ZoomSlowik

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 21, 2005 -> 12:19 PM) There's no comparison between Andruw Jones and Aaron Rowand. Jones is a superstar, and Rowand is an average all around player. Don't forget, Jones isn't exactly old, and he should be hitting his peak this season. But since there's obviously no chance of acquiring Jones now, there's no more reason to look back on what might have been. And the difference between stats that guys had last year like Beltre, etc. is that there was no testing involved. By no means am I saying A. Beltre and others were on roids, but stats this year are much, much more relevant. I wasn't comparing Rowand and Jones overall, I was comparing their defensive capabilities. Frankly I don't think their D is all that different, maybe 1 ball that is caught a week. Beltre was just an example. The point is that current performance is not that reliable an indicator for future results. Jones could easily go back to hitting in the mid 30's next year just like his career numbers, much like Derek Lee probably isn't going to be anywhere near a Triple Crown contender next year. Even considering the power boom, his batting average and on base numbers are not any better than they were in the past. He's still not a $12 mil a year hitter, although he's impersonating one on TV.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan99 @ Sep 21, 2005 -> 12:05 PM) Actually, almost none of Buehrle's stats are better. Zambrano has lower BAA, OBPA, WHIP, more strikeouts, only one less wins, and a lower ERA. Peavy is a better pitcher than Mark without a doubt. The only reason I would possibly take Mark over Peavy is he throws more innings and is more durable. A healthy Peavy is better than Mark without a doubt though. Like I said, Mark would be a #1 starter for a lot of teams, but at this point in his career he isn't an ace. You need to compensate for the difference between the NL and AL. In general, the ERA's in the AL are much higher than in the NL. Plus Zambrano gets gift outs and K's by pitching in the NL because of the pitchers hitting. Put Buehrle somewhere like Petco park and his ERA sinks to the mid 2's. Peavy is a stud, but Zambrano is way too inconsistent.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Sep 20, 2005 -> 09:06 PM) So what your saying is that only 2 out of 31 teams had interest in Maggs at the start of the 2004 season, actually before the start of Spring Training? Looking at the 2004 squad what was needed more another Bat or try and trade for an actual starting pitcher? Also, let compare numbers..two and half years VS 5 years..Hmm which would I rather have? Your Right 5 years is better. Also who is better built for the long haul.. Meaning after this year I say Cleveland has a 4-5 year run ahead of them, if we are lucky we have this year and maybe next year. There wasn't that much interest in Maggs going around. He was a guy in the last year of his contract that was already getting payed a ton. Not that many teams could have taken on his contract for the rest of the year. It would have been like $14 mil if we dealt him in Spring Training (which we weren't likely going to do because we looked like a contender), or still 7 or 8 mil around the trade deadline. That's why Jones came up because he had so much money left on his deal. Jones is a good player, I won't argue that. However, as I said before, I don't want him for what he's getting payed. Is he really that different a hitter than Paul Konerko, who a lot of people don't want to sign for more than $10 mil? I know, he's much better defensively, but is he really that much of an upgrade over Rowand? I'd rather not dish out that kind of money for a guy who struggles to hit .270. The fact that he is having a career year in terms of power numbers doesn't really change my mind. Adrian Beltre hit 48 homers last year, that doesn't mean he's suddenly worth the contract he got. Plus we would have been stuck with another player in Ortiz that was in the last year of his contract and was due a big raise. We almost certainly would have tried to resign him if we made the deal, which would have been a disaster. Having more than $20 mil locked up in Andruw Jones and Russ Ortiz is not the way to build a contender.

I like the NCAA overtime better. Not only do I like it because both teams get the ball, but I like that most of the time a touchdown wins the game. NFL overtimes just seem so anti-climactic most of the time. A couple of first downs and teams play for the FG and stop going for the endzone. With the threat of your opponent matching or beating it, you can't let up. I like the idea of starting them further back though. The 50 yard line would be a good spot in my opinion because it forces you to about 25 yards to get a reasonable field goal attempt.

