caulfield12

QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 01:42 PM) Again, you could do this for every team in baseball and find potential flaws for multiple players to make them X-factors. There is every reason to think the players mentioned will give seasons up to their normal capabilities. I don't consider them X-factors. You may, but I don't. On your last point, Rios can always shift to a corner if necessary. He's done it before. But onto the bolded statements. I think you consider the Twins a potential playoff team, correct? You then equate Brendan Harris to Mark Teahen (and I agree, that's being generous, but not to the guy you think), yet you say Teahen couldn't start on most playoff teams. There is nothing worse than "playoff teams can't have _____ as a starter" arguments. It's baseball, yes they can. People used to say the same thing about Juan Uribe. You can look at just about every playoff team every year (except the Yankees, because their worst infielder was Robinson Cano) and you can find a starter that you might consider a bum. It's just a poor argument. IT can happen and it does happen. I disagree on the Twins bullpen, because the Sox have a pretty solid 3 on the back end. And while Nathan is a very good closer, I don't think that he's so much better than Jenks that it makes that much of a difference. The overall pitching (from top to bottom) for the Sox was far better than what the Twins put out there last year, and on paper, it hasn't changed in the Twins favor this offseason. Someone already brought it up, but I'll reiterate. Juan Uribe was pretty much a Gold Glove shortstop (premium position on the field) who was ALWAYS good for 20+ homers and 70-80 RBI's. It's not a surprise to me that he was rated higher by MLBtraderumors as a more desirable FA than Jermaine Dye because of his versatility. Yes, the Twins have won with the likes of Nick Punto, Doug Mientkiewicz, Rivas, Koskie, Tolbert, Casilla, Lew Ford and Jason Tyner (thank God they don't have Bartlett still). That's the whole point, the White Sox in 2005, the Twins over the last decade....they had superstars or All-Star as part of their core to carry those players. Sure, Juan almost never walked, never hit as well again as he did the first half of 2004, but that guy could do the little things that didn't show up in the box score defensively, he saved a ton of runs with his arm and he and Crede were clearly "clutch" go-to guys to get that run in with a baserunner on 3rd and less than 2 outs. It seemed to me he was like an RBI magnet in those situations. Teahen is a so-so defender at a corner infield spot. And no, Brendan Harris shouldn't be a starter at 3B for the White Sox either...and Morel isn't ready and neither is Viciedo. As far as the Twins' bullpen, they added Rauch and there's a 50/50 chance they'll have Liriano and/or Neshek down there at various points of the season. We subtracted Dotel. Unless Pena, Linebrink or Dolsi do something amazing like Cotts and Politte, we're not close to the 2005 or even 2008 bullpens. Comparing a future Hall of Famer (if Nathan keeps it up for 3-5 more seasons) with Jenks, you're pushing it. I didn't read many threads where the Twins were threatening to non-tender, waive and/or trade Nathan this past-offseason. I would guess 25-35% of the posters around the Internet were ready to just waive Jenks and use that $7.5 million in other creative ways. Now if JJ Putz returns to dominant form, you'll have a strong argument. But that's like saying if Jeff Nelson and Jose Paniagua returned to prior form, they would have made big contributions to the White Sox. Oooops, hyperbole. LOL. If nothing else, watching the Twins' bullpen change from Hawkins/Romero/Guardado to Rincon (yes, steroids helped, lol) to Breslow/Mijares/Reyes, etc., they've always put out a decent pen up there. Although with Crain and Guerrier in recent years, they weren't outright dominant like the 2002-2004 pens were that you KNEW you were done if you went into the 7th inning trailing. Just compare the Twins blown leads from the 7th inning on since Nathan became closer over there...you'll find most of them in 08 and 09, but the bullpen comparisons fall short for the White Sox holding leads compared to the Twins for every season BUT 2005.

