CyAcosta41

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Sep 18, 2012 -> 02:01 PM) Ok, I need to stop this Duran Duran spoof real quick. YOU ARE ALL GETTING IT WRONG. I did it either in 2010 or 2011 and it was "His name is Rios and he dances on the paths" That is all. Found it: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/lofiversion/...t79387-250.html Absolutely. Kudos to you, dude. I know that somebody has been doing the Duran Duran Rios thing for awhile now, but couldn't remember who it was. In no way was I trying to steal your thunder. Rather, with the sand of the sliding pit right there, and with the importance of that play, YOUR Duran Duran Rios thing has never been more apt!

Paraphrasing Duran Duran: "HIS name is RIOS and HE dances on the sand." (and it pains me to paraphrase that group because nobody hates hates Duran Duran more than I do). The season is far from over, but Gordon Beckham is wrong -- he said "that might be the play of the year." That WAS the play of the year. Fundamentals; hustle; playing hard every moment. As the games become more important, little things matter -- big-time. Most people pooh pooh momentum in baseball, saying cute things like "momentum is only as good as tomorrow's starting pitcher." And indeed, momentum can be overstated. And have a short shelf-life. But gosh darn-it ... the Rios play should absolutely energize these guys in the same way a playoff caliber team is energized when an accomplished hitter gives up an at-bat to advance the runner to third, or when El Duque galvanizes the 2005 team when he pitched his inning for the ages and retired the Red Sox without allowing a run. It won't guarantee wins and losses from this point forward, but I'd love to see "The Takeout Slide" be a springboard for virtually non-stop hustle and intensity until 2012's final pitch!

Count me as one who considers CURRENT VERSION Peavy to be part of the problem for why we're having such difficulty closing this thing out. He isn't THE problem; he has lots of company; but, in my view, he is indeed part of the problem. Admire Peavy a lot as a pitcher. I don't think his bulldog attitude is a sham. That's who he is and it has a lot to do with his success over the years. I do think he's always been somewhat overrated -- and certainly benefited from being in the NL and playing at PETCO -- but even present version Peavy, post-major surgery, is a good to very good (and sometimes even dominant) big league starter. That said, my disappointment is that sometimes you need a pitcher to be GREAT. And be GREAT when you need him to be great. And whether it's inability to dial it up to great (this year), or plain bad-timing, Peavy has not been able to produce that GREAT start in a start where you truly need him to. Not once in 2012. Sale has -- many times. Quintana has -- multiple times. Even Axelrod and Santiago have. The entire starting staff did over and over again in 2005. Even the much-maligned John Danks did in the Blackout Game. And certainly Scherzer, Verlander, Fister, and Porcello (in Detroit) could dial up GREAT against us (of course, they had the luxury of going against our hitters). Forget the "ace" label, sometimes you need your guy to simply dominate and shut the opponent down -- no excuses. And I haven't seen one time that 2012 Peavy has been able to do that. If we were forced to a Game 163 versus the Tigers and had the luxury of picking ANY pitcher on our staff to start the game, all equally rested, Peavy would be my fourth option behind Sale, Quintana, and Floyd. It's not because I think Peavy isn't a strong starter to have on your staff during the course of a full season; he's my fourth option because I haven't seen a thing, THIS YEAR, that gives me confidence that he can throw that GREAT GAME for you, against a quality opponent, when you need him to do it.

QUOTE (Rooftop Shots @ Sep 14, 2012 -> 07:35 AM) and the fact that to opposing pitchers PK no longer seems to be a dangerous threat anymore. How many clutch situations were there where we really needed some runs........... has he come through without hitting some weak sqibber to the shortstop, or a lazy fly ball? the first half.............he was dangerous to the opposition because they knew that he was going to hit it HARD someplace. Now......solid hard contact out of him in key situations is horrible. If we are going to have a chance at this thing we need the PK back that we know him to be Exactly. Everyone always talks about the benefits of pitching with confidence. Against guys like Cabrera, Pujols, Trout, Konerko when healthy, pitchers justifiably feared these hitters, couldn't muster any sort of real confidence, and tightened-up and nibbled which screwed with their control and hurt their stuff. Half of the damage was done by these fearsome hitters the moment they set-up in the batter's box! Unfortunately, it's difficult not to be a Debbie-Downer about this, but I suspect that the reasons PK isn't the REAL PK isn't because he's slumping or out of synch. It's because he's hurt. Hurt at the level where he can swing a bat, but not with nearly the talent and ability a healthy PK brings to the plate. And it's circular because by playing hurt (only he knows how limited he really might be right now) he's also keeping himself out of synch as well. But it all starts with being hurt. Everything I see in his set-up, his swing, and his "need to cheat on a pitch" suggests that he's currently damaged goods. If this is so, then we're simply not going to have that REAL PK back this year, no matter how much we hope we do. Now how about some of the non-damaged hitters step-up and take their game up a notch or two? For El Capitan???