Most Cubs fans are delusional in some way or another, but I at least run into some of the few intelligent Cub fans. It seems like a lot of them are either sympathetic or indifferent to the Sox. However, they all lack a grasp of basic logic. I still say the Cubs one is bigger either way because they were up 9 1/2 on September 1st and managed to blow it. Ours was 7 1/2. They also went something like 8-20 to finish the season, much worse than us.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 20, 2005 -> 05:27 PM) Zoom...I'd hate to see your evaluation of the Sox players then. Perralta is having a terrific offensive season for the Indians, and will likely keep getting better. Who would have thought that this year, Sizemore and Perralta would just destroy Rowand and Uribe in terms of offensive production? He's good this year, but so was Rowand last year. I'd like to see him do it twice before I declare him a stud.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Sep 20, 2005 -> 05:18 PM) I never said that, What I am saying is that their GM was able to rebuild in 2 years to contend for a divsion title. I wish we could do what Cleveland did, but alast look who we have running the player personal...We should have traded Maggs b4 last season, along with about 16000000000000000000 other moves, to make this team better for the long haul not just a chance for one year. First off, it's been at least since 2000 that the Indians competed for anything. Second, are we really better off if we have Jones? He's hitting with a lot of power this year, but not much average, and he's signed for several more years and a lot more money. Plus we were still trying to resign Maggs. Third, pretty much everyone is back next year, with only Paulie a strong possibility to go.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 20, 2005 -> 05:11 PM) So it's just luck that a lot of their young guys have panned out? Sometimes, you have to give credit where it's due. They risked a few years of losing and poor attendance to reload the entire organization. They're in great position to have about 5 years of World Series caliber teams. It's not all luck, but some of it can clearly be attributed to some good fortune. They got three very good prospects for Colon from the Expos. They probably got more for him than the A's got for Mulder and Hudson combined. Two of those guys have become key parts of their team in Lee and Sizemore. They also got Hafner in a deal where Aaron Myette was the centerpiece for two weak players. Anytime you your #3 hitter in a deal centered around Ryan Drese, some luck is involved. Also, they got plenty of extra draft picks from letting guys like Ramirez, Thome, and Alomar go, giving them more shots at good picks. We don't have those kind of guys. We got some decent stuff for Lee, but he was by far our most valuable piece and had two years left on his deal. Would Konerko with 1 year left get us an everday starter and a decent bullpen arm? I'm not sure. Thomas and Everett would get us squat. Do any of you remember how good the Indians were before this stretch? They were a terror for a while, with some of the best lineups I've ever seen. It's a little easier to rebuild when you have so many good pieces. Plus, I'm sure many of us here wouldn't want to have little to no shot at competing for the next 4 years or so while we did this. More importantly, I don't think the Indian's personel is that strong. I think they are a decent team that hit really well for about a month and a half and are now winning some close games because of a decent pen. Millwood is not this good a pitcher. He can still be decent, but I doubt he has an ERA under 3.50 the next few years. C.C. Sabathia is talented but hasn't done a whole lot. Lee is merely decent, Westbrook looks like the old Garland, and Elarton is a scrub. Plus, how good is their lineup? I can't say I'd want anyone after Martinez in last night's lineup. Sizemore looks good, Hafner is a stud, and Martinez looks pretty good. I'm not sure about Perralta yet. The rest don't really impress me, except Belliard when he is on. The only way I see them as a supremely dominant force is if they use some money to get some major players in FA.

Don't make the Indians out to be this ungodly good team with a superb manager. They're where they are right now because they traded off the bulk of their veterans while they were still decent and have been brutal since 2000. In breaking up their team, they somehow convinced Montreal to give up most of their farm system for Bartolo Colon, managed to get Hafner and I think Hafner for almost nothing and I believe they drafted Sabathia. They managed to have like all of their prospects pan out over that stretch (with the exception of Brandon Phillips). No matter how good your scouting in that takes some luck. Plus, they decided to give a decent sum of money to Juan Gonzalez, and I'll eat an Indians hat if Millwood pitches this well for the rest of his contract.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 20, 2005 -> 03:32 PM) they rank near the bottom of the MLB in attendance however. I dont think their payroll will increase significantly. Secondly, we still have the best record in the AL, how many times has a GM or Manager been fired over that? If we were in our division last year with this record, would you still be calling for the same thing? Two words: Grady Little.

I have only one response... White Sox! White Sox! Go Go White Sox! Let's go, go, go White Sox! We're with you all the way! You're always in there fighting and you do your best, We're glad to have you out here in the Middle-west! We're gonna root, root, root, root White Sox, And cheer you on to victory! When we're in the stands we'll make those rafters ring! All through the season you will hear us sing, Let's go, go, go White Sox, Chicago's proud of you! I've been playing that all day.

I am so sick of hearing about how we didn't go out and acquire a bat or a pitcher at the deadline. Is Danys Baez really going to solve our problems? Were we supposed to give up half or roster or farm system for guys that their teams didn't really want to trade, like Griffey, Huff, Schmidt or Burnett? Come on. There just wasn't much to be had, and what was there was ridiculously expensive. Jay would probably be whining and moaning about how we traded away potential stars for stop gap solutions if we had done it. The constant complaints about our offense are getting old too. Our offense hasn't been our problem recently. At least make the right complaint if you're going to gripe. In our 8 losses in September, we scored at least 5 runs in 5 of them. What's funny is of our 10 wins this month, we scored 2 runs or less in 4 of them. It seems that our problem is that we can't get the quality pitching and hitting in the same game, not that we can't score.