QUOTE (ScottyDo @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 12:14 PM) I disagree with this assessment of Mark Teahen, as someone who has watched his career for a while now. Mark Teahen is a very talented player who has enjoyed only limited success in the losing environment of Kansas City. He has performed far below his abilities and I think is as prime a candidate as any to benefit enormously from a change of scenery. Of course, he would be a bench player in New York or Boston because they are loaded, but if you view Los Angeles (LAD or LAA) or Seattle or Texas or St. Louis as playoff-type teams, I don't think you put him in the "bench player" category. Personally, I think he will be a solid starter here. We'll see. I lived in Kansas City from late 1996 through 2005, and then 2006-2007...so I've seen plenty of Royals' games firsthand or on the local network. Many Royals' players have succeeded during those lean years despite the "culture of losing." Jeff Montgomery, Kevin Appier, Carlos Beltran, Mike Sweeney, Jermaine Dye, J. Damon, Jose Rosado, Soria, Greinke, Joe Randa, DeJesus, etc. Heck, even Carlos Febles and Rey Sanchez have looked really good for seasons, not to mention Angel Berroa at SS. Maybe the "culture of losing" argument can be applied to the failures of all their first round draft picks, including Alex Gordon, but I'm not buying this argument entirely...largely because he's not going to be allowed to be a "complementary" player like Geoff Blum in Chicago, he's going to be hitting 5th, 6th or 7th, and that's what scares me. Yes, he had one torrid half-season, but the rest of his career has been pretty pedestrian for a corner infielder, to say the least. If you look at what we've gotten from all the Royals' castoffs over the last 10 years, it hasn't been a great "plus" overall. Of course, that's not a surprise, really. Just like it won't be a surprise if Brian Anderson, Josh Fields, Getz and Pods disappear from the baseball world within 2 years. Getz has a chance to hold on as a utility player somewhere, but not in a starting role for very many teams.

But once every 15 times Thome went up to hit for the Sox last year, he homered. His average was .249 with 23 HRs and 74 RBIs in 345 at-bats before being traded to the Dodgers, where he languished as a pinch-hitter. Had he stayed in Chicago the final month, his numbers likely would have been better than the AL average for DHs — 26 HRs, 89 RBIs and .255 average. That's a 39-year-old, above-average designated hitter worth inviting back. In a platoon role as DH against right-handers, the Sox could have expected more pop out of 300 at-bats from Thome than the other possibilities combined. And if the Sox want to think as big as their starting pitching rotation allows them to think, who do you want batting sixth in Game 1 of the AL playoffs next October: A guy approaching 600 career home runs or Mark Kotsay? With a straight face at SoxFest, Guillen worried what bringing Thome back might mean to potential playing time for Kotsay, Andruw Jones and Omar Vizquel. That's like worrying if you still will have room for the steak after the salad. Reliable veterans Kotsay, Jones and Vizquel give Guillen the luxury of a deep, experienced bench every contender needs. But in 645 at-bats in 2009, they totaled 22 home runs and drove in 80 runs. That's not enough oomph for an American League team that plays in a ballpark requiring it. David Haugh/Chicago Tribune

There will be players available later on if it doesn't work out. Every single year Williams makes a mid season addition. Does SoxTalk not understand that concept? Further, do they not understand that Williams aims higher than guys off the scrap heap? Do they not understand there will be guys available later that aren't now? But then again, there never has been any accountability over there ... for certain people anyway. I don't want to get on the "hit" list for future attacks, but why not? LOL. Jenks Dye Thornton Contreras Alexei Ramirez Tadahito Iguchi Pods (especially the 2nd time) Griffey, Jr. Alomar Erstad Politte Hersmanson Takatsu Everett MacDougal Aardsma Sisco Quentin Loaiza Thome A. Jones Vizquel Kotsay Damaso Marte J. Nix Ross Gload Arguably, all or most of those players were either pulled off the scrap heap, injured, undervalued or unwanted...isn't the whole point of being an MLB GM to do that? Outside of David Wells and re-signing our own players like Buehrle, Konerko, Dye, AJ, etc., I can't think of very many times we've paid "market value" or above for a player. Ooops, there's always Alex Rios, although by definition he was really on the scrap heap. Or Todd Ritchie, more "scrap heap" material who had a couple of non-pressure/pedestrian NL Central seasons and morphed into a 3rd or 4th starter in our rotation magically. Nick Swisher is the only other example where we paid "top dollar" to acquire a player from another organization. Jake Peavy was "stolen" from the Padres because of finances, but we got him at a huge discount.

