caulfield12

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 10:18 AM) MacDougal, Contreras, Blum, Alomars, Everett, Charles Johnson, Schoenweiss, Freddy Garcia KW makes moves inseason Charles Johnson was Schueler's deal...during the 2000 season. Some other moves, off the top of my head: Scott Sullivan in 2003 dumping Howry, Baldwin, Durham and Lofton in 2002 Riske trading Koch to Marlins Takatsu to Mets (well, it was a waiver move, lol)

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 08:44 AM) So then your saying the plan was crap from the beginning? The bullpen looked like crap from the beginning? OK - you are entitled to your opinion. As far as Massett goes, if you can't see the potential in him and probably a starter for us soon, then I don't know what to tell you. That Danks/Massett/Rasner for McCarthy trade was unbelievable. I am sorry you can't see that as a feather in KWs cap. Certain players faile KW and the gang. For instance - McDougal should not be this bad. No, I never said that. I could have told them not to take Sisco and MacDougal though, I've seen them a ton since I live in KC (and have lived here for 10 years now), and both are huge projects...even though MacDougal had 21/24 saves one year, it was in the style of Doug Jones and would make Jenks look like Mariano Rivera in 1996-2000. MacDougal has never been able to throw consistent strikes, same with Sisco. Aardsma, we simply couldn't take another chance on Cotts, and Aardsma might turn out okay, but he hasn't been the same since the Thames homer in Detroit. I think the Danks/Masset deal was a good one, I don't think anyone will be able to sit back and call it "great" until 2-3 years from now, same with with Gio and Floyd needing to produce something at the MLB level....because none of that money was invested in at least one veteran reliever. Of course, look at the Indians, they threw out contracts to Williamson, Baez, Walker and Bradford and most of those guys have predictably struggled and soaked up about $15 million in payroll. Same thing with Howry and Eyre, who were overused and abused by Baker (see White Sox/Torborg/Thigpen).

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 08:39 AM) It looks like Aardsma is going to go to the minors and McDougal is going to shipped out to the minors or another team. Article: http://www.dailysouthtown.com/sports/412924,041SPT4.article It's logical enough, but the supposed MacDougal trade gives us Rowand, and we don't need Rowand enough (in Ozzie's mind, I think) to displace Pods and/or Erstad for the rest of the season, since KW and OG won't admit that Erstad won't be back at 100%, and I don't see them displacing Erstad while he's hurt after the job everyone claims he did for the Sox. We still have Day/Masset as our RH set-up guys in the 7th and 8th, and I can't wait to see how long they hold up against the Yankees in prime time. The Phillies don't have RH relievers to give us, they need help, so we might be doing the typical Borchard/Thornton or Cotts/Aardsma change of scenery move.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 08:30 AM) He did? Who gave him credit? Very few people if any at all. Most thought Oz and Coop did a hell of a job - but KW didn't get much credit. He didn't win any awards for his job in 2005. It seems he always gets s*** on around here. He had a pretty damn good plan and still made some good signings and trades - Toby Hall, Darin Erstad, John Danks, Nick Massett - he still can't win. His plan was a good one with the bullpen - it isn't working now even though it did the first month - but he had a plan and it seemed to be a good one. I like having one of the most aggressive GMs in baseball. I like that he always wants to win. I like that we always seem to have a good product on the field and always seem to have a realistic chance to win. It has been that way under his watch.His worst season as GM was in 2002 at 81-81. He has never had a losing season as GM with the White Sox in 5 years. That says a lot. I appreciate the job he has done and respect it. I have faith in him to do his job and get the correct players in here in order to win this year and the years following. I would be shocked if he didn't make any moves to try and better this team immediately. I'll give you a pass on Masset after yesterday, due to the two times he had extended outings (one the Cubs' start) leading directly to Sox wins or comebacks. Still, a 7+ ERA can hardly be called a feather in your cap either, so we're giving him credit strictly based on "potential" and not consistent results. Sisco and MacDougal are not looking good, and Aardsma is struggling about as bad as anyone too. In fact, we're to the point where we don't have a single reliable RHer and too many lefties (Vazquez, Sisco).

