almagest

Guillen's been as good as any manager at deflecting attention away from his players and to himself. I think if there's any place Bradley could be successful, it's here. I guess it depends on whether the Sox feel he would behave himself. The talent's certainly there, and even though Bradley's having a bit of an off-year, a switch-hitting DH who gets on base a lot and can hit for power is a nice replacement for Thome.

If it's late in the game, and it's tied or either team has a 1 run lead, the baserunner has good enough speed to score from second on a single (or is on second and can score on a sac fly/wild pitch from 3rd), the batter can bunt, and the batter has some speed to apply additional pressure on fielders, then yes. I agree. The bunt is the right call in those situations. Otherwise, I think it's a bad idea.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 12:49 PM) To those of you who hate the bunt let me at least ask your take. It's the 10th inning in tie game. We are at the Cell and AJ gets on base. Do you want CQ to bunt him over? The answer should be yes. The odds of scoring him from second with one out are in theory pretty damn good at that point if you can bunt him over. Now the answer is no if CQ can't bunt the damn ball like most big leaguers. Most can't bunt. In a tie game in extras, why wouldn't you bunt? I just think Oz wants guys to be able to bunt the times we need a f***ing bunt. He's not going to bunt a lot in the AL. People are panicking. With a power hitting team, he's not going to be giving up outs early. He knows baseball. Did you want Quentin bunting him over during his MVP 2008 season?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 09:04 AM) Sample size, there are probably like 3 people from Montana who even voted, and 2 went to CC because they thought he was a pregnant elk.That WOULD be a great story... "Pregnant elk wins AL Cy Young award."

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 09:39 AM) Ok, you guys are right. The bunt is worthless and never should be usedIt's useful, but so much with a power-hitting team in a small ballpark with players who can't score from second on a single and players who can barely get the ball out of the infield 2 or 3 months a year. All bunting would do with our current roster is increase the number of RISP we leave on base.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Sep 18, 2009 -> 08:33 AM) Bunting accomplishes plenty when used properly. It is far from an easy out like Thunderbolt suggests, and although our team spectacularly fails at bunting, there are teams that can use it to their advantage and do so often(Angels) No, they don't: QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 17, 2009 -> 12:11 PM) In 2008, the Rays had 23 Sacrifice Hits. That was the lowest total in MLB. The Angels were 22nd in MLB in SH, the Sox were 28th.

He says this every year. I bet there's a thread in the archive from each year he's been manager. Ho-hum. I'd feel better if he said "we're going to get rid of players who slump and are effectively useless for 3 consecutive months ."

Jarrod Washburn has just been awful for Detroit. 6.81 ERA, 11 HR allowed in 37 innings, 11 BB/18 K, 1.405 WHIP. I don't even think these numbers include tonight's mediocre performance (3 ER in 5 IP). I figured he'd be worse for Detroit than Seattle, but not by this much. Keep it up, Jarrod!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 2, 2009 -> 01:11 PM) Having a connection at a company (friend, former co-worker, etc.) is far and away the best way to go, in terms of success rate.It worked for me!

I thought I'd like the positive Sox Talk gamethreads more than the all the negativity that's been around here lately... ...and I was right! *rips off pants, reveals banana hammock*

QUOTE (oldsox @ Sep 1, 2009 -> 09:33 AM) Why do you want Thome back? You like strikeouts? Time for him to retire.No, but I do like having a power-hitting left-handed DH who gets on base a lot. Don't you?

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Aug 31, 2009 -> 08:59 AM) Those are my two favorite Wes Anderson films to date.Same here. I saw Adventureland over the weekend. Definitely worth seeing.

Don't buy a NAS, use that semi-operable desktop you have, add a RAID card and some drives, and install FreeNAS. Saves money; fun project.

My first guess is that there's a problem with the power supply, the power button isn't connected from the case to the motherboard correctly, or there's a short somewhere. Do you have another computer to test the power supply with?

I handle support, internal IT, and am currently dabbling a bit in development for a small law software company. I'd like to get into Bioinformatics, but I need to finish my bachelor's first (I'm in the "I hated college because I didn't stay there" boat). I plan to enroll in Northwestern's SCS to finish my degree in CIS, then go on for BI @ UIC or somewhere else around here that has a good program.

Best Dracula comics ever.

That heart was disgusting looking by the end. They stuck it on the 3rd floor balcony with all the broken exhibits and the indecipherable chemistry exhibit. The rest of the museum has really improved, though. They had a green home exhibit in the spring that was pretty amazing.