And lost when we traded for Royce Clayton. Well, at least we got Sosa, Wilson Alvarez and Scot Fletcher back in one of the greatest steals of all-time.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 02:40 AM) Then you move Rios to RF where he will be just as good. By the time those 2 guys are ready, we could realistically have 2 spots open in the OF (Pierre gone, Q to DH). He isn't blocking anybody. Alex Rios is a capable RFer, but the only place on the diamond that he profiles as an All-Star or merits his contract numbers is in CF. Alex Rios putting up his 2008 and 2009 numbers at his salary and playing RF is very close to a nightmare for KW and JR. If you have Danks/Mitchell playing one outfield spot and Rios hitting 15-18 homers at another, YOU BETTER get 70-90 homers from the 3rd outfielder and/or DH, because that's a seriously putrid outfield OPS (not too much different from 2009, actually). The only other option is for Tyler Flowers to emerge as a 25-35 homer threat and realistically not hurt us anymore than AJ defensively...but knowing we're also losing AJ's moxie, gamesmanship, knowledge of our pitchers and opposing players, you just have to hope and pray Flowers and Viciedo are real offensive contributors at some point or we're back to 2007 all over again.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 02:21 AM) Caufield's post is kind of scary. If his point of view is correct, our team better throw a lot of shutouts or we could be in trouble. He makes some good points, but it is the glass half empty take on the team. David Haugh/Tribune calls out Ozzie on Thome "pass" http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,2742944.column Good. If 2006 taught us anything, it's that even a "perfectly constructed" team going into the season will have its issues. Going into 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, there were glaring holes in our major league roster. Right now, our lack of concern about having a bottom quintile DH combination and putting our hopes on the shoulders of Teahen, Pierre, Quentin, Rios, Kotsay and Andruw Jones is based on: 1) The Twins playing in a new stadium, which will magically morph them into an average team that has forgotten how to run, play fundamentally sound baseball, defend well or pitch. 2) The Indians and Royals have seemingly regressed. 3) The Tigers are financially strapped and had to give up Granderson and Jackson, arguably 2 of their 5 best players...as well as not resigning Polanco, Lyon or Rodney. 4) We can magically fix the eminently forseeable DH/hitting problem with a mid-season trade or adjustment and reel in the Twins or Tigers. The White Sox typically have been similar to Tiger Woods, "front-runners" who aren't as good at stalking or closing from behind. if you look at the 2000, 2005, 2006 and 2008 seasons, especially. We haven't shown the ability to come back in the 2nd half of the season in meaningful games since the Twins swept us at the Metrodome in 2003. So why we'd want to handicap ourselves, put off the fanbase by not putting a team on the field capable of starting fast and not taking advantage of the DECIDED advantage the pitchers will have in the "cold months" of April and May to support those aforementioned starters with enough runs to scrape together a bunch of 1-2 run wins (see 2005, April/May) is beyond me. I really think the organization just isn't quite as hungry since we won it all in 2005, and most of those players are gone except for Mark, AJ, Jenks and Paulie. It seems the whole attitude the last two or three years heading into Spring Training has been a bit complacent. Ozzie and KW always SAY the right things about bunting and fundamentals and versatility (whatever the buzz word of that offseason is), but then we lapse into bad habits and revert to the three run homer and a cloud of dust strategy. Is KW and Ozzie's strategy to NOT HAVE home run hitters, forcing all of the individual pieces of the line-up to function together more smoothly and create an attitude that only by sacrificing individual stats for each other can the team win? Small ball (Pods and Iguchi) has been debunked here quite frequently (we did have Konerko, Dye, Thomas, Everett, Rowand and Crede on that team, and even Iguchi, AJ and Uribe had some pop in their bats, too---and that was an average to below-average AL offense, yet light years ahead of 2010). I feel pretty confident that adding a Guerrero or Damon to the mix would have been enough to get the "fence sitters" who are waiting to see how things shake out back into USCF as paying customers. Now it's kind of a "wait and see" attitude, the typical "prove to me you're a winner" viewpoint that White Sox fans (not counting the die-hards or season ticket holders) typically have about their teams.