South Side Fireworks Man

Everett was a big part of the Sox success in 2005. I'd like to see him coaching 1B instead of Baines.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 22, 2007 -> 05:58 PM) Saw the Brewers, that team is fun to watch. ... and they just happen to be 8 games up on the Cubs Maybe I'll have to adopt the Brewers as my favorite team for the rest of this season.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 22, 2007 -> 05:55 PM) Instead we are going to go out and trade for the next Todd Ritchie. Pelfrey?

Too bad the Sox probably won't sign Zambrano in the offseason. Not only would he be their best pitcher, he'd be their best RH hitter off the bench. Heck, they'd be better of DH'ing him against lefties on days he's not pitching.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Jun 22, 2007 -> 05:46 PM) Glad I didn't watch, this team blows. I turned the game off after the Cubs scored their rhird run. That's the first time I turned off the game early all season. I can't even remember when the last time was I turned off the game early because of disgust---probably back in '04.

Jermaine Dye can kiss my ass already.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 08:21 AM) Another trade I think has turned out extremely bad was sending Aaron Rowand away to Philly. As I've reflected on this, one of the strengths of that 2005 team was that, while we may not have had any superstars, we also didn't have any weak links, at least once Joe Crede and Juan Uribe started tearing the cover off the ball late in the year. By dumping Rowand for Thome, we added offensive production in the middle, but at the cost of sending out a home-grown tough guy who would run through a wall (literally) to win, and at the cost of putting an automatic out in the lineup. True. QUOTE(AirScott @ Jun 21, 2007 -> 08:30 AM) Well, one of the things the players always said in the 2005 run was that they always wanted to pick each other up after making a mistake, and when it was close and they were down in the late innings, they always felt like they could come back. Now for that last one, what gives a team that mentality? Is it just something they say as it keeps happening, or is it the team's make-up? Two of our most fiery players from 2005 who have departed are Aaron Rowand and Carl Everett. Were they responsible for that never-say-die mentality?Or could it be the underdog thing? Nobody predicted we'd do much in 2000. Then the next few years we were AL Central favorites. Then the media stopped believing in us, we changed the team identity and were predicted to finish 3rd or 4th in 2005, then won the whole thing. Now last year it was really World Series or bust. Frankly, we got slow fast. That obviously has something to do with it. Pods, Erstad and Ozuna went down. Willie Harris wasn't brought back after 2005. But just what happened to the clutch hitting? Yes.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jun 20, 2007 -> 04:55 PM) 5 years for 70 million... you'd have to brain dead to not give him that. And you'd also have to be brain dead to settle for that when you could get a lot more. I just went back and looked up where I thought I heard that--actually, I was mistaken. I was confusing what we were discussing at work this morning with what was actually printed. It comes from Phil Rogers suggesting the Sox should offer Mark $75M for 5years. That would definitely be a no-brainer for the Sox. I have previously said I think Buehrle could get $90M for 5yrs if he becomes a free agent. Edit: I also read this on mlbtraderumors.com -- "Both van Dyck and Buehrle himself give much credence to this particular trade talk. Buehrle wants to stay, but chances are slim because he's looking for a five-year contract. He deserves it, but it's not the White Sox way. Five years, $70MM sounds appropriate. Poor guy's got a kid coming soon; I'm sure he'd rather not go through this." Again this is just someone's opinion and not from Buehrle himself.

QUOTE(joeynach @ Jun 20, 2007 -> 04:27 PM) The problem with the whole sox against giving pitchers deals more than 3 years thing is that Buehrle isn't the type of pitcher this idea protects the team from. The whole 3 years thing is basically a good idea to protect against all those power pitchers throwing the heck out the ball and their arms. Guys like Kerry Wood, Bartolo Colon, Randy Johnson, AJ Burnett, etc. In which case I agree dont offer these power arms more than 3 years because as history has shown it is very likely they will break down and be injured for extended periods of time. The sox did a good job with this not offering Colon 4 years like the Angels did after 2003. The problem is Buehrle is exactly the opposite of this theory of 3 year contracts etc. If the sox don't like offering longer contracts to pitchers because they are worried about their durability, well than I think they are confused with who Buehrle is. If there was going to be one exception to the 3 years rule it would be Mark Buehrle This is absolutely correct. I read today that supposedly Buehrle is seeking $70M for 5yrs. If that's what he's really asking, it should be a no-brainer for the Sox to re-sign him today. By the end of that contract, $14M per year will be a bargain for a pitcher of Mark's calibur.

QUOTE(zygoat @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 11:23 PM) Is it just me or any time Thornton comes into the ballgame he struggles to get guys out and ends up blowing or giving them more of the lead? I guess you cant blame Ozzie because Boone Logan hasnt thrown a strike in about 4 outings Your thoughts, but I've just about had it with our lefties Logan has been one of the best guys in the Sox pen and their best LH reliever. Thornton got three up, three down when he was brought in last night. If Iguchi gets that bunt down, the Sox probably would have scored (can't say 100% sure because under a different situation maybe Konerko doesn't get a pitch to hit that SF) and Jenks would have pitched the ninth instead of Thornton. Although I agree it would be nice if you could count on Thornton to pitch to more than three batters.