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 08:26 AM) I'd rather Dye remain on the White Sox and lend us compensation picks than swap him for Abreu. It's rather impossible to build up a minor league system when no additional selections or players are entering. Yes, Dye's value is low considering his FA status and poor statistics, but from my perspective -- if we're not on the receiving end of a desperate general manager -- he should remain until the end of the season. Buehrle will certainly lend more. That is where Williams must receive an absolute killing in return. It appears to me Abreu's presence on this ballclub, and in the outfield, would only serve as an extension for Williams to decide on Dye's future replacement. How I figure is next years payroll will still remain substantially high. His salary should not be a burden if Fields replaces Crede and Gonzalez, Buehrle. If there is any substance to this rumor, Williams must be concerned about handing out long-term contracts and stiffling future teams. There's no telling how high the 2009 salary of the White Sox will be. Throwing 15+ million at one player when the overall salary is 75 million won't be too wise unless minor league production improves. The only way adding Abreu for Dye makes sense is if the White Sox were to get money back from the Yankees or significant younger talent, like the Vazquez/Young deal. Or, if Abreu was willing to restructure that $16 million contract for next year, which is 99% unlikely, unless he really wants to get out of NYC and be reunited with Guillen. The problem is that we're hanging onto the 2005 team for another year by adding Abreu as a band-aid (and we keep Buehrle long-term), and the only reason to do that would be the belief that Sweeney is not ready to be the starting RFer in 2008. If we lose Buehrle, we have to no reason to not start turning the roster over and get younger and better at every position possible. There will be some debate about why we would even need AJ, Thome or Konerko, but I think they are the ones most likely to stick, with Uribe 4th and Erstad/Iguchi, although nobody will die from being distraught that any of the latter three are gone.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 06:22 AM) Garza has been backlisted for criticizing the Twins organziation for making him change his style of pitching. Just call him Brian Anderson. It's kind of interesting. I guess he needs to work on the consistency of his breaking stuff, and he feels that he has the "stuff" to not be stuck behind Slowey, Baker and Perkins in the Twins' pecking order. from si.com Slowey looks like another version of a former Twins pitcher Brad Radke. He has a 50/5 K/BB ratio and a 1.76 ERA in eight starts at Triple-A, spanning 56 innings. Batters are hitting just .195 off him. He has had top-of-the-charts control ever since college. A guy that has good stuff and can locate it anywhere he wants at any time will succeed. Garza has a little more notoriety after pitching so lights-out in the minors last year that he got a late-season callup. This season he has a 46/18 K/BB in 49 innings with a 3.49 ERA. He had one bumpy start, but otherwise has shown more consistent command, which was his problem in his major league stint in 2006. He's keeping the ball down in the zone a lot better. They're coming, it's just a question of when, even if trying to predict exactly "when" occurs is sometimes difficult with the Twins

QUOTE(ChWRoCk2 @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 12:50 AM) Heres what Im thinking: C AJ Pierzynski 1B Paul Konerko 2B Eckstein 3B Joe Crede SS Juan Uribe OF Josh Fields - Feel he might be given a chance, if not him Owens assumin he stays consistent thus far OF Ichiro Suzuki OF Jermaine Dye DH Jim Thome BN Toby Hall BN Andy G BN Cintron BN Mack BN Owens SP Mark Buehrle SP Jason Jennings SP Jon Garland SP Javy Vazquez SP John Danks Bullpen: Jenks, Day, Lieber, Aardsma, Masset, Logan Crede does have an optinon for 08 I believe, I really think he stays next year, I dont see a trade for Figgins since Angels look to be set in the future at 3B with guys like Mcpherson/Wood/Aybar/Figgins. Figgins probably will be gone not to the Sox. Eckstein just fits our style of play, grindy. Been mentioned quite a bit in this thread and its grown on me that he could come. Id love to see Ichiro, he is in his last year. Would look good in a Sox uni leading off. Erstad obviously leaves, Ichiro or no Ichiro, hes gonna need to earn a spot next year, which Im sure alot of our OFs are gonna be given a fair chance for a spot on the team and he will leave due to the vast competition. Jennings would be a cheap replacement and has proven he can throw in a hitters park, solid option. Lieber would be spot starter for a sudden injury, his agent has good relationship with KW and its about time he comes back to chicago. Where are we getting the idea that any starting pitching would be "cheap" in any way, shape or form, let alone a pitcher close to his prime and possibly improving, in contrast to a Zito or Schmidt? Eckstein will be past his prime (if he's not already) by the time we are close to competitiveness.