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 02:04 AM) Thome would have clogged the paths. Who is arguing about skills? If Rios, Teahen and Pierre don't get on base at above 330 clips, whatever skills they have in terms of pure speed or base-running IQ don't really amount to a hill of beans. You can put Alexei Ramirez in that group as well, although his walk totals improved to so-so from abysmal.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 01:47 AM) What does Twins payroll have to do with this? And, no, some of those trades are also made because of needs. AZ had an abundance of outfielders and didn't need Quentin, The Royals didn't need another 3B/RF any longer. You're making it sound as if trades never happen in which one team gets the better end. I suppose Matt Thornton is only as valuable as Joe Borchard. Or John Danks is worth as much as Brandon McCarthy. Or Jose Contreras was only worth as much as Esteban Loaiza. It may be true that GMs typically try to make deals work out evenly for both teams, but it doesn't always work out that way. Mark Teahen is a complementary, bench player on most playoff teams. Maybe he could start for the Twins, but there aren't many upper division teams that would be giving him the starting job without any competition in Spring Training. Same thing with Juan Pierre, how many teams that are legit playoff contenders would go with him as their leadoff hitter? Even if he was playing for those teams, it would be as the 8th (NL) or 9th place hitter. As mentioned before, Jones and Kotsay wouldn't be part of a DH platoon for all but the 3-5 worst teams in the majors either...not even taking into consideration our home ballpark. Yes, the Rangers have a launching pad, but they also (have) had a stronger overall offense and there wasn't as much pressure on Jones to perform as there will be in Chicago in April and May. Then you have the Rios enigma...I'm really curious how many other GM's would have taken on that reclamation project at those numbers? Anyone besides KW? We could have put Rick Ankiel out in CF for 1/5th of the cost on a one-year contract, signed Vladimir Guerrero/N. Johnson/Matsui/Damon as our DH and had money left over to solidify the bullpen in the form of someone comparable to Dotel but with more of a history than Pena. Ankiel/Damon/Dotel (etc.) or Alex Rios??? That questionable decision is probably the biggest single factor preventing us from spending money right now on a legit DH. forcing us to do things on the cheap again (see Wise/Anderson/Owens 2009). There's one other factor here, too. Mitchell and Jordan Danks BOTH profile as better CFers than corner outfielders, the presence of Alex Rios in CF theoretically blocks both of those guys.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 26, 2010 -> 01:13 AM) That really doesn't illustrate or prove anything about the players the Sox have in exchange. Nor does it prove that they will not be productive. The Twins matter in this because it proves the point that you can make any player into an "X-factor" and because it shows that the Sox are not operating in a vacuum. Their success also depends on their competition. We've got too many issues, starting with a corner infielder in Teahen that if ALL the stars are aligned can give you a 775-825 OPS, but he can also give you 675-725. Let's be charitable and say Brendan Harris is equal to Mark. Ramirez and Hardy are pretty even, all things considered. Huge advantage to Beckham, our one clear positional advantage (barring a sophomore slump) over the Twins' line-up. Then you have Morneau huge over Konerko, Mauer huge over AJ, Young with a slight advantage over Pierre, Span a clear advantage over Rios of 08-09 and Cuddyer being pretty even with Quentin (yes, the upside of CQ is AL MVP, and coming off the 08 season this wouldn't be a toss-up). Huge advantage to Kubel over Jones/Kotsay. In other words, if Pierre/Teahen/Quentin/Rios/Jones/Kotsay perform at +25 to +50 over career norm stat levels, we'll trail the Twins by about 50-100 runs scored. That's assuming we can count on Becks, Ramirez, AJ and Konerko to do what we expect. I would say a full 5/9ths of our everyday line-up is questionable, whereas the Twins have holes only at 2B and 3B. The White Sox have the advantage in starting pitching, but the Twins have a lot more depth. Essentially, we have one replacement for Garcia (or anyone else going down) in Hudson (some will count Torres and Hynick, good luck with those guys over 10-15 starts). The Twins have 3-4 of their "system" guys that always seem to throw strikes and get the job done somehow. And