up decent numbers in aggregate, but he killed our offense when he was cold or hurt, which was a significant portion of the season. it's just greg and DickAllen - and it's because we traded him for guys they've never heard of. Kind of like that no namer we drafted in the 38th round in '98, or that third base prospect we got from the Reds, or that kid we traded Matt Karchner for from the Cubs, and that lefty we got from Seattle for the next cant-miss prospect AKA Joe Borchard, or that southpaw we've got replacing Buehrle who we got from Texas a few years back... forget his name too... OH WAIT NOW I REMEMBER ALL OF THEM! Mark Buehrle Paul Konerko Jon Garland Matt Thornton John Danks we didn't know their names either.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 03:48 PM) Like Adam Dunn? AWWW SNAP! greg you got burned.

QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Jan 2, 2012 -> 10:27 AM) Jackson can choose where he wants to play. He may be comfortable and enjoy playing for the Sox. He may even take a bit less money to play for the Sox than to play for the Yankees. Jackson could choose not to play for the Royals or Pirates just because of their recent history. Floyd however would play for the Pirates or Royals if that is who the Sox traded him to. Basically, a team would trade for Floyd because Jackson would rather play for the Sox than for them. This is all very unlikely, but it has my mind on hot stove. KW is aggressive and under the radar so the idea of E Jax is at least plausible. why in the world would EJax choose less money with the Sox over more money with the Yankees??

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 1, 2012 -> 10:45 PM) He only pitched 12 innings more than Floyd and his WHIP was 1.30. I said that he was a good pitcher - I just don't think that 200 IP is a huge thing anymore. there's something to be said about a guy you just don't have to worry about. our entire rotation is a question mark. Danks is pretty solid, and so is Floyd, but the other 3... we just don't know. Having a solid, steady guy the anchor the rotation that you don't have to waste a thought on is rare. that said, statistically speaking I don't think we should see THAT much of a downgrade. In the AL from this point on MB is a 4.00 pitcher. in the NL he'll be low to mid 3's.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 1, 2012 -> 04:37 PM) Cmon. Are you serious? yes.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 1, 2012 -> 04:34 PM) IT's the Quentin appreciation thread, so let's not bother with this in here. haha sorry. fair enough.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 1, 2012 -> 04:11 PM) I don't know why some of you guys consider Ozzie a quitter. Ozzie says a lot of things like all ballplayers/baseball people. Just like Kenny lied and said he'd trade for guys ready to contribute now. Lie. At Ozzie's age, name a better candidate to be a manager on a baseball team. His resume was built in Chicago and now other teams get to reap the benefits the next 20 years. Great. And we get Robin Ventura, who should make the game threads very very interesting this year (unless it's full of people assuming we're going to lose most games the next 10 years as we "rebuild") bolded #1: because he quit. bolded #2: you really want a GM that tells the truth all the time? then you can have a team that is constantly in last place. bolded #3: you love Ozzie because he was a White Sox player with no managerial experience. You rip Ventura because he's a former Sox with no managerial experience. Got it.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 1, 2012 -> 03:52 PM) Exactly, stats be damned. The man could absolutely rake the ball when he got hot. stats be DAMNED???? are you kidding me? and what exactly was he good for all the other times when he WASN'T locked in? You're telling me you're supposed to keep a player who's good only 25% of the time?? I know by now I should just ignore you, but that's up there with one of the dumber things I've read from you.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 31, 2011 -> 11:30 PM) The Sox dump yet another player I like. I'm glad for Carlos he gets to go to an area where he has a lot of history. I like the guy. When he gets hot ... he rakes big-league pitching. I think of CQ I have positive feelings. Another of my faves gone. Amazing. I do truly hate KW. 7.8 WAR over 4 seasons. 1.95 WAR/Season This is completely s***ty for the amount of money he makes. I liked Quentin too, but this move had to be made. I know you'll never understand this stuff, but the move was in the best interest of the team. BUT since it's an appreciation thread, TCQ when you were locked in you could mash better than anyone in the game. He was just scary at the plate, and I'll remember that. Best of luck in SD.

Ok ima take a break cuz typing on a phone is hard but gimme better options than iowa first and i'll try and poke holes in 'em later

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 01:26 PM) In other words his time in Iowa had nothing to do with his poll numbers dropping, it happened long before that point. Again, Iowa was irrelevant here. Not true. The question is would they have dropped as dramatically elsewhere? We cant say. But we also cant have some sort of random rotating system where one year mississippi or alabama is first.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 01:15 PM) So in other words, retail campaigning of the sort that you tell us is important in Iowa would work well for Rick Perry, but his campaign imploded because of his inability to cut it on a national stage. One might conclude from this that the sort of retail campaigning done in Iowa is effectively worthless in evaluating a candidate's ability to succeed on a national stage, and is in fact counterproductive. Instead, a candidate should face much larger, national level tests during the primary phase, since that is the type of test that will be required in the general election. Wait what? How'd you get that from that? Perry f***ed up debates and his Iowa poll numbers plummeted as well. I'm not saying debates dont matter obviously they do. But I think regardless of the debates he was still just the flavor of the week for a while and when iowans realized he didnt know jack s*** they jumped ship. He tried to win them back with folksiness and radical commercials and iowans didnt bite. Alabamians would have

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 01:07 PM) Rick Perry's campaign imploded because of his terrible debate performances, not because of anything silly he did in Iowa. Iowa doesn't have some monopoly on "Having candidate debates". Im not suggesting otherwise, just that he thought he could get away with being charming and likeable above all else.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 12:54 PM) If anything it does more harm than good. You're vote becomes based more on irrelevant stuff like a smile, a quick soundbyte, or a handshake versus their actual positions. You dont live in iowa and havent experienced a caucus correct? So tell me how you know so much. Ive been there, and iowans ask questions and want answers - not bs. Remember earlier in the thread when iowans were personified as holier than thou? Well maybe they do act that way, but what that means is we want actual answers because in this state you CANT get away with a handshake and a smile. Ask Rick Perry.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 11:43 AM) Examples of states more diverse than Iowa, just in the general part of the country. Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Tennessee for starters. About the only states equal or less diverse are the Dakotas, Wyoming, and Montana. And Iowa is the most moderate of all those states. And way to skew the question. Im not convinced i asked which states were more racially diverse.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 29, 2011 -> 12:27 PM) Briefly speaking to a candidate in person doesn't actually make you more informed than someone with an internet connection. Do you think the average person really does extensive internet research?