QUOTE(BobDylan @ Jun 4, 2007 -> 02:50 AM) I'd find a way to get these players: Yeah, one is an ump, but I'm sure she can play a little 3B. Ummm....Denise Richards has proved she can "steal" Ritchie Sambora away from Heather Locklear. Neve Campbell's career is about as hot as our RH relievers. But she's available at least, and she's Canadian.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/10211270

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 10:50 PM) he defiantly doesn't have the worst farm system, its maso menos. pretty middle of the pack. We're supposedly 25th, I would say we're optimistically closer to 20, but we're still pretty close to a bottom quartile minor league organization. The ultimate goal is top quartile in winning pct. and 3rd quartile in payroll, which is what the Twins, A's and Marlins (once) pulled off

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 10:54 PM) Yeah, that's his job title. What is his job description. And a better analogy would be Walker is your McDonalds Supervisor and under his watch you and 6 other employees have been taking regular afternoon s***s in the deep fryer. There is no real way for the restaurant to get rid of the lot of you due to cooperate and FDA regulations, so they're stuck with your miserable ass no matter terrible your fries are. In the past when fry cooks had acted up firing the Supervisor would give the whole group a little jolt and brought about some overall acceptable production in the french fry department. Really Walker isn't doing much as your Supervisor just kind of standing around watching his professional fry makers struggle to make a quality french fry so firing him would be no big loss in the grand scheme of things but canning his ass now could get the fry makers going and the McDonald's could once again start performing at the level excellence which is expected of it. Everyone in the world wants to be a major league player, but there's a finite number of quality replacements. Whereas McDonald's has lots of replacement options, but, at the amount they pay, they are bound to invest a lot of time and money in training them and replacing them, because of the low pay. The McDonald's question is more about pride and effort, whereas MLB bullpens that "try too hard" see diminishing results. Maybe the McDonald's manager gets better effort from properly motivating his "fry team," but I'm not sure that Cooper can do a better job "motivating" relievers that have serious endemic limitations.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:51 PM) Was Rowand ever on the DL with the Sox? No, but his motorcycle accident almost killed him (once again, part of his reckless nature), he really struggled that year, and KW felt he had to replace him on two separate occasions as CFer, the last time with Kenny Lofton.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:44 PM) Rowand got injured on a collision....not exactly the same type of injury frequency as Pods pulling a groin, etc. But isn't it all part of his "reckless" style of play that contributes to those type of injuries occuring? I don't think any Sox fan is shocked when they see Rowand is injured yet again, any more than Cubs fans are with Prior or Wood.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 08:10 PM) It's hard to tell....Thomas ended up having a fairly equal season to Thome. Our CF position was a disaster, so Rowand would have helped that. Rowand isn't great, but he's better than what we had last year. McCarthy very easily could have put up better numbers than Vazquez, especially given the run support that Vazquez received. But having AJ as our only lefty with any power, an injured Rowand and a 5-7 games over .500 record for April and May with Thomas instead of Thome, I don't think that Thomas' second half surge would have been enough alone to reverse 8 games under .500 to, let's say 20 games OVER .500, if you're willing to make the assumption that Thomas versus Thome in the first two months would have been a huge difference with the way the season played out. But we'll never know. And we still would have been without a CF when Rowand went down, which was just as likely to happen here as in Philly, just like man suspected Pods and Erstad, for instance, to go down.

QUOTE(klaus kinski @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 07:05 PM) We were no fluke in 2005 Then WHY did the GM get rid of one third of that team in the immediate off season? So if we had Rowand, Perez, Blum, El Duque, Thomas, Everett, Harris, Vizcaino and Marte, we would have won in 2006? I don't think so.