this is based on the assumption that Liriano and Neshek, perhaps their two most effective pitchers in recent years, DO NOTHING. The Twins, overall, have a deeper bullpen and also a stronger closer, although Nathan has been shaky the last two years, it's not close to the level of concern surrounding Jenks. And reports are that Putz is still a big question mark. The only advantage the White Sox currently hold head-to-head is their top four starters. The Twins have better fundamentals, better overall team speed and they really cleaned up their defense last year. Now they sacrificed some of that D by giving up Gomez, but the White Sox were pretty atrocious in that area last year, and hoping for "mediocre" or league average is about the most we can get in terms of improvement because AJ, Teahen and Ramirez will have their issues and Beckham will be learning his 3rd infield position in a year.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 08:19 AM) There isn't one player on the Sox who fans haven't wanted gone at some point. Even Beckham people were down on after his slow start. I'm sure the White Sox have known Thome's first choice is them from before they traded him. Its not a new revelation. They need a bat. This Kotsay/Jones/Vizquel rotating DH thing is not going to work, just like Wise in CF didn't work. Just like Swisher leading off didn't work. Just like Darrin Erstad didn't work or Mike MacDougal or Andy Gonzalez.................................................They have to do something to correct it before it costs them wins. If its bringing back Thome fine. If its someone else fine. I agree Thome's popularity has increased tenfold, just on this board alone the past couple of days, but if the Sox had adequately filled his position, his potential signing with Minnesota would have been met with a collective yawn. Hmmm....I don't think I ever wanted to get rid of Robin Ventura or Lance Johnson.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 08:14 AM) This is like going into a gun fight with a knife, pez gun, nail on a 2x4 and pillowcase filled with soap because you think it gives you more options. Which one is Omar Vizquel or Jayson Nix?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 07:22 AM) LOL, you were the one who started that! And what exactly has the Haitian government been able to do when compared to what the US government did? I WROTE THAT? ARE YOU SURE? Either the grammar's incorrect and it should read "what the US government is doing" (present continuous) or it's a comparison of Katrina and Haiti, isn't it?

I think both have equal weight. Ok, so to put it a different way, which general consensus would you value more? That at Soxtalk or that of Chris's callers? Sadly, I believe that those callers actually have more influence on the White Sox and KW, even though I don't want to believe it...there's that past history of comments about KW not caring at all what people think of him or his moves, then he spends more time than any GM in baseball explaining himself and reiterating that he doesn't care! Because the majority of people that call into shows like that, while they might not even attend any games, their "silent majority" opinion does have some influence. Just because posters here are more knowledgeable, that doesn't mean that we represent more than a sub-segment of White Sox fans. For instance, they help to reinforce stereotypes about White Sox fans as being more "blue collar" or complain about topics from 10-15 years ago like "Reinsdorf is cheap." It's interesting that Chris reacted the way he did, that he was surprised so many people wanted Thome back when in his mind, the majority of fans calling into the post-game would always complain about Thome when he had one of his patented TWO 4-3 putouts with a hat trick of strikeouts in a crucial game. Really, it's not that MOST fans really want him back, it's that they just can't believe that we would rather use Jones/Kotsay instead of spending an additional $2-3 million to bring Thome back as part of a platoon situation. And maybe I'm startled too that anyone would think of Thome as this point in his career being prohibitively expensive to add to the roster. That Phillies contract is over and done with...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 23, 2010 -> 10:16 AM) So, if someone were to point out that Prince Bin-Talal owns 8% of newscorp, you think that'd make people stop watching, or question why that network's official policy is that there's no such thing as climate change? Somehow, I doubt it. I also don't think that nifty documentary about battery operated/electric cars will be making it onto the schedule of any Fox affiliates, either.