I'd settle for the Sox scoring runners from 2B on a hit. A runner on 2B is not a runner in scoring position with most of the guys currently on the active roster.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2007 -> 04:11 PM) Its going to be the highlight of the rest of the season. The games are pretty meaningless at this point. Ozzie's press conferences are going to be classic. I bet you they have a team official nearby to make sure he doesn't say something that would get him in too much trouble. I was quite impressed with his self-control last night.

Iguchi, Cintron, Mackowiak, Dye and most of the current bullpen need to be traded before the deadline. Buehrle needs to be re-signed and Garland extended. Contreras and/or Vazquez should be shopped before the deadline as well. Just win the next three games then get ready for '08.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 07:47 PM) He has a lot of nagging injuries and commands a s***load of value if he were on the trade market (and obviously a major if is whether you can get him to waive his no trade clause) and should be moved at all costs if possible (I'm sorry, but I'd rather not have him completely break down in the next year or two, not when he can help your raid the Angels system). Maybe they can pay him to waive his NTC.

Actually, Ozzie is handling this with as much class as anyone could.

QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 10:47 PM) something tells me he is going to go after the hitters inability to get the bunt down. Iguchi should be the first one traded. He has regressed in all aspects of his game.

QUOTE(Brian @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 09:32 PM) Too bad Gooch can't bunt. "Gooch" has got to go.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 04:52 PM) I still think he may do both. Sell some guys for prospects he thinks can help now or in the near future, as well as sell some prospects that he isn't as high on for major league position players that can help us now and in the future. Yep.

Tonight's Lineup Gonzalez, LF; Iguchi, 2B; PK, 1B; Dye, RF; Fields, 3B; Terrero, CF; Uribe, SS; Cintron, DH; Hall, C. Danks pitching No Thome.

QUOTE(beck72 @ Jun 19, 2007 -> 05:42 AM) Well said. Having Paulie in the meeting--who will be around for the next few years and has a stake in the sox future, as well as its present--was a good touch. Kw got the players perspective. That's good management, having input from its employees and listening to them. We all want to be included in major decisions. As far as not trading away players--this meeting never dismisses that possibility. KW has over a month to give the players more time to play better. And the price for players usually goes up closest to the deadline. Few people give them a chance. Yet it's a chance KW is giving the players that doesn't tie his hands. He still can and should trade guys if they play .500 ball from now until the deadline. That kind of faith, though--even if it's blind faith--will serve KW well as he tries to add free agents in the future. Thome, PK, Dye, Buehrle, Iguchi--these are all professionals and seemingly good guys---guys you'd want to sign with your team via free agency, and the type of players you want to attract to come play with you--deserve to treated with a measure of respect. Kw is treating them with respect by giving them the month to right the ship. If they don't no big deal. But if KW had decided to sell off players this weekend and the sox went on a tear and were only a few games back by the deadline--now that kind of move could really hurt the kind of relationships with these professional good guys--and the kind of players the sox want to play here in the future, such as Ichiro. I say no harm no foul. And KW should and will no doubt be looking to make deals for the future if the players are closer to last than first come the end of July. Thanks for bringing some sanity to the discussion. Good post. What do people expect KW to say??? Of course he's going to try to make a few deals to improve the team. But when he does trade a veteran for some younger players, he's not going to say he's conceding the season and rebuilding for the future. He'll spin it as injecting new life into this year's team. I don't expect Kenny to sell off guys for A and AA prospects. But I do think he will trade for near major-league ready younger players. Just for example, and this is purely hypothetical, say he were to trade a Dye for a Billingsley. Although the move would be mainly focused on the future, he will spin it as adding Billingsley to help out a struggling bullpen to increase their chances of making a run at the wildcard this year.

First thing the Sox should try to do is extend Mark's contract with a legitimate fair offer. I agree with the policy of not offering long term contracts to pitchers, but there are exceptions to every rule and I think in Buehrle's case this is an exception. Of course there is risk involved but the way Mark throws it seems reasonable to risk that he won't come down with serious arm trouble for the next five years. This guy just may be another Greg Maddox. If Mark refuses a reasonable five year contract, they'll have to trade him. The second thing the Sox should do, in fact they should be working on this already, is extend Jon Garland's contract. They can build a rotation around Buehrle, Garland and Danks and get whatever they can for Javy and Jose.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 10:51 PM) IHe got injured and needs to get back to dropping and driving instead of sidearming everything. He gets ontop of that fastball and gets it back to 93-94 and he will dominate again. That's exactly what I was telling my daughter early in tonights game.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 10:14 PM) .....a rocket scientist like Erstad to figure that out. I was talking to Dick Williams about this, and he said that Al Kaline was a tremendous base runner. I remember sitting down with Yaz when we were talking about Catfish Hunter, and he told me that this was the greatest assembly of talent he's ever seen to struggle this long. Everything is self-induced.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 18, 2007 -> 10:07 PM) Brewers up 1, top of 9th, and Giants had them loaded with one out. Cordero K'd Winn, and then with Bonds on deck, Klesko grounded out on a 3-2 pitch. Go Brew Crew!

C'mon Bukvich, just throw strikes--no walks.