QUOTE(WhiteSoxfan1986 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 06:45 PM) Didn't get to see the game today, and I guess I'm glad something got messed up with the DVR and it didn't record. Did Danks deserve to be pulled so early, how many pitches did he throw? Granted, if he leaves him in another inning the pen would have blown it in the 7th. 99 pitches through 5, he was taxed. The big debate seems to be not bringing in Logan to face Lind, and when a game is decided on something like that, we're in huge trouble. We had AJ thrown out, and runners that didn't score from 3rd on two separate occasions (including the top of the 9th)...overall, it was a predictable game, with all runners scoring off Masset with two outs and nobody on base in the bottom of the 6th. Everybody wanted Masset, and he, too, failed.

QUOTE(diegotony06 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 05:35 PM) What looks riduculous is this team, and what reeks of unintelligence is our hitting coach, manager, and GM. Anyone who think this team will even sniff coming close to the playoffs, now that is ridiculous and reeks of unintelligence. At some point people have to be held accountable for their actions. It's just the way life is. If you have a job, and you f*** up at it by not doing your job for over 2 months then most likely, you get fired. That's just the way it is. So since this team has been playing like s*** since last july, then I think it's time for people to be held accountable. As for people who don't agree, hey that's fine. I have no problem with that. But to start saying people are not intelligent or sound like teenagers, when they are just expressing their opinion, then to me that's ridiculous and unintelligent. You can't find the right people in the middle of the season. This is a September 07 through March of 08 project. I'm definitely not in any way for giving the job to Hahn. If we want to continue to be innovative, we should give it to Kim Ng, the Dodgers' ASST GM and a woman who graduated from Univ. of Chicago and started as an intern with the White Sox. However, I give KW and Ozzie one chance at this rebuild...they deserve that much for 2005. Firing them both would be not unlike the Schottenheimer situation in SD. It's just illogical. And compared to that particular situation, we all KNOW that Ozzie and KW can lead and produce a World Series-winning team. There are no obvious names out there to manage this team, and Girardi's definitely not on my list....let him replace Piniella on the North Side and blow out some more arms.

The Indians simply needed to address their bullpen, and they've done that adequately enough with Borowski and Hernandez. They've caught lightning in a bottle with Carmona, but Sowers has been as bad as Carmona has been good. The only thing the Indians (questionably) could have done besides the bullpen is bringing in a better manager than Wedge. They got rid of Boone and Belliard, Marte hasn't worked out like they had hoped, but they also added Dellucci and Nixon to their OF platoons, and they had the luxury of having "spare" players in Blake and Garko that have filled into the weak spots of the line-up. But there was no "core" under 30 player the Indians were going to trade...versus our entire core being OVER 30 and worth LESS in trade. Different situations. Plus, they had the "jump" in 05 to fall back on, we've had the exponentially increasing decline from ASB 2006 to get to the point where we're at now, stretching over two separate seasons of play.

Yay, two consecutive no-hitters. That's hard to do.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 01:39 PM) 71 pitches through 4 for Danks. Not good at all, and wow it's sad we are up 3-0 going to the 5th and i'd stil be shocked if we win since our starter is only going 6 or 7 tops. So who's our best option for the 6th or 7th inning right now, assuming we still have the lead? Masset? Logan? Do you stretch Thornton for two innings, or Jenks, more than one? EDIT: Have we reached two no hitters from the opposite bullpen? I think that's 52 at-bats without a hit.

QUOTE(29thandPoplar @ Jun 3, 2007 -> 11:57 AM) I sense it's the logistical issues of them being in Canada and possibly them wanting to make sure the replacement arm is fresh and ready to pitch. It will be interesting to see who doesn't pitch for Charlotte today. Don't they also collect taxes on the game checks (from the Canadian government)? I know that's not the primary consideration, I just thought it was funny...I didn't realize, until I worked for an NFL football player, that they were taxed in each of the 8 cities they played (for 1/16th of their season salary) and also by the that particular state as well.