I'm still waiting for a single Republican to articulate a clear vision for the country. It's quite easy to say no and be obstructionist, it worked in 1994 and 1995 for the GOP as well, but eventually the newly-elected representatives and Senators and governors will be expected to accomplish something that actually improves the lives of a majority of Americans. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Waxman, Frank, Baucus, Nelson, etc., have obviously failed that test so far. However, I would love to hear a GOP platform of new/creative ideas that doesn't involve simply lowering taxes for the richest Americans and for corporations, getting rid of the Department of Education, stopping "judicial activism" and supporting traditional marriage, etc. Do Republicans really believe there isn't a health care problem in the US and/or that nothing should be done about it? Do Republicans really have no concern about the environment, global warming or the future over-polluted world their grandchildren and great-grandchildren will inherit? Do Republicans have any ideas for ending our dependence on foreign oil? For funding Medicare and Social Security for the next 50 years? It's easy to say "no" or complain or say what's wrong with the other side, but at some point, there needs to be a leg for them to stand on. Because I think we tried that approach (cutting taxes, capital gains, estate taxes, business taxes) for eight years and it didn't work very well....trickle down became more like a "drip, drip." With the new election financial contribution rules coming into play, I can just see a re-run of the Gore/Bush election in 2000, with the Democrats deciding to fight a do-or-die "populist" war against the GOP. By the way, for all those who don't believe Obama is a US citizen or that he was born out of wedlock, what's your strategy for getting us out of Iran/Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan? How is it any different than the current strategy of the administration? I'll be laughing in 2012 when the Tea Party is running someone like Sarah Palin or their new darling, the Penthouse Senator of the Month from Massachusetts.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Jan 25, 2010 -> 01:43 AM) I wouldn't call the DH market a "great" one because there really haven't been that many good DH's available at a cheap price. Like I've said a number of times, I think this upcoming season would be a lot more comfortable for me if I had a better feeling about that spot in the order. What they have proposed at the moment isn't terribly exciting. It's not that it can't work, because I think that it can, it's just that it doesn't seem ideal. However, I've been an advocate of parting ways with Thome for a long time and I never really thought they'd come back with him or Dye. I always thought they'd keep 1 of the Dye/Thome/PK trio...2 of them at the most, but I thought even that would be unlikely. The problem with Thome, even though he's still been productive, is that he is not getting any younger and his bat speed isn't getting any faster. At any moment, he's liable to have a significant drop-off. That's what worries me about him. If what they have is, indeed, what they will start the season with, they'll find out by the middle of May whether or not it's going to work. And since they are right at their budget, with maybe a little breathing room, I have no problem with them being flexible enough to make a trade and take on some salary midseason. I like the idea of that flexibility being there in case some other need arises after the season starts (due to injury or poor performance or something of that nature). I'm aware that seasons can be lost in April, but I can't see that being the case in this division. Regardless of their DH, they should be able to remain competitive until they can make whatever midseason adjustments they need to make. You don't say? The money paid out to the likes of Vladimir Guerrero, Nick Johnson, Hideki Matsui, Miguel Tejada, Rick Ankiel, Aubrey Huff, LaRoche (a bit pricey based on his career results), DeRosa, etc., hasn't been anything CLOSE to exorbidant. To put it in perspective, it's roughly what we paid Octavio Dotel to be a serviceable 7th inning reliever for two seasons. With all the questions surrounding our offense, Rios' return to form, Beckham's possible sophomore jinx, Quentin's health, Teahen's actual impact/ceiling offensively, Konerko's future...it wouldn't be the worst idea in the world to add something closer to a "sure bet" than what we're going to run out there on a day-to-day basis. I just hope Alexei can pull his head out of his A-- the first two months this year. Nonetheless, there are still legit options out there like J. Damon, Winn, Orlando Hudson, Branyan, Carlos Delgado, etc. While I'm a BIT more optimistic some combination of Jones/Kotsay/Quentin/Tyler Flowers can put up "decent" numbers, I guess the only thing to say at this point is it's not QUITE as bad as starting the season with DeWayne Wise in CF and him getting booed the first home series of the season. I'm pretty sure the fans wouldn't turn on Andruw Jones like that. They might wait until May or June.