Disco72

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 06:00 PM) I know there is a lot of Cook love on this board and he is solid ball player, but I have a hard time believing he is a major league baseball player. He'll be 28 years old in a month and still is in AA. To me, maybe he is a 4th OF in case of injury, but he is not a good enough player to be considered for a major league roster spot for more than a 15 days. He hit in AA last year, but didn't in AAA (65 Ks in 228 ABs last year, too). This year, he is only hitting .247 in AA, that to me, at almost 28 years of age, says not a ML player. Plus, he isn't a good enough defender to be used in CF in the majors. All he is is organizational fodder. I'm not sure Cook would be any worse than Wise. Seems to have better OBP skills and power than Wise. Like you said, he's probably a 4th-5th OFer and suffers since all the Sox starters in the OF are righties except Pods.

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 05:56 PM) He's only got 45 K's on the season, which isn't bad in my opinion. I can live with some K's in the lineup if the lineup is more balanced in terms of OBP, contact, and power. QUOTE (JPN366 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 05:56 PM) Let me know, and I'll get you in for free. Will do. Thanks!

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 05:52 PM) That they should be gunning for a roster spot at those points. Gotcha. That's encouraging that so many guys are so close. I really need to get to Birmingham sometime soon this summer! Somehow I've made it to Charlotte which is twice as far but not B-ham!

QUOTE (JPN366 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 05:25 PM) In my opinion, the ETA's for the Barons players should be as follows... Tyler Flowers - Now Brandon Allen - start 2010 C.J. Retherford - middle 2010 or start 2011 Dayan Viciedo - start 2011 John Shelby III - start 2011 Jordan Danks - start 2010 David Cook - NOW NOW NOW Stefan Gartrell - start 2010 or middle 2010 By "start 2010," do you mean they should be starting on the big league club in 2010?

Dare I say that Sox starters have been looking very good lately... Jose and Richard are making legit cases to stay at the back end of the rotation.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 05:35 PM) 1) Corrected that for ya 2) Once again, it goes to show my belief that the more we mess with the middle east, the more we make it worse. It's not necessarily messing with it but messing with it for purely "selfish" national interests and ignoring any possible long term consequences. Having said that, though, I do sometimes wonder if there is any "right" policy for the middle east.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) The part of this team that really needs to be rebuilt is the everyday lineup. The pitching on this team is actually ok, and I think the bullpen is too. In addition, I think the long term situation of our pitching is pretty good too. But this lineup stinks, it's incredibly bad. And I do like the idea of mixing the old guys with the young guys, but by the time the young guys are good and ready to contribute to a playoff team, the old guys like Dye, Konerko, and Thome will either be gone, retired, or too old to contribute very much (by 2011, I don't know if any of our everyday old guys are going to be able to play anywhere near their career average levels except for probably A.J.) That's why my idea of a firesale is based entirely around trading the old guys in the everyday lineup, as well as a pitcher or two like Dotel. So the Sox need to find some legit middle of the order hitters for 2011. Hopefully one of Flowers/Viciedo/Allen works out as a 3-4-5-6 type hitter plus Beckham and TCQ. Would your plan to be to "let the kids play" in 2010 so that they'll be ready to contend in 2011? It's not a bad plan, I'm just curious if that's the plan you are advocating.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 12:47 PM) We kind of have to go into full rebuild mode because the veterans we have are on their last legs and running out of contract time (which is why so many people want to trade them rather then let them leave/retire and get nothing back). Our only other choice is to be a huge player on the free agent market and try and mix those guys with our young movement, but there is no reason to think the Sox are going to do that based on our history. We're willing to spend money to keep good players and trade for good players, and we'll sign the occasional big free agent (Albert Belle comes to mind), but we're not the type of team that will sign multiple big time free agents like the Yankees to fill holes. I don't think it is true that the Sox have to go into full rebuild. Thome is still productive and will probably only play for the Sox, assuming he still feels the way he did when he was traded here about his geographical preferences. Konerko still has another year on his contract, and Dye has the option and is the most consistent of the three veteran hitters. Our veterans may be "old" but they are still productive. Will they be productive indefinitely? Of course not, but with TCQ injured (again), the only guys really producing are Konerko, Thome, Dye, and Pierz. Pods is also producing, but I think most agree it won't last. History shows that a bunch of our minor leaguers (any minor leaguers) won't pan out or will be role players rather than stars. Trade Dotel since the Sox seem to have enough minor league talent to replace him. Trade one of Dye/Thome/Konerko (probably Dye or Konerko) if you can. However, let the "old" guys mix with the young guys as the Sox completely transition from the 2005 "core" to the 2011 "core." If you can add a player who can be productive in the long term, the Sox should look to do it. I just don't believe a full rebuild will be successful. I also think the Sox have a high enough payroll to continue the rebuilding on the fly as KW has been doing. The Sox have the making of a very good rotation now that Floyd is pitching better and Richard looks like a legit #4 at least. The back of the bullpen, except Dotel, is under control for at least another year or more. This is a team that can compete once it finds out who the "keepers" are - both young guy "keepers" and old guy "keepers."