I could definitely buy us sweeping them. Last night excluded, they haven't been putting up a whole ton of runs recently. After hitting .295 in August, they're down to about .270, and I think that went up about 15 points after the 11 run outing. Only 4 of their regulars are hitting over .240 this month (granted those 4 are also over .300, but I digress). Amazingly this month the Sox are at .279, with A.J. and Carl being under .270 (and Carl is really bad this month). Although Cleveland's ERA has been fantastic of late, we get favorable pitching matchups in this series. The only one I see as close is Garcia vs Millwood, which could go either way. However, we seem to have a big advantage in the other two with Buehrle and Garland facing Westbrook and Elarton. I'll be at the game tonight, so let's get this division wrapped up already!

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Sep 17, 2005 -> 08:04 PM) Right now, even if Marcus Williams comes back, I don't see anyone overtaking Duke. Duke is absolutely loaded with talent and experience, if K doesn't win it all this year its a major chokejob. Josh McRoberts will be one of the top 5 freshmen in the nation, he's unbelievably talented at 6'11. However, if Shelden Williams goes down, Duke could have alot of problems on the inside with toughness. I think we've been through this before, but I just don't see Duke as being this unbeatable powerhouse. He's had much better teams, and as for the "major chokejob" part, it would be nothing compared to the 1999 team that lost in the title game. I wouldn't even call this the best 1-2 punch he's had. I'd much prefer Williams/Battier or Hill/Laettner, and both of those pairings had a better supporting cast. They're also not that "loaded with talent and experience." Redick and Williams are both solid players with a lot of talent, but after that it gets a little more thin. Dockery and Melchionni are upper-classmen, but neither is exactly a gamebreaker. Dockery is okay at managing a game and can play some decent defense, but does little else. Melchionni is basically Redick, only much less proficient. Reggie Love falls into this category too. He's a minute eater at best. The real keys for them are going to be DeMarcus Nelson and the incoming freshmen, of which probably McRoberts and Paulus are going to get more than garbage time. At least one of them has to be an impact player, otherwise it looks like they could have some major problems if Redick has an off-night or Williams gets in foul trouble, similar to Kansas last year when no one but Simien did anything. Ewing did that for them last year, they'll need something similar. They need to average around 80 a game to really be good. They averaged about 78 last year, and lost almost 20 in Ewing and Randolph, which is at least what they need to make up in scoring improvements and from newcomers, and that's assuming no dropoffs (which I could see from Redick with a more diverse scoring attack, much like McCants did last year). They'll be fine if McRoberts, Melchionni or Ewing turns into a consistent low-double figures scorer, but if they struggle to find a consistent 3rd option (which looks highly possible), it'll hurt their chances a bit. McRoberts looks like the most likely choice, but I personally think that he's most likely to average between 8-12, with only a slight chance of matching Ewing's production. Melchionni will probably be a bit erratic in his scoring because of his dependence on his shot, and although Nelson has talent, he needs to improve his shooting a bit. Before you say Paulus, his greatest attribute is not his scoring ability, and he probably won't take many shots as a freshmen. They're still one of the more talented teams, but frankly no matter what they do it wouldn't surprise me. They need some of the former role players to make a bigger impact to really reach their potential, especially since they're probably only going to go 8 deep tops. I like Villanova more because they have less reliance on individual players. Ray, Foye, and Sumpter are all solid scorers, Lowry looks like he's going to play a bigger role this year, Fraser is solid in the post when healthy, and Sheridan and Nardi are solid role players. Another option or two of the bench could be nice, but all of those guys are pretty solid.