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2010 -> 03:34 PM) IMO, that's exactly the kind of guy the Royals ought to be acquiring and giving PT to. If they bust, what have they lost? The question is...what are they going to do around them? Think about the 2008 Rays...yeah, they had guys like Longoria that they developed, but they also had guys like Navarro, Pena, etc., who were castoffs from other teams that they picked up and turned into something useful by giving them playing time. Wasn't Navarro a pretty highly-touted Yankees' catching prospect??? If you're talking about the likes of Howell in the bullpen (pretty much their entire bullpen), Aybar, Akinori Iwamura or Fernando Perez, then I'll bite. The Royals are waiting on those three big bats in their minors, but it seems like they were always waiting on "3 big arms" in the minors the last 20 years or so. Just look at their first round draft picks from 1990 on and it makes the White Sox look like the Twins in comparison from a development standpoint.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Jan 24, 2010 -> 11:32 PM) Even with his bad years as a Red Sox, Kotsay has stayed good at hitting righties. I like him used selectively. Thome is no guarantee to repeat his OBP from last year. There's some decline there and he's not getting any younger. True, there's no guarantee Kotsay keeps up what he's doing either. But you get bat control and situational hitting from him, which we have a serious dearth of. I refuse to believe you NEED to have great production from your DH. We basically need all our guys to have their regular numbers, and Quentin to have a better year than last. If that happens, then the DH spot can be a wait and see..(and even an eventual chance for midseason Flowers at-bats) Carl Everett was OK as a DH in '05. I will grant that he provided power. But we got by w/o good OBP from him. If we have added a bunch of HRs to the lineup with Teahan/Rios/Beckham, we can afford to use more of a slappy guy at DH. Beckham did it (thrived for most of his first season), but I don't think putting Tyler into the heat of a pennant race as a rookie DH is the wisest plan in the world for his development. KW has seen enough position prospects go bust than to put faith in Tyler saving the season. There was a thread presenting 30-40 different options and KW has passed on all of them (so far)...one would have thought that going into 2009 with no legit starting CFer would have taught him a valuable lesson, but perhaps he thinks it's a lot easier to just go out and find a DH at any point in the season or Spring Training THAN an everyday outfielder, especially a CFer.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 24, 2010 -> 07:46 PM) And what exactly has the Haitian government been able to do when compared to what the US government did? Either of the Long skeletons unearthed from their graves or even David Duke could have done a much better job. When you combine the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere with a totally incapacitated/decapitated UN mission...the Louis Armstrong Airport with what the Haitians have to work with, the sunken port/cranes and an obliterated National Palace with many government officers/police/firefighters/doctors dead or missing, there's really no basis possible to make any "governmental" comparisons between the US and Haiti. Not to mention 150-250,000 corpses that have to be buried quickly...the final totals will be greater than the Tsunami. The poorest 10% of Americans have a comparable life of luxury when juxtaposed with the poorest 90% of Haitians.

You're joking, right? Yeah, Brownie did a great job with that one...MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.

Well, then imagine the same ship was parking at a private coast off the coast of Louisiana/New Orleans in the weeks after Hurricane Katrina... Would you still feel the same way? Let's say some of the passengers on board actually knew of relatives who were killed and/or homeless there (imagining it's an around-the-world trip and they had started on it weeks or days before Katrina hit)...that wouldn't change things either? The economic argument is one part of it, sure. However, the impact is little more than a very, very tiny drop in the bucket in the overall scheme of things. Reading the statement from the cruise lines, it seemed very much like a rationalization for doing something that was already being construed by many onboard to be in poor or bad taste. If you say it doesn't matter what country it happened in, are you really being honest? Would you really consider it to be okay to dock offshore of any American state and consider the "boost to the local economy" good enough reason not to be upset while there were fellow American people dying in the hundreds of thousands less than 60 miles away?