QUOTE (Jeremy @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 12:15 PM) So what's the lesson here - that he does better with inconsistent playing time? The lesson is that it's been a week. It's pretty hard to make any conclusive decisions based on a week.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 08:53 AM) Numbers-wise at least, the system has a very good set of closers... Jon Link, AAA: 7 saves, 2.57 ERA, 1.10 WHIP, 10 BB / 38 K in 28 IP Fernando Hernandez, AA: 11 saves, 1.32 ERA, 0.88 WHIP, 11 BB / 33 K in 34 IP Nathan Jones, A+/A- combined (not the closer in W-S, but that is his projection): 1 save, 1.57 ERA, 0.80 WHIP, 11 BB / 33 K in 28.2 IP Dan Remenowsky, A-: 8 saves, 2.78 ERA, 0.97 WHIP, 4 BB / 40 K in 22.2 IP This is why I'm ok with trading Dotel this season - you have to figure the Sox give his spot to one of these guys next season either way.

Awesome photo Lostfan! We all agree there are no better options on the roster. Just let the guy play the rest of the season, and we can (hopefully) end this debate once and for all.

Of course, he wouldn't have been running the bases if he were in the AL.... The Padres get screwed by this, no doubt about that.

QUOTE (WCSox @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 09:30 AM) Agreed, and I imagine that Kenny would hit the FA market this winter, rather than going with a full "youth movement." Good point. If the FA market is anything like last year, there should be some good players available for reasonable deals who can help fill in the gaps.

Are people sure they want the Sox to unload these veterans? A "youth" movement sounds appealing, but it'll look a lot like last night's game - meager offense, the young guys struggling, a weaker bullpen.... I'm willing to bet KW trades 1-2 guys at most if the Sox are out of it. The Sox need a mix of young and old next season to be competitive. This season, he's trying to figure out who the "keepers" are - both young and old.

At least we get to see Poreda.

QUOTE (G&T @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 09:42 PM) Clayton still can't throw to first. Yeah, brutal... good outing for him. Now its up to the 'pen. I'm a little surprised by Dotel this early.

QUOTE (Disco72 @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 09:13 PM) Clayton is looking good. Come on offense - keep it going! Clayton is the offense!

Clayton is looking good. Come on offense - keep it going!

I still don't see a problem. Ozzie is playing Beckham nearly everyday, and his worst comments about Beckham are that he is cocky and the media/fans are annointing him as the next great ballplayer. Both are true statements. I frankly don't think its good for anyone to have the pressure of being "the next great thing." Also, other than the Anderson issue, I don't see any consistent bias against young positional players by Ozzie. Fields played alot, Getz plays when healthy, and TCQ and Alexei played a ton last year even when they weren't performing well (Alexei).

QUOTE (Dizzy Sox @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 02:13 PM) Whenever I think that it would make sense to let Thome play some first, I think of Toby Hall. Ozzie is right to sit him. Let's face it, at this point in the season Thome's biggest value to us is as trade bait, and that value goes to nil if he's injured. I disagree. At this point, Thome's biggest value to the Sox is playing in the 92 games after these nine games in NL parks...

QUOTE (TitoMB345 @ May 30, 2009 -> 05:27 PM) FTA on Whitesox.com: So, what are his plans then, continue to suck until we cut him? So, you'd rather he swung for the fences every time he gets an AB so he can "prove" himself?

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ May 30, 2009 -> 10:40 AM) Hasn’t McCulloch proven that he’s suitably mediocre enough to be promoted to AAA and let a decent pitcher with upside take up his spot with the Barons? Maybe they are hoping they can keep his #s good in B-ham to give him decent trade value for this summer? He almost certainly wouldn't perform as well in Charlotte given the differences in the stadiums. Then again, given the value of Broaday (worth a backup C), I'm not sure what value that gives McCulloch!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 29, 2009 -> 07:32 PM) True in the simplest form...but at a deeper level...you still need to raise x amount of revenue, which means that at some point you still pay the same taxes. If it encourages savings...hell, right now that's a terrible idea and the Fed is desperately trying to find ways to discourage saving. Agreed, but as you point out, it could change the incentive for spending.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 29, 2009 -> 05:45 PM) Deal. If we're going to do it properly...making it so that somehow avoiding some version of "Tax shelters" and all the other crazy things inserted in to the current income tax system is the only way that it can work. Because otherwise, it turns in to something just as complicated as the income tax system, except different people hire the tax preparers. Edit: but then again, if you could somehow cut back on the loopholes and the deductions in the income tax, you pretty much make the reason for switching taxes go away anyway. On your edit - not entirely as the tax systems encourage different things as a result of their focus on earnings versus consumption.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ May 29, 2009 -> 05:28 PM) I was just making a blanket statement. Not in reference to this situation. Ok, no worries. In any event, if the Sox do seriously pursue another pitcher, it'll be interesting to see how the deals compare.