ChiliIrishHammock24

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 10:58 PM) Sounds like Sox are extremely pissed off at Joe West. How do you know?

Morel went 1/3. Wilkins went 2/4 with a 2B, 2 R, 2 RBI, 1 BB.

Ok, disregard my comments about wanted updates on players. My nerdlinger roommate told me to empty my cache, so I did, and it's fine now.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 09:09 PM) per cowley: Freddy Garcia is pitching Game 1 - TBA for Game 2. E. Jackson is not coming back. Psh, p**** pitchers now a day.

This would mean that Jackson would start tomorrow, and push the starters back 1 day, but it would also mean that we would miss Greinke then, right? I understand it will f*** our bullpen (or Pena I guess), but at least we would miss Greinke. Also, I think Sale should be able to pitch 2 innings or so tonight. He is a starter afterall. Throw Pena for 3, Sale for 2, and then you have 5 innings covered.

QUOTE (Ozzie Ball @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 04:49 PM) There's always the FutureSox Twitter. Hmm, cool. I'll have to remember to get on twitter and check that, but thanks.

Not to be a pain, but could someone please try and post what Morel, Wilkins, Phegley do on a day-to-day basis? I am at school now, and for some reason the boxscores do not load properly on my computer, even though I use Google Chrome on laptop and at home. Even when I try internet explorer, it messes up and I can't read it. And guys like Arroyo, Reed, Petricka, and our other top pitchers line when they pitch would be great too. Thanks if anyone does this.

I am going with the under, and 9 K's for Edwin, 9 Ks to 2 BB.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 20, 2010 -> 12:18 AM) Not really. Thornton is a legitimate option. He still had to choose between Jenks and Thornton. Not really. I think the closers job was always Jenks or Putz. I have heard that Thornton is not comfortable closing.

Oh boy, Ozzie must have been so giddy at the news that he could slip Jenks back in to the closer role with an excuse.

QUOTE (Cali @ Aug 19, 2010 -> 09:56 AM) Now that the Sox are completely out of it, and chance Morel get s cup of coffee in a few weeks? I asked Brent, and he basically said "not this year" as if he was already told he wasn't being added to the 40-man roster because he is behind Teahen, Vizquel, and Viciedo.

Holy Balls, that may be the hardest ball I have ever seen a pitcher catch. Not in terms of skill, or difficulty of the catch, but that ball landed in his mitt in about a 1/10th of a second.

Phegley is 2/3 in his debut so far with B'Ham. Morel is 1/2 so far in Charlotte.

CSN just played a clip of Ozzie going off about the Thome situation. He basically said the only people who think we need Thome is fans, radio broadcasters, and newspaper writers. But this team doesn't need Jim Thome, so f*** off and don't watch White Sox baseball......

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 05:10 PM) I like Jackson, I think he will be a competent 4th starter with potential to go higher, problem is I see Hudson the same way. Tie in the fact that Hudson was the only minor league pitcher the Sox had ready to come up and contribute in significant ways makes this deal really tough. Yes, we could trade Jackson after the season, but then we're down to 4 starters again and no young, cheap replacements. The idea being that Sale can do in 2011 what Hudson did in 2010 for us, and I think that's pretty fair.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 02:28 PM) There have been several reports that have been published by a number of different people that state that Rizzo didn't want Jackson and that the Sox were 3rd in the Dunn race, and that by the end of July, the Sox weren't even interested in Dunn anymore. Rizzo wouldn't come down from Beckham. I'm also not saying he doesn't have value, but you have to consider what type of hitter he can truly bring in. It would also almost certainly be a trade similar to the Garland trade of trading for a player with 1 year left on his deal. Another trade with the Angels, this time for Abreu, could be a possibility. I'm not sure Williams ever did attempt to trade Jackson again. I'm pretty sure Williams traded for Jackson with full intention to keep him. You are looking at this in a vacuum, where one #63 rated prospect is perfectly equal to another, and they have to be better than the #64 and have to be worse than #62. That's quite obviously not the case. Well, there were even more reports saying that Rizzo wanted Jackson, and the team to get Jackson would be the team to get Dunn. I guess we won't really know, on that front. And to the bolded part, I am not saying that Poreda was better because he was ranked with a lower number than Hudson, I am merely saying that they were BOTH considered top prospects. Whether one was better than the other is irrelevant to my point that they were both considered in the same class of prospect. I too think that Hudson was better than Poreda, but either way, they were both a top prospect when we traded them. All in all, I will continue to root for Jackson and hope he keeps up the dominance. If it's your thing, you can continue to root for Hudson and maybe hope Jackson fails to fulfill your notion that it was an awful trade and we wasted money that we haven't begun to pay for yet. To each their own.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 01:21 PM) Beyond that, which big bat is Edwin Jackson going to net you? He's only got one year left on his contract at $8 mill, he may not net you draft picks at the end of the year, and he's been quite mediocre throughout the entirety of his career. That doesn't sound like an overly valuable asset. Well, Rizzo was apparently wanting Jackson for Adam Dunn, so I would have to say that's a pretty big bat, and that was when Jackson was pitching like s*** in the NL West. Now that he is dominating in the AL, why should I have reason to believe he still wouldn't have just as much value? Sure, he is coming for 2 months less, but he is also pitching exponentially better. $8M for a start of his caliber with Detroit and with us now is a bargin. There is value there. This is why I said it's not 2011 yet. We haven't begun to pay the $8.35M he is owed next year. Until next April rolls around and you see Jackson in a Sox uni, then don't complain about what is owed yet. Kenny tried trading Jackson less than a day after acquiring him, so why shouldn't we believe he wouldn't try and trade him this offseason? I ask for you to wait at least until April to b**** about his 2011 contract. Aaron Poreda was ranked our #2 prospect, and #63 prospect in baseball. Daniel Hudson was ranked our #3 prospect, and #66 in baseball. If you don't consider Poreda a top prospect back then, then don't consider Hudson one now. Whether or not you liked Poreda, or regardless of what he is doing now, he was a top prospect when we traded him. Sure, you can use hindsight and say he is not good anymore, but then wait that same period of time before you make your judgement on Hudson. He could very well lose it and go back to sucking too. But at least Edwin Jackson has a history of success in the American League. Hudson, did not.