The Royals are soaked with mediocre-to-bad outfielders. Well, first they have David DeJesus, who is actually a good player, though the sort of good player who will leave you wanting more. He can’t run, he probably will not hit more than 15 homers, and while he is above average at getting on base, he’s not that much above average (lifetime .358 OBP; last year .347). He plays good defense in left field, which is a bit like being a punter who can tackle — handy, but mostly beside the point. Left field defense is so much beside the point that the Royals now seem interested in moving DeJesus to right. DeJesus is the sort of guy who, I suspect, could really help a good team. He’s a bit out of place when he’s a team’s best player. Beyond DeJesus, the Royals have “right fielder” José Guillen, who will get $13 million in his final year of that disastrous signing. He can’t play right field anymore, which is why the position is in quotations, and there’s no reason to believe he can hit anymore either. But he’s getting $13 million, so you have to hope. They just signed Scott Podsednik, who is coming off a decent year that he is 98 percent unlikely to repeat. They signed Brian Anderson, a one-time big prospect the Royals apparently believe has some untapped talent. They have Mitch Maier, a longtime Royals farmhand who seems to be a lot like Brian Anderson. They also have Alberto Callaspo, a pretty decent line-drive hitter who seems to have been bumped off second base. They also have Josh Fields, who has played some left field … they supposedly want to give him at-bats though he doesn’t really have a position. They also have a couple of mid-20s prospects who are probably not in the picture but, hey, they’re out there. It seems to me that the outfield is chock-full. It’s not exactly chock-full of goodness, but, hey, we’ve been over the treading water bit already. Then they sign Rick Ankiel. I’m not saying this is a bad move — I’m so completely confused by it that I can’t even think in terms of good and bad. Ankiel is one of the more famous stories in recent baseball. He was the preposterously gifted 20-year-old pitcher who lost his nerve. He was the kid hitter in the minor-leagues trying to live the dream. He was the 2007 call-up who hit 11 home runs in 47 games and the next year banged 25 homers in a comeback year that coupled nicely with Josh Hamilton’s resurgence. And all that’s fine … but what is he beyond the storybook pages? He’s a 30-turning-31-year-old outfielder who has never had 500 plate appearances in a season. Last year, in 404 PAs, he hit .231/.285/.387. He is a guy with some power and no plate discipline. He is a pretty good athlete with a great arm and shaky instincts. He’s an interesting right fielder because of his arm, but the Royals figure to put him in center where he’s at-best OK. He has a gigantic hole in his swing … he hit .266 in the minors and .251 in the majors, and there’s really no reason to believe that’s changing. People talk about him improving … but guys generally don’t start improving at 31.* *It’s amazing that decades and decades after Bill James broke down the arc of big-league players’ careers that people still have this fundamental misunderstanding about how baseball players age. Back in 1988, when talking about what he had learned about baseball, he wrote “Ballplayers, as a group, reach their peak value much earlier and decline much more rapidly than people believe.” Joe Posnanski, KC STAR

QUOTE (PeavyTime @ Jan 22, 2010 -> 07:38 PM) Are you making the case for me or you?? That pretty much sums up everything I've said. Discounting teams like the Red Sox and Yankees because of their payrolls...think of all the teams with great offenses that went nowhere because of the lack of pitching. The 1995-2001 Indians teams are the perfect example. Or look at the offensive numbers put up by teams like the Rangers and Rockies historically. There's no doubt there needs to be a balance, or the Braves would have won more than 1 World Series title in 14 tries. And A's and Twins teams in the first half of this decade had very good or great pitching AND good to great defenses and they were simply lacking firepower offensively. If you looked at the teams that have finished above .500 over the last decade, I would guess 65-75% of them had "top half" pitching statistics in their respective leagues. Just looking at the White Sox, with the exception of 2000 when the offense mostly carried the team injury-depleted pitching staff until the end of the season, the best Sox teams have always been the ones that were in the Top 5-6 in AL pitching. This was the case in 05 and 08, as well as the pitching we got from the 89-94 teams.

The White Sox in 2006 lost because there were two better teams in ALCD. Our starting pitching staff was overtaxed in 2005. Contreras wasn't close to being the same pitcher from June, 2006 on. Jenks was hurt and really struggled the second half. The defense was fine with Anderson in CF until he proved he couldn't hit his weight and Mackowiak was just out of his element trying to play CF. And the offense really started to go into a funk in August/September and injuries started to take their toll. Vazquez disappeared over and over again in big games against teams like the Tigers. Around the ASB that year (after the infamous Boston/Papelbon game), we were only 2 GB. In less than a month, we were close to 10 GB. For some reason, I remember getting some very decent starting pitching but the offense wasn't scoring runs to save the pitching, especially in a later series at Boston. That, and the defense overall just wasn't as good, beyond the revolving CF situation.