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Sep 13, 2012 -> 03:27 PM) Cy, you sound as if this team dropped out of the race? I think we have done well regardless of PK's injury especially when the so called experts had us finishing below .500 Not at all. I understand that going into the game on 9/13, we're in first place, a game up on the supposedly mighty Kitties. So-called experts aside (most of whom are horrible baseball analysts and afflicted with the traditional East Coast bias), I personally thought the Sox would be a 6-12 game over .500 team. And that's what they are. It's a pleasant surprise (and just a a wee bit of luck) that this sort of winning percentage is keeping them in this year's pennant race. I think it's possible to be pleasantly surprised that we're still playing meaningful baseball, but still be disappointed that injuries, player decisions, inability to play competitively with the Tiggers and THE ROYALS(!!!), and various other factors have us with a one game lead (pending tonight's Sale-Verlander showdown) instead of the 6-8 game lead that we might have had. I understand that the .399 hitting Konerko, with power, was not going to be here all season long. But if we had statistical average Konerko this second half instead of "injured Konerko," then we'd have a bit more cushion than we currently have. We'd also have a bit more optimism that we're capable of the kind of winning percentage we're likely to need to win this thing in this final 20-game sprint. All things considered, great that we're in first right now, but things would look a lot brighter IF we had a non-injured Konerko, a non-injured Dunn, non-exhausted #1 and #2 starters in Sale and Peavy, and a manager who recognized that the time for experimenting with AAA and AAAA players is over and you should win this thing or lose this thing with your big league roster at this point of the season. Love the heart that this team plays with, but whether through injuries, roster decisions of the GM, or playing-time decisions of the field manager, we're frequently undermanned on the field right now.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Sep 13, 2012 -> 12:42 PM) My guy at Sox park has heard Konrko's been playing with a fractured hand/wrist for quite some time. Perhaps the biggest "duh" in the last 2 months is that Paul Konerko is OBVIOUSLY playing hurt. We've had years of watching this guy. Sure, he's had a slump or three over the years, but throughout, when going well or not so well, he's consistently been one of the top pure fastball hitters in the game. THAT GUY has been M.I.A. for months now. Every so often you'll see Konerko "cheat" and turn a middle-in fastball around, but for months now he's been getting beat by the heat, just aiming the outside fastballs for flares into right, and getting little bat speed and thin wood on anything with velocity in. Will anyone be surprised when a few days after the season we hear that Paulie is having surgery on his wrist? Unfortunately, while it's admirable to be a tough guy and to take one for the team, a team can't survive when the guy who should be the best all around hitter and consistent power threat has been morphed into nothing more than a smart hitter with far less than average ability to drive the ball. And if you're forced to play that guy, he shouldn't be sitting in the clean-up spot. I've been a huge Konerko fan for years and years, but team management should have said "screw the macho stuff, we're sitting your butt down because you aren't helping (and can't help) the team." And of course we have many other problems. Konerko alone is not to blame. But Paul's "injury" is a big part of why the second half Sox are so beatable. Is he feared like Cabrera or Fielder? Not even close. Present version Konerko is feared less that Gordon/Butler!

QUOTE (Lillian @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 10:23 AM) Yep, the first one in his last 19 appearances!!!!! It would have been nice if he had also struck someone out, instead of allowing two guys to smoke balls on the line to right, in almost exactly the same spot. Fortunately, Rios was standing right there. However, at least he didn't give us all one of his typical "heart stopping" finishes. I'm no Addison Reed apologist by any means -- he's a rookie who simply MUST learn that his stuff lacks the movement to throw balls over the heart of the plate (as he does with great frequency); he also needs to develop some additional movement and/or cutting action on his fastball and harness control over his breaking balls to stop hitters from sitting dead red. Still think he has nice potential, but he's got some stuff to work on to progress to dependable, before we see if elite is even possible for his skill set. All that said -- "allowing two guys to smoke balls on the line to right?" Were we watching the same game? With a 5 run lead, I was very happy that Reed stayed in the strike zone, but not his typical "heart of the plate" strike. Both pitches were outside fastballs. Both hitters did a professional job and took the outside pitch the opposite way. And both times location and decent enough velocity insured that each hitter simply muscled a dime-a-dozen loopy fly to somewhat deep right. The Cell plays small for anything put in the air. I just have to disagree with you -- far from "smoked," nothing close to "on the line," and neither were worries at all. At that time, he's supposed to pitch to contact and throw strikes (just not "fat" strikes). LOVED his performance last night. Definitely something to build-on for the rest of the series and year.