Since we don't have Brian Anderson any more, I guess this is the new thing to make 11 million threads about.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 25, 2009 -> 03:10 PM) You're right, and Josh Fields couldn't play the outfield because he couldn't play QB in the Big 12. Some guys just cannot play the outfield. There is a much different natural reaction to seeing a ball coming at you on the ground than there is in the air, and some guys never figure it out. Some guys do and can move around the diamond. Josh Fields was not given a long look in the outfield because the Sox brass felt that he could not handle the OF after even just a small time out there. If they felt that Brandon Allen could have played in the outfield, I guarantee you they would have given him more than 8 games in rookie ball 5 years ago (or whenever it was). The fact of the matter is that, from what the Sox brass has seen, and what the Arizona brass has seen, Brandon Allen cannot play the outfield. He's a big kid already, and he's not going to get smaller as he gets older. He's a 1Bman. On to Brandon Allen's value...compare Allen's numbers in AA and AAA to those of Casey Kotchman, Paul Konerko, Aubrey Huff, and Adam LaRoche. All 4 have been relatively average 1Bman, though good to great at times. If that is Brandon Allen's ceiling, then the value is about perfect; Adam LaRoche, after proving himself at the MLB level, was traded for a dominant left handed reliever. Brandon Allen, having not proven himself, was traded for an average MLB reliever who is young and has been solid in the past. Sounds about right to me. I was going to say LaRoche isn't in the same class as those other players, but his career numbers are better than I thought.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Aug 25, 2009 -> 12:35 PM) We should have gotten more for Allen than Pena because Allen's ceiling is a lot higher than Pena's and Allen is ready now. Pena is a decent reliever who has been an underachiever and has a chance to be a very nice setup man. Speaking of dealing from a position of strength, unless we want to permanently move Flowers or Viciedo, by dealing Allen we dealt from a position of weakness. OTOH, the strongest part of the upper portion of our farm is the amount of quality right-handed relief prospects. Your comment about AZ not dealing from a position of strength doesn't make sense. They dealt a reliever who had basically been a righty specialist during a horrible season to fill a glaring need. If Pena can replace what Dotel has done, well, that will be a huge addition. Not many relievers out there can put up the kinds of numbers Dotel has put up here, and not many of those guys can come in and get huge strikeouts with RISP. I would definitely not bet on Pena being as good as Dotel has been, although he could end up as our primary righty setup man. No, I'm not overvaluing or undervaluing anyone's view on anybody. AZ reportedly loves him and he was a target of theirs. KW OTOH had a hard-on for Tony Pena and had been rumored to be after him before. Just because Kenny traded Allen for Pena doesn't mean people in Kenny's ear weren't telling him not to make that deal. Kenny happened to think Allen was expendable enough, and he wanted Pena bad enough, and so he made that deal. It doesn't sound at all like Kenny really shopped Allen, and if he did, I think he could have gotten more. As for the Chris Young and CQ deals, Chris Young was a guy a lot of teams would have loved to acquire. Teams love high-level defensive CFers with 30-30 potential who handle large jumps like that from low-A to AA with great success. It's not like Kenny "fooled" anyone by trading Chris Young. Kenny and all his people know the odds of a prospect panning out, and some are better than others, and some are worth trading when you're coming off a WS Championship. It's not like we had some major scouting advantage there. And CQ only became available because of the bogus Eric Byrnes extension combined with CQ's injury history and the emergence of Chris Young and Justin Upton. It's not like Kenny saw something great in CQ that nobody else saw. Everyone knew the type of player Quentin was capable of becoming. The reason we got CQ in the first place was because the DBacks were talking with the A's about Haren and Beane wanted Chris Carter. It's not like we were the only team in on him. The Indians offered Cliff Lee straight up and the DBacks passed. When those deals were made, each team took a chance talented players and so far it has worked out better for the Sox. If you have a glaring hole you need to fill, and other teams know this, you are not dealing from a position of strength. I'm also not entirely sure why Arizona is so smart for targeting Allen, yet the Sox made a poor decision in obtaining Pena. It's not like Az has been raping the Sox in trades, their major league team isn't anything special, and quite a few of their big-time prospects have done nothing or have seriously regressed since 2007. ...Besides your biased opinion that Allen is better, of course. Cliff Lee? Really? The same Cliff Lee who was mediocre in 2006, then awful and injured in 2007? I probably wouldn't want him after 2007 if I were Arizona, either. They probably regret that now, though, as Haren/Webb (when healthy)/Lee/Scherzer would be disgusting.