It would be ONE thing if we were replacing our 5/6/7 guys out of the pen constantly. Our problem for most of the first half was the primary set-up guys, specifically, Cotts and Politte. It then morphed into problems where we used our 4/5/6 guys in any game that we were ahead significantly or down just a run or two. You're not only asking a Gio or Russell to become 7th and 8th inning guys, you're doing it when the season is still relatively young and the pressure's high (well not quite as bad with the Cubs' soap opera in town). To recap, we don't need a mop-up righthander, or a long man to get his feet wet like McCarthy (although Ozzie did try him in the 7th and 8th too when he began to feel he had no other options, which seemed to really put Brandon out of his comfort zone and started his "downfall" last season in the 2nd half). Ozzie has remarked he's not confident in Masset in that role ("too inexperienced"), so why would we possibly use Russell or Broadway or whoever? Gio is our best "strikeout" arm down in the minors (along with Day, who obviously is lost at this level), and yet we don't need another LHP. Which leads to Prinz, Bukvich, Oneli Perez, Vazquez, etc. Then maybe you try Floyd, since he at least has experience relieving. Heck, Sierra throws hard too, even though he has no control and can't get anyone out. Maybe they'll try to catch lightning in a bottle with him, like they did w/ Jenks? I know, I know, Jenks was a legit prospect...but this is one huge mess without a solution in terms of talent surrendered or money. The best option might be to trade two struggling relievers with comparable guaranteed contracts...there's always the Jose Mesas, LaTroy Hawkins and Felix Rodriguezes of the world, but betting on that, we might as well bring back Jose Paniagua. Finally, our starting rotation is still VERY good, and that causes the guys like Masset (and Jenks), that are at the end and front of the bullpen, to stultify from lack of work, which is the last thing you'd want to do to Gio or Russell or De Los Santos. Of course, there's always the MacDougal-Rowand trade, which I almost wish would happen just to quiet all those who feel like Rowand is some mixture of Jack Sparrow, Spiderman and Maximus from Gladiator and will save our team, no matter what.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 11:26 PM) I'm all for change, but the Sox wouldn't have been any worse had they kept all the players from the world championship team instead of the tinkering they've done. The players we've acquired with the exception of Jim Thome haven't done squat. And as much as I like Thome, don't you all agree he's no longer capable of carrying a lineup? He's getting older and definitely hasn't hit many homes in bunches this season. I'm surprised anybody would want Oz and/or KW fired however. Again ... they led us to a World Series title. This franchise and this city hasn't done squat with the exception of the Oz-KW led title season. But nobody we've traded has done anything either, and therein lies the dilemma. Did you really advocate at the time for keeping Frank Thomas and Carl Everett? Seriously? Essentially, McCarthy and Young are the only talented players we've lost that we would still want to have in 2-3 years. We've gained Danks, Masset, Gio, Vazquez and Thome. Vazquez > Garcia Danks > McCarthy Gio + Masset = Chris Young (I'm sure this could be debated, but most scouts would take young pitching) Thome > Rowand QUOTE(zimne piwo @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 11:36 PM) Couldn't have said it better myself. For better or worse, one of the by-products of winning the World Series in '05 is that we've raised the bar substantially higher, and with that the overall tolerance level of the fan base is going to be much lower than it has been in years. Right, otherwise this would look exactly like every White Sox season the past 20+ years, with the exception of 1983, 1990, 1993/94, 2000 and 2005/06. Of the past twenty five years or so, we've had 7 very good to great seasons, or 28%. If you eliminate the late 80's and late 90's duds, most of those non-contending teams have all fallen into that 75-85 win range.

I have to mention how dominant Contreras was during the final two months of the season...how he turned everything around, after being fairly average, slow working/methodical and uncertain whether to pitch with FB or forkball first. He became the dominant pitcher in the AL, and the only indications of that were his first 1/2 year in NY. McCarthy might not have been the difference in us making the playoffs or not, but those starts against the Red Sox, Rangers and Twins (even though he lost to Santana) also helped to stem the tide. Our offense that last six week stretch was very comparable to this year's version...Everett and Rowand, in particular, were lousy.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 2, 2007 -> 08:58 PM) It was a fluke in terms of how everything came together with guys having career years and other teams, besides the Indians, having a lot of issues in the AL. However, for about 80 pct of the season, the Sox were clearly the best team on the field. If you want to point to a team that fluked it's way to the WS, the Cards last year is the best example. Then you add in the Graffanino error, AJ's strikeout versus Escobar (and the time he was tagged without the ball by Escobar), Pods' homer off Lidge, Blum's homer...seemingly every possible break went our way. Of course, we had to take advantage of the opportunities we were given, but we did that too. Good teams have a way of creating their own "breaks," the tried and true sports cliche.