QUOTE (JohnCangelosi @ Sep 11, 2012 -> 08:07 AM) So you're saying he's a fluffer? FLUFFER? How funny. Back in the day when I had time off from the OF, I used to love warming up pitchers between innings -- watching how the ball came out of the pitcher's hand, really focusing on spin and movement, and just generally getting a good sense of those "skill" positions (I never pitched nor caught). Suddenly I feel kind of gross and really need a hot, soapy shower! As far as Olmedo goes, given that horrific combination of very limited talent and low energy/effort, the dude should see playing time in 2012 in total emergency situations only. Every game, but especially in the homestretch of a pennant race, you want to use talented guys who really want it. It was horrible to see Olmedo batting #2 in the Sunday KC game and being allowed to hit during the game's last at-bat. It was inexcusable to witness a AAA guy (who on his best day couldn't be described as a AAAA guy) fail to hustle on multiple occasions.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 11:59 AM) The way I look at it is that Floyd's injury (assuming it doesn't magically clear-up in the next day or so) means that a spot start is necessary for someone -- Santiago, Humber, or Axelrod. Personally, I prefer Axelrod because the other two have been HR throwing machines. In scouting terms, Axelrod doesn't have the raw stuff or ceiling of the other two, but on any given day I think he's a better bet to keep you close. ... With the assumption that Floyd is DL'd (obviously, still TBD), then we both think Axelrod is called up to take his slot. Axelrod doesn't necessarily have that high big league ceiling, but he's proven that he's not likely to get rocked completely, and he has the ability to string some 0's together. I love it when I analyze! Sorry about the no-no of self-quoting (a/k/a quoting someone I love), but just wanted to send some more kudos to Dylan Axelrod and his big cajones for his performance in one of this year's most important starting assignments (momentum-wise). He's had some good starts last year; he's dominated all year long in AAA; and he had good+ starts this year against the Yankees and the Red Sox. Everyone falls in love with stuff, but some guys just know how to pitch. I'm not saying he's Mark Buehrle (who has made a fortune for himself knowing how to pitch), but no reason that on many nights he can't do a serviceable Cy Chen impression (who, oh, by the way, shut down the hot Tiger offense tonight knowing how to be a pitcher and not a thrower). Axelrod's ceiling has got to be a 4/5, but in the heat of a pennant race, on the road, against a hot offense, I had much more confidence in him than the higher ceiling Santiago (who at this stage of his career seems to alternate great stuff innings with BP innings) and the enigma known as Phil Humber (who can throw you a perfecto, get bombed, or anywhere in between).

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 05:34 PM) Mark Gonzales, the Trib beat writer, tweeted that Peavy was pitching Friday. Humber or Santiago will get Peavy's Wednesday start in Baltimore. Thanks man. Gonzalez is a decent beat writer. Not a fan of blowhard Phil Rogers ... especially for anything Sox related. Still like Axelrod (if they DL'd Floyd) better than either Santiago or Humber as a spot-starter, mainly because I have more confidence he can avoid a blowout and keep the ball in the park, but I love that Floyd's injury set us up so nicely for both series against the Tigs.

QUOTE (SOXOBAMA @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 04:42 PM) Great to see Peavy pitching on friday vs Det. Is this based on Phil Rogers? Or some other source? I haven't heard any source other than Rogers (he IS right sometimes, but I think he's just barely adequate as a supposed baseball insider). In any case, I think the idea of using Floyd's injury to get a spot start for someone (I'd prefer Axelrod, Santiago, and Humber ... in that order) and helping to best set-up for Detroit with minimal other changes to the rotation rocks. We'd wind-up with Peavy, Liriano, and Sale for Detroit Round I; Quintana, Peavy, Liriano, and Sale for Detroit Round II. Smart baseball to wind-up with your top three starters getting 6 out of the 7 cracks at Detroit, with the 7th going to your 4th starter (Quintana), and never exposing your 5th starter (any of the spot-guys or current version of Gavin). And yes, despite statistics (and I'm a Quintana fan and think the ballsy youngster has a legitimate chance of being a decent #3), I'd have to consider one Frankie Liriano as one of our top 3. He's a vet with electric stuff and we traded for him to pitch in some of our important games!