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Aug 25, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) When that trade was made there were reports of AZ scouts absolutely loving this guy. I forget who it was, but FutureSox had an interview with I think one of the BA guys and something similar was said where Allen is a guy some scouts love and see as an above-average starting MLB first baseman, others see him as a AAAA player, and yet others see him as a MLB bench or platoon player. The AZ people have seen this guy since we've had him because, with the exception of this year's ST, we've shared complexes with the Diamondbacks as long as Allen has been in our system. The strikeout rate statement lacks knowledge of his numbers. He has cut down on his K's drastically from where it was prior to the last two seasons while increasing levels and facing tougher competition. Obviously his numbers will look bad for periods while he adjusts, and obviously the PCL had inflated his AAA AZ numbers, but the numbers with AZ are a lot more indicative of his ability than his stint in Charlotte was. The improved K rate was one of the main reasons he shot up our charts as a prospect, and if you think Allen's K numbers the last two seasons are high, just check out the numbers for pretty much every other legit power hitting prospect in the game. Most all of them are going to be at least as high, probably a lot higher. It is pretty rare to find a guy who makes better contact than Allen has these last couple seasons and still hits for power. Thirdly, the main reason I loved him as a prospect is *because* of his ability to make adjustments at the plate. It is that plus the lowered K rate, plus the age, plus the improvement he's made over the last two seasons, plus the increased walk rate as he's improved, plus the athletic ability and the improvement he's made at 1B that makes him more than your average 1B prospect. Allen hasn't gotten the attention nationally, and if you look at top-100 prospect lists from long ago, it is very common to see guys in the 80's and 90's that ended up being far better players than other guys much higher on the lists. Just because a guy doesn't get lauded in the big publications doesn't mean he isn't as good or better than some of those guys that are. Allen IMO is a much better prospect than Poreda and yet we heard lots of national prospect evaluators glowing over him with very little about Allen. Casey Rogowski probably got more pub coming up the ranks than Allen got the last two years. Allen might be considered a "late bloomer" as a prospect because he had to repeat levels, but even considering him that would be inaccurate as he signed out of high school and at the age of 23 has become Arizona's starting 1B. So I don't think anyone is overrating or overvaluing Allen because no one is making outlandish statements like he's going to win batting titles, or have top-5 finishes in MVP races, or be a perennial All-Star, etc. It's just that he's a very nice prospect and some people, including myself, feel he was worth more than Tony Pena. I would have had no problem dealing him provided we got a better return - and I'm not talking Pujols or anything, I'm talking about a better-than-average starter or position player whom we would be able to control for the next couple of seasons. I don't see how you can assume we should have gotten more for Allen than Pena, since Arizona had absolutely no production from the first-base position this year. It's not like they dealt from a position of strength. I also think you undervalue Tony Pena, as he's been a good reliever since 2007, makes league minimum, and is under our control for a couple years. He's also a likely replacement for the 5.5 million dollar Octavio Dotel. You also seem to overvalue Arizona's talent evaluation, while undervaluing ours. We weren't wrong on Chris Young, it seems, and I doubt Arizona would trade Quentin again, even with his injury this year. Allen seems to have improved his strikeout/walk ratio, which is a good sign, but I still find it hard to get excited about a first baseman who had a full-season OPS over .900 once in his 6 year minor league career.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Aug 24, 2009 -> 02:16 PM) The only prayer the Cubs have for dropping a little payroll is some AL GM thinks Bradley can excell at full time DH and take some of that moneyHe could be our Carl Everett, version 2.0...

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 24, 2009 -> 01:09 PM) There is a difference between calling it a bust, and saying we disagreed with it when it was made. I'm in the latter camp. Can't evaluate the former anytime soon.That's understandable. I just think we're severely overvaluing Allen. He wouldn't be with the D-Backs right now if they had a first baseman who could hit over .200, and his high strikeout rate is going to kill him at this level unless he can make adjustments really quickly. Also, we have Konerko for another season IIRC, and one of Viciedo/Fields/Flowers/Phegley is probably going to replace him after that. Although none of them are 1B prospects at this point, I don't think we'll be hurting for depth at that position.

Maybe we should wait until Allen has more than 8 major league at-bats before declaring this trade a bust?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 20, 2009 -> 01:53 PM) Washburn's been terrible. He's given up 17 ER now in 4 starts. He only pitched well against the Royals. He's been especially prone to the home run, which doesn't make that much sense since Comerica is bigger than Safeco. The park factor is actually about the same homerun-wise, but I'd bet the ball still travels much better in Comerica than Safeco. The ginormous area from the power alleys to center field probably influences the PF in Comerica, but it doesn't seem that hard to hit it out to straight LF or RF since they moved the fences in.