Adam LaRoche has made it through waivers.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 11:58 AM) Apparently anyone who puts stock in a stat like that is stupid. What exactly is so stupid about it, anyway? It's been shown that certain players perform differently in day and night games. Because those numbers should be nothing but coincidental. L/R splits makes sense. Home/Road splits even mean something to some degree. But Day/Night really doesn't hold any weight.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:50 AM) So trade your top pitching 'spect for an at best 4th starter for two months only to trade him the following offseason with 1 year and 8 million bucks left on his contract? That makes little to no sense. If we trade Jackson for a big bat this offseason, then it's essentially the same as trading Hudson for that big bat. I don't see why trading FOR Jackson was dumb, and then trading AWAY Jackson is dumb. Unless of course you are trying to say that trading away Hudson for ANY bat would be a bad idea, in which case I disagree with that too. Ok, and how does having Hudson solve any of that? It's not like we traded away a 1B, C, or DH in the trade. It was pitcher for pitcher, so the rest of the holes we have are still the same. To me, that sounds irrelevant, if, as I said before, we trade Jackson in the offseason because then we have added no additional salary. So let me get this straight.....you are cool with trading 2 top prospects and 2 other prospects for an injured pitcher who makes $16M+, and one of those top prospects has proven himself as a good starter, but you are NOT cool with trading 1 top prospect for a healthy pitcher who makes half the salary as Peavy, and the prospect we traded is unproven..... I understand Peavy has a track record, and is signed for a longer deal, but come on. If you hate trading away young pitchers at the risk of our future AND our payroll, then how can you possibly defend the Jake Peavy trade, which did just that.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:26 AM) Didn't say that he was great. But I feel he can be just as good (and I thought this as soon as the trade was announced) as Edwin at 8 million bucks less. Now we're going into next year with a rotation at 50+ million and no 1B, C and DH. Did the 2011 season start without me knowing? As far as I know, Jackson can still be traded before the season starts. How do you know we did acquire Jackson for the home stretch, and then plan to trade him this winter? Seems very possible. Who is to say that a team wouldn't be willing to part with a big slugger, and wanted Jackson in a trade? Piss and moan all you want that he is dominating for us, but don't bring up that $8M salary until we actually start paying it.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 03:02 AM) I have about 8 million reasons to complain. You guys can keep ignoring the salary issue if you want. But it's a huge factor. DHs and pitchers? A s***ty Detroit offense that's been torpedoed by injuries and the Orioles? Not very impressive. I'm not saying Hudson is Strasburg. But I'm sure as hell not convinced Edwin is 'cured' after three starts against two mediocre offenses. So 3 starts don't convince you that Edwin is "cured", but 3 starts convince you that Hudson is so great?

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 18, 2010 -> 12:31 AM) Finished with 10 Ks in 7 IP. Tough luck loser. And for all the "he's doing it in the NL" talk. The Brewers and Reds have two of the most potent offenses in baseball. Not just the NL. Just a pathetic trade. You knew eventually KW trading prospects at this ridiculous rate would come back to ram him in the ass. Gio Gonzalez and Daniel Hudson would look awfully good right now. Not to mention Chris Young. And there's no hindsight here. I hated all three trades. Until Jackson starts sucking, you honestly have nothing to complain about. Has Hudson been good? Yes. Has Jackson been just as good, if not better? Yes. Jackson is doing it against DH's, while Hudson is doing it against pitchers.

For the people saying "f*** Thome", that's ridiculous. It should be f*** OZZIE. Thome was great player and person for us, he WANTED to come back, Ozzie is the one who is to blame. If there was anyone to hit a walk-off HR vs. us, I would want it to be Thome. 1) Because outside of Mauer, Thome is the only Twin that I like. and B.) It's a reminder to Ozzie how f***ing awful Kotsay is and his decision was to take Kotsay over Thome.

Wilkins is 1/1 with a 2B.