QUOTE (balfanman @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 11:02 AM) If we prefer a lefty against the Tigers, Why not have Santiago start Fridays Game. Santiago just pitched a few innings yesterday so Thursday might be too soon for him and I'd rather give any needed starts to Santiago over Humber. I know that Detroit is an all important series, but we can't be so concerned about the Tiger series that we discount games against other teams. Any almost give away loss to the Orioles in this case can hurt as bad. The way I look at it is that Floyd's injury (assuming it doesn't magically clear-up in the next day or so) means that a spot start is necessary for someone -- Santiago, Humber, or Axelrod. Personally, I prefer Axelrod because the other two have been HR throwing machines. In scouting terms, Axelrod doesn't have the raw stuff or ceiling of the other two, but on any given day I think he's a better bet to keep you close. But, the point is that we have to throw one of them. Pick one. It honestly doesn't make all that much of a difference. But if we need a spot start, then why the heck would we use that spot starter against the Tigers when we could just as easily use it against the O's. And by doing it against the O's, get Q that desired extra day of rest. And by doing it against the O's, get Q to actually face the Tigers. Yes, all wins are important. I don't see any spot-starter as a "give away loss" (whether against the O's or the Tigers), but in this case ... this week ... it's simple and totally minor to move Q back one day ... and a game against the Tigers (one day later) IS more important than a game against the O's (one day earlier) because winning a game against the Tigers ALSO hangs a loss on the Tigers (and that isn't the case in a win against the Orioles). Not at all patting myself on the back here because finding a silver lining in the cloud of Floyd's injury and making an easy rotation adjustment isn't exactly rocket science. Honestly, I'll be very surprised if the brain-trust on the South Side don't do this (or something similar).

QUOTE (flavum @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 10:07 AM) Cy- good thoughts. Axelrod is scheduled to start tonight, so we'll see if that happens. If they were going to set the rotation for Peavy to face the Tigers, they would have done it over the past couple weeks. Obviously things worked out well at home this past week, but I don't understand why they didn't give those guys an extra day around the KC series, and get Peavy to face Detroit twice. But that won't happen now. Maybe once as you said. As far as sending Quintana ahead to Detroit, the game is at 12:35 eastern on Thursday. He should be ok staying with the team. I do like that idea of starting somebody else on thursday, and having Q face the Tigers on Friday night. Thanks for the reply. A rested Q for Game #1 in Detroit just might be a nice tone-setter (since we're likely bringing someone in for Floyd, why waste Q against the Orioles when we can push him back one measly day and have him extra well-rested for the Tigers). All that said, another reason not to waste Axelrod's arm in a meaningless AAA game tonight is the pretty decent chance that rain might gum up the next four days and make a double-header very possible sometime during this Baltimore series. All arms on deck!

QUOTE (flavum @ Aug 27, 2012 -> 07:49 AM) Saturday is Liriano vs Scherzer and Sunday is Sale vs Verlander. Friday is up in the air for both teams, but for now, it's Floyd vs Fister. Just talking about this last night with a fellow Sox fanatic (former minor league catcher and current scout and h.s. coach). With the assumption that Floyd is DL'd (obviously, still TBD), then we both think Axelrod is called up to take his slot. Axelrod doesn't necessarily have that high big league ceiling, but he's proven that he's not likely to get rocked completely, and he has the ability to string some 0's together. But, this is where it gets interesting ... Don't plug-in Axelrod on Floyd's spot of Friday in Detroit. Instead, assuming he's at all on schedule, let him pitch for Quintana on Thursday in Game #4 in Baltimore. That gives Quintana that extra day of rest (and fly him into Motown early). And that sets up pretty well for the weekend in Detroit: Quintana, Liriano, Sale. If you follow the schedule, you then stay in rotation for a bit until the Sunday, 9/9 Game #3 against the Royals where Peavy's turn would come up. On that day, skip Jake giving him a badly needed extra day of rest and having him available this time for Detroit, and choose one of the following for that Sunday game: (1) bring Axelrod back on short rest; (2) give a spot start to Santiago or Humber; or (3) give a spot start to a September call-up (maybe Leesman or Shirek). By doing so, you set up for that four-gamer here with Detroit with your best four: Peavy, Quintana, Liriano, and Sale. Neither of us are a fan of overdone rotation manipulation, but this manipulation is minor -- one extra day once for Quintana, one extra day once for Peavy -- and we set ourselves up in a really good way for the important 7 head-to-heads with the Kittie Kats! Then, if we've bought a little cushion, find a way to give a bit of a blow to Sale, Quintana, and Peavy (in that order of importance of "needing" a blow) to have them hitting (pitching) on all cylinders come the Playoffs!