I don't buy BC, Louisville, Syracuse, Kansas, Wake Forest, Kentucky, or Indiana being as high as they are (that's my rough order of disagreement in descending order). I don't understand how BC can lose in the second round, make no impact additions, and suddenly be in the top 10. Louisville still has some talent with Dean, Palacios, and Padgett coming in, but they aren't top 10 good. I really think Syracuse is going to struggle. The only guys that have proved their worth are McNamara, who is horribly inconsistent, and Edelin, who never seems to be able to stay on the floor. Everyone else needs to get significantly better, and someone needs to be a threat from outside. Kansas just has too many young guys to make major noise. Yes, they're good. However, they need three guys to be major players in order to warrant top 25 status. Wake has a lot of question marks outside of Eric Williams. Gray is a solid player, but can he play the point? The other guys they have are getting much bigger roles. People are seriously overrating Kentucky. Unless Randolph Morris is eligible, they have a massive hole in the post, and although Rondo and Sparks are good, they aren't good enough to carry the team. Indiana has some talent up front but they need some guards to step up. UConn has much more talent than most of the teams ahead of them, but their PG problem needs to be resolved. If Williams comes back, they immediately move to #1 in my book. If Price becomes eligible but not Williams, they're more like 4 or 5. If neither do, I still see them as top 10. I don't see how a Michigan State team that also didn't have a true PG was pre-season top 10 last year and UConn isn't this year. MSU had better guards, but only the underachieving Davis up front and no real star. UConn has a rising star in Rudy Gay, who is probably the most talented player still in college. They have Josh Boone, who is a solid rebounder and shot-blocker that's a go-to post move away from being a major impact player. They have Rashad Anderson, who is a great shooter and a dangerous scorer now that he is healthy again. They have Denham Brown, who is a pretty solid all-around G/F. They also have other solid but less experienced options up front in Armstrong and Boone, and decent newcomers in Marques Johnson and Jeff Adrien. If they get any kind of credible play at PG, they'll be really tough to beat. Edit- I guess Edelin is no longer at Cuse. That makes me dislike their ranking even more.

God, I just looked at Yahoo!'s pre-rankings and they are seriously ridiculous. Everyone make sure they make some adjustments, otherwise you might end up taking Kyle Korver over Dwayne Wade. Edit- I just got back my first auto-draft team I did for s***s and giggles. My starting guards are Wade, Redd, and Davis; forwards are Jefferson, Anthony, Brand; C's are Duncan and Brezec; utility Chander and Dwight Howard, and I still have Randolph, Hilario, and Curry on the bench. Seriously, make sure you adjust the rankings, otherwise someone in your league could get this.

Alright, I'm in. Now it's time to defend my honor.

I agree with the previous two guys. Both McGahee and Rudi Johnson are locks to get 20 carries, which is not the case with Larry Johnson. He's not going to average 10 yards a carry on a regular basis. I'd say it's about 60 yards and a TD tops for Larry, where the others could both easily get 100 and a score.

I want in. I need to make up for my disastrous season last year, where I took Shaq in the mid-first and started 3 players from the Magic.

I'm personally not that worried about the pitching matchups in the Cleveland series. Whether it's Contreras or Garcia, the matchups are favorable. It appears that it will be Garcia, Buehrle, and Garland versus Millwood, Westbrook, and Elarton. Yes, I would feel better if it were Contreras against Millwood, but we need to beat the Twins too. Frankly if we were going to do anything with the rotation, I'd like to see us drop Hernandez and use McCarthy against Santana, who might be a bit off due to his blister problems.

I'm going to come to Mark's defense here. He's performed as well as or better than pretty much any pitcher in the AL this season. He has 15 wins, which ties him for 4th in the AL, and that could have been higher if he didn't get screwed out of a couple of wins earlier. His ERA is the third best among qualifying starters in the AL, and is only .04 higher than the great Johan Santana (by the way, it appears that Santana has a blister problem, so we may or may not see him Saturday, and he might not be at his best even if he starts). Also, his numbers could be even better if he were not victimized by some poor defense in previous starts. I don't really think he's been pitching that bad anyways. He was okay last night, but the defense didn't exactly do him any favors. Pretty much every time the runners were taking an extra base on the outfielders. Some of those balls shouldn't have been doubles, and some of those guys shouldn't have been able to score from first. If our guys throw out or hold just 2 or 3 of those guys, it might have been a different start. Was it Mark's best outing? No. Was it his worst? No. I personally didn't think either of his pitches that Brown hit for a double were that bad, but he hit them, and the outfielders made sure maximum damage was done. The guy has been a monster for us most of the season, and we're panicking about a couple of bad starts that are coming at the wrong time. As someone said, this isn't all Mark's fault. We do, however, need some solid performances from Mark, Jon, Freddy (who frankly I've been the most upset with recently), and everyone else in the near future.

Can we please just hit Sweeney this time before something bad happens?

How many doubles is Mark going to allow today?

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Sep 15, 2005 -> 01:54 PM) inning/score? Top 3rd, 2-0 Sox with two on, 1 out.

You send A.J. and hold Willie? What kind of sense does that make? I'm not saying you necessarily should have sent Willie, but have some consitency and look at who's running.