QUOTE (chw42 @ Aug 11, 2012 -> 04:42 PM) 'Roids. Not directed at you man, but count me among the many who tire easily of the "'roids" explanation for ALL (seeming) baseball statistical anomalies. Sure, this generation of ball players deserve that as a whole because so many have indeed been on the juice. But, for well over a century, veteran players have the ubiquitous "career year," sometimes almost out of nowhere, and I'd venture to say that "performance enhancing" drugs or substances have been the actual reason why in very few situations (although clearly more recently). More often than not, better training or conditioning, corrected vision, slightly tinkered mechanics, new mental approaches, and some combination of all, are more plausible reasons why a particular player with no hint of substance abuse rolls out that career year. The difference between a player who has consistently hit hard topspin line-drives throughout a long and successful career as a solid hitter and one who now hits hard lofted flyballs with backspin is literally eights of an inch and/or virtually imperceptible changes in swing plane. As I see it AJ is hitting the ball hard like he did all of his career, only (a) he's pulling it more, and especially (b) he's getting loft. I think most of us have seen this say on the golf course -- where you suddenly have a month period (or hopefully more) when you're just blowing past your previous long drives over and over again. I saw this a few summers back in Park District softball -- where I was a 2-3 home run a SEASON hitter, but for one storied year (not repeated the next year), I became a feared 1-2 home run a GAME hitter, just because I inexplicably started getting incredible backspin and loft on my fly balls. I doubt very much that AJ is suddenly on the juice. I think he's having a storied career year and he and we should enjoy the ride. (As a separate matter, it's one of many reasons why I'd be really careful of extending him into the future at too great a salary because career years are called "career years" for a reason. Peace all ... and ... GO SOX!

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 12:20 AM) In all fairness, that line-up worked just fine on a weekend against the Mariners and Mr. Millwood. I remember complaining about it and was proven wrong. And hitters like Lillibridge, Fukudome and Flowers with big/long swings can't just get their timing playing once ever 10-14 days. Lillibridge actually hit two balls on the button for outs (one an amazing catch by Ethier, the other right at 2B) and had a hit, so he looked about as well as he has all season. The Bridge did look as good as he has looked all season. And you are correct that these long swing guys (and Lillibridge, Fuku, and Flowers are all long swing guys -- part of the reason why I'm not crazy about any of them as bench players) need more consistent at-bats to get their timing. But while it did work earlier this year against Millwood, and while it worked from time to time in the MANY times that Ozzie pulled that stunt, it's not at all likely to work on any given day, and the bigger issue (I think) is that there is absolutely no reason to trot out the JV squad, almost en masse, for a varsity game. Play the bench guys a little more often perhaps, but not Lilli, Flowers, Danks, and Escobar ALL in the same game. Or stated differently, why on Earth sit ALL of DeAza, Konerko, AJ, and Alexei on the same day?!?!? Rest one, maybe two ... but only rarely, rarely three starters, and never, ever four (IMO, pretty much playing the game with one-hand tied behind your back).

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:40 PM) Nice post. I do hate your first sentence though. One of 162. Yeah but we've been talking that way for years now. It's just one game. And one series. And it all, always adds up to the ceiling of this team and most of our recent teams ... .500(ish) Thanks, but you misunderstand my 1/162 reference. I'm no Hawk groupie, but it's just like how Hawk (endlessly) refers to "you'll win 60, you'll lose 60, but how you do depends on what happens with the other 42." So many 1:1 battles in baseball, so many decisions that not only impact what happens later in the game, but what happens later in the week, month, and season, that we can all spend a lifetime second, third, and infinity guessing everything if we're so inclined. That's the nature of baseball. EVERY team deals with countless moments just like this (NOT just the White Sox -- most of us just follow the White Sox though). EVERY manager makes decisions that turn-out differently than how he hoped they would (NOT just Robin Ventura -- the same happened with Connie Mack, John McGraw, Earl Weaver, Tony LaRussa, Bobby Cox, Ozzie Guillen, or insert the name of your favorite manager here). I know 1/162 is important since they all add up, but the entire 162, the entire body-of-a-season's-work is more important. And for the record (since this post stays in the permanent record that is the internet), nobody hated Robin's decision to take out Quintana more than I did. He was breezing, dealing, and totally on auto-pilot. I'm with what I'd imagine to be a majority of people and let Q start the inning, having Reed ready if any trouble arises in the pivotal 9th. However, no way is that the "right way" or the "only way." Plenty of baseball managers and experts (real or in the reality of their own mind) would have done just what Robin did -- graciously accept Q's yeoman work and turn the 9th over to a guy who had been perfect for the year and who has a "chance" to be a long-term stud closer. I wouldn't have done that, but I think it's overly simplistic to say that many baseball lifer's wouldn't have done exactly what baseball lifer Robin Ventura in fact did do. Love talking Sox, but I'm choosing to be angsty about things I think are bigger problems -- like why intentionally handicap yourself to THAT extent by such an extreme Sunday lineup that had so little chance to score more than a run or two, losing momentum from a nice Saturday night win, and ensuring a downer of a long flight home. To this point in the year, I had been happy that Robin was staying away from getting the scrubs in all at the same time (something I thought was one of Ozzie's biggest flaws as a tactical manager). Hopefully today's mess of a game might become a memorable lesson!

So much angst about 1/162, gentlemen. I hated watching today's game (starting with the inexcusable "too Sunday, Sunday line-up"), squirming the whole time because every freaking sign pointed towards a painful loss. But we're Sox fans and dissect every decision and move made in a White Sox game and I think many of us fail to recognize that the nature of baseball is such that every manager makes decisions that he'd possibly change in hindsight (if only because of result). Like many on the board I'm sure, I played baseball at a high enough level (Div. 1 college for me), and have been a fanatic of the game for so long, that I'm sure I'm equipped to manage a big league team, notwithstanding that it would never work for a nanosecond since I don't have the professional bona fides to get one ounce of respect from MLB players! If it were me, I'd have left Quintana out there to start the 9th. It wasn't so much that he threw just 77 pitches, it was that his entire outing was nearly stress free, he had a remarkable rhythm going all game, the 8th inning might have been his easiest of the game, and the Dodgers had nothing scary to trot up against him in the 9th, particularly because their best available player, Abreu, was unlikely to hit as long as Quintana was in the game. To me, managing is an art as much as a science, and feel is part of the art. I'd have looked the young lefty in the eye, told him he's in until he gives up one base runner, and take my chances. All that said, I can't blame Robin at all. For everything I said, Robin's "feel" seems to be that he got a great game out of the youngster, and that he wanted to show a "possible" lights-out closer of the future that he has full confidence in him. I think my way had the possibility of instilling a lot of confidence in Quintana, while preserving the ability to still get Reed out there, but I can't say Robin is wrong, just different. The beauty of baseball, but sometimes the pain too, is that there is often no one right way, and even a good decision can still have bad consequences. Trotting out Reed wasn't horrible -- many of us would have done differently, many others (including lots of great baseball managers) would have done exactly what Robin did. And getting past Robin's decision, the 9th inning doesn't have me wondering whether Addison Reed can do the job. Dude was not going to be perfect this year. Abreu's hit was a veteran hitter fighting off a tough pitch with a good bit of hitting; the hit and run single was a total seeing eye grounder. Reed is good, very good, but every closer not named Mariano Rivera gets beat sometimes. That's baseball. If the Sox are angsty too, hope they take it out by absolutely destroying the AAAA team playing on the North Side. EDIT -- Just saw Caulfield's post above ... mentioning one batter for Q ... and Mo. Don't post often; this is one reason why! So many posters say exactly what I feel like saying, but I'd rather read than write!

QUOTE (NHDadUmp-RI @ Feb 16, 2012 -> 01:31 PM) Terry Doyle: Rule 5 Twin http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/t...-rule-5-twin-2/ Hey Terry's Dad ... I've always enjoyed your posts about Terry and understand your great pride in his accomplishments. I think many of us wish him great success. Because he's now a hated-Twinkie, I think the formula for success (our version) is a bit convoluted -- a really good spring training, clearly indicating he's major league ready, but because a few other prospects have even more lights-out spring trainings, the Twinks have no alternative other than to offer him back to the Sox. Now, realizing yet again that pitching success is more than just lighting up the gun, WE give Terry a legit shot ourselves. On a more serious note, it still amazes me that a team so bereft of pitching talent and depth could so easily pass on giving a shot to arguably the most successful pitcher in last year's Arizona Fall League (perhaps the most notorious hitter's league of all hitter's leagues). It's not as if we're knee deep in pitching prospects who can consistently get good hitters out (no matter the reading on a gun or the subjective analysis of their overall "tools"). It boggles the mind that a team who watched Mark Buehrle pitch for all of these years (not saying that Terry is Mark, but I'm talking about pitchers who just know how to get batters out) couldn't even give this guy a real chance after his last couple of years. Then why sent him to the Arizona Fall league in the first place? And even if they didn't want him, then why not at least pretend to want him and trade him to the Twinks or some other team who fell in love with his Fall successes. This is yet one other way where I think Kenny simply mismanages his assets. Even if you don't value something yourself -- parlay it into something REAL that you do value. We're far too lacking in resources (money and organizational talent depth) to be playing so fast and loose. But I digress. Good luck Terry. And you too Terry's Dad.

No Jose Valentin scouting report would be complete without mentioning that Juan Uribe caliber, absolutely howitzer of an arm. Good base runner too with good technique and instincts, despite just above average speed. Loved his tools, hard-nosedness, and of course the stache under that hard-nose. One of my favorite players of that era. Just took another look at his stats. I think people forget about just how much pop he had for a shortstop -- 249 career HRs; 25, 28, 25, 28, 30 in his five years with the Sox of the non-Carmine variety. Of course, he started out with a .273 BA in his first year and we watched it decline by 10-20 points each and every year of his tenure. But, OMG that iron glove. And it certainly SEEMS from hindsight that those doinks would invariably happen late inning in true game situations (of course, with the pure number of E's, some would had to have happened then). Happy Valentin's Day to all Sox fans!

QUOTE (winninguglyin83 @ Jan 30, 2012 -> 10:21 PM) Also loved that Sox team. It helped save the franchise. Attendance had plummeted after the 0-10 start to 1968 and finishing behind the expansion Royals in 1969. Dick Allen was so unlike any Sox player of the 1960s that it was hard to believe. Pretty certain he made the cover of Sports Illustrated with a cigarette in his mouth from the Sox dugout. Plus, it was fun to cheer for Carlos May, who made a remarkable comeback without more than half of his thumb. Good memories. Saved the franchise and our passion for this team. My favorite Sox team of all-time, that is, until 2005. As for Carlos May. Good player who might have been great. Blew that thumb off serving his country in the National Guard. What a time. And of course, that rare player with his birthday on the back of his uni: May 17

QUOTE (Wanne @ Jan 30, 2012 -> 07:45 PM) Love your handle Cy...he was always one of my faves. Wonder if many of the youngin's know who he is? Thanks Wanne. Nothing to add about Humber, just a Cy Acosta fan, eh? He was definitely one of my faves. I was 14 during that special '72 year and with so many Sox fans of my generation, THAT was such a special year. Coming out of the real dark ages of 1968-1970, had the slight upswing in 1971 sniffing at .500 (anything would have been an uptick after 1970), and then we get treated to Dick Allen ver-1972, an offensive force that none of us had ever seen playing for our beloved Sox. Even with those good 60's Sox teams, we had those popgun offenses, with great pitching, forced to be even greater because we were such hitless wonders. But '72! Wow. Dick Allen doing things we had only dreamed of. And then great young arms for the future -- Terry Forster (another favorite), Rich Gossage (whose stats were incredible all year before a trial start at the end of the season), and little Cecilio ("Cy") Acosta, a 26 year old Mexican import with deceptively good stuff, deceptive deception (!), and the AL just couldn't figure out the guy. Loved him. The 1972 Sox gave the A's everything they could handle that year (as the A's began their dynasty), but fell just short. Acosta was used in higher leverage situations in 1973 -- got more saves and more great stats. All numbers fell off precipitously in 1974. Purchased by the Phillies before the 1975 season and 8.2 innings later, he called it a career. Part of the Cy Acosta attraction for me was the then novel Mexican pipeline the Sox had going with players like Jorge Orta, Cy Acosta, and then Francisco Barrios. I remember talking with friends at the time how we didn't seem to compete signing players elsewhere, but seemed to want to exploit a then untapped market like Mexico. Some things never change, right -- today many of us are hoping that a Cuban pipeline can salvage help band-aid our deficiencies elsewhere. As I was refreshing my memory about 71, 72, 73, etc., how about these stats from the 1973 starting staff: *Wilbur Wood ................................ 48 starts, 359.1 IP ... 24-20 ... 3.46 ERA *Stan (Stanley Struggle) Bahnsen ... 42 starts, 282.1 IP ... 18-21 ... 3.57 ERA Wonder if the youngsters can even begin to get a handle on THAT? A knuckleballer with 48 starts AND a conventional pitcher with 42? Two twenty-game LOSERS on the same staff, one of whom also won 20+ and the other knocking on the door. And both with respectable overall stats. Beisbol was a very different game back then.

I'm a big-time Humber fan. Huge. Saw him pitch a few times at Rice. Dude was dominant. His stuff was dominant then too (pre some injuries and lesser grade of hitter), but even at Rice, he wasn't excelling because he was blowing people away (not usually), he was a pitcher who changed speeds, used his repertoire, worked hitters. As the Sox like to say, he had "pitchability." You ALWAYS give a guy with his pedigree and pitching savvy chance after chance until it's clear he can't do it. Great acquisition last year. Most of last year he was superlative. Are you kidding? There was a great argument that he was All Star game worthy. His occasional trouble the first half and his recurrent problem the second half was all largely the same thing -- good beginnings by a sometimes precipitous fall-off as he prematurely tired: the hard-stuff that used to pop and dart, now kind of poofed and slid; the breaking stuff that used to bit, now rolled. He would lose his repeatability and struggle with his location. You could see it happening time and again. Had Guillen been a bit more understanding, his overall numbers would have been better because once the pattern became clear he should have been out of there far earlier than he was (living to fight another day). Cooper and the Sox are pretty good about pitching. They saw all this with last year's Humber. No doubt he had major core strengthening and long-toss programs in the off-season designed to better his durability. Hopefully that results in improvements in a clear weakness. And even if the improvement is minimal, I think they know from Day 1 the warning signs with Humber. When the guy is right, he's truly lights out. And if he's slotted as your number #4 or #5 guy, then he has the ability to be the best #4 or #5 guy in the league since he's capable of the stuff/pitchability combo of a #2. As I said, big Humber fan. And I can be critical of Kenny with the best of them, but Kenny deserves big-time props for this particular classic Kenny-style "fallen prospect" acquisition.

QUOTE (thomas_35 @ Jan 11, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) who's going to close then? Thornton? yeah, we've been down that road. and everyone was unsure what Santos was going to do given the opportunity and he did just fine. he never closed games before either! at least Reed has experience (albeit not MLB experience) as a closer. Bravo dude, bravo. Reed has tons more experience than Serge had when he stepped into that role -- both as a closer and as a pitcher generally. Doesn't mean that he'll be successful, but there is all sort of precedent for young pitchers making this jump and succeeding. Does he have the stuff? Check. Great stuff by any measure. Does he have the temperament and constitution? By all accounts, yes -- seems to be a very confident young man who grew up envisioning himself in this role and has succeeded with it at previous letters (closing for Stras, et al). Should absolutely be a competition in S.T., but no way do you run scared of Reed because he hasn't done it before (NOBODY on our present roster has done it successfully before, and some of them have repeatedly tried and failed). Baseball isn't that difficult. See ball, hit ball; get batters out. If you can do it, you can do it -- age, draft position don't mean squat once you hit the bigs.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 23, 2011 -> 06:44 PM) Except he already made the over anxious, must-have this guy deal this offseason when he dealt Sergio. Hey Balta ... 100% agreed. That was the classic Kenny-move that we all seem to know, that every GM in baseball must know, and that some will defend as "oh, that's just how Kenny is." Yeah, and it sucks. And it hasn't been working all that well. And it means he isn't doing up-until-the-last-minute due diligence by seeking to maximize his trading chips. DISLIKED the over-anxious Santos deal not because I loved Santos, nor because I knew a darned thing about Molina (other than what the very mixed after-the-fact scouting reports disclosed), but because it gave every appearance of being same old "swing-for-the-fences, take the high-risk (the unnecessarily high-risk)" Kenny. My point about being elated if Kenny has now learned some patience was referring to POST-Santos trade. Maybe HIS boss took up back to the woodshed and set him straight. Maybe some trusted elder statesman like Buddy Bell had him look at himself in the mirror. If he had changed it could certainly happen AFTER yet another Kenny moment (that he finally realized WAS a Kenny moment). And, just to be fair, I do always reserve the thought that internally they may know things about Sergio that we don't (perhaps, maxed-out and all down-hill-from-here) and things about Molina that we don't too (despite what some of the naysayers claiming, this guy absolutely being the real enough deal that we must get him). Bottom-line for me is that no one on our roster is going to bring us a Cahill, Latos, or Gio type return, but of any of them, Gavin (or Alexei -- but I don't trade him because I smell the Ramirez-Tank-Cespedes era on the horizon) is the one that if played correctly COULD bring back a relatively decent haul. So, GO KENNY!