Eminor3rd

QUOTE (tonyho7476 @ Jun 22, 2012 -> 01:24 PM) On Espn Chicago...this is hard. Going with Frank first. Top 50 Sox Yeah, going back and forth between him and Lyle Mouton.

QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jun 22, 2012 -> 11:07 AM) When they are replacing Orlando Hudson I don't really give a damn what TYPE of hitter it is so long as they can occasionally positively impact the overall lineup rather than resembling a pitcher at the dish. This is the important point. Hudson is playing abysmally both offensively and defensively. Even a 3B that is just a tick BELOW average on both sides of the diamond will be an upgrade. What are you thinking/referencing when you say a team "can't have two guys striking out a total of 400 times?" To me, it just comes down to someone providing positive value at all to replace someone providing negative value.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Jun 22, 2012 -> 11:08 AM) One or two games a season. Interesting. I typically get to 3-5 per season (two so far this year), and yet I always feel like all the outcries of attendance (from KW, from the media, and from other fans) are directed at me. Maybe I'm not part of the problem, after all?

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Jun 22, 2012 -> 02:54 AM) Youk is a bad idea. Old broken down, gets paid huge money and unproductive. Anyone who wants him isn't thinking ahead . Konerko and AJ ,both still very productive ,aren't getting any younger. Giving up any youth for anyone old is beyond ridiculous. We just have to go with what we have and keep rebuilding. If Sox fans can't get behind a team that has a plan but isn't instantly successful, has young and exciting players then it'll be very hard to continue the rebuilding process . Get your asses out to the park if its not too much of a financial burden. You don't have to buy food there. It's fun family entertainment. It's a nice ball park . It's a good environment for kids if you show up early and want to hit the kids zone. The emphasis shouldn't be on winning to go to a game but to have a little fun with the family or friends. Brooks Boyer if you're listening stress the fun things about U.S. Cellular and creating memories with your family, even tell people to brown bag their lunch or dinner. Have more on field activities and advertise the heck out of them. It shouldn't be about appreciating the game but appreciating the memories with those close to you. Just out of curiosity, how often do you think a typical fan "should" go to games?

QUOTE (Soxfest @ Jun 18, 2012 -> 10:57 PM) First place may be history soon. And it won't have anything to do with Danks not pitching.

Have you guys looked at Middlebrooks' stats? First glance looks great: .303/.340/.523? Sure! Second glance: 25% K rate, 5% BB rate, .367 BABIP, -3.8 Fld in just 37 games. This guy is poised to come crashing down HARD. I don't want him for what he would cost. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playe...amp;position=3B

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 05:14 PM) It would be nice. However, I do not think we have the bullets. If you were Josh Byrnes, what would you want in return? If I'm Byrnes, I want someone like Mitchell as a centerpiece, Quintana because he will kill in Petco, Nate Jones, and a lower end pitcher. If I'm KW, I try to avoid giving up Jones, but if worse comes to worse, I make this deal, possibly asking for a Stewart-like pitcher back for the sake of ML depth. Headley has less than 4 years of service time and is criminally underrated because of his team and park.

We gotsta get Chase Headley somehow. It's a perfect match. I just hope we have the bullets.

I honestly would rather watch on TV. I love going to the game every once and a while, but it's just not the best way to consume baseball when your chief concern is what is happening on the field. Unless you're very wealthy and can regularly afford tickets in the first few rows around the plate, going to a game is an event, not a hobby.

QUOTE (Noonskadoodle @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 11:30 AM) Really? Because I'm not seeing a lot of options out there. What would you do Mr. GM? Get ANY major league third baseman from ANY team. That's what I'd do. Because that's all it would take to upgrade.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 10:16 AM) Dunno...they could always put Figgins there so that he is actually playing. At this point for them, they should be trying to keep the "core" guys as you mentioned, and trading any other assets where they think they will show a net improvement in the next several years on. What they put on the field this year should not particularly matter. I'm sure they'd want Viciedo. I'd counter with Mitchell, throw in Morel, then you'd probably have to give up one of the SP spects we just got this offseason, and maybe even low-level offensive player. Wait, what? EDIT: Nevermind, somehow I read that wrong and thought you were suggesting that package for Figgins.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 09:48 PM) He's only allowed one run all year prior to the 9th inning or later of a game. He can be a decent long reliever for this team right now. His biggest issue is that 1 out of every 10 righties he's faced this year has hit a homer off of him (5-50). He has a 96% strand rate. Do you know how insanely lucky that is? He's been worth -0.3 WAR this year.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 09:47 PM) In all fairness, the last two games, you could say that about most of the players on our roster. Lillibridge, Fukudome, Ohman, Stewart, Hudson, etc. Viciedo's ice cold, Beckham's fallen off again, no Konerko...we're scuffling, but it's only 2 games. And we're still in first place. And Detroit's in much worse shape than we are. Although the mysterious home woes continue again. I'm not talking about the last two games. When has Hector Santiago been good? What has he had one or two good outings?

Hector Santiago f***ing sucks

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 08:23 AM) Keith Law mentions Keon Barnum one of the worst picks of last night. Just one man's opinion. This pick was definitely a reach, but I like White Sox change in philosophy going after some high ceiling high school players. It will be interesting to see if they pick any more high school players in the 2nd or 3rd round. After the 3rd round majority of solid high school picks will be looking to enroll in college because the new financial hit. High school players are the strength of this draft, eventhough it's one the weakest drafts in years. Chicago White Sox The pick: Keon Barnum at No. 48 Summary: I'm guessing Barnum, a big kid with a terrible habit of swinging and missing, was off a lot of draft boards as unsignable for worth, meaning he wasn't a strong enough prospect to merit buying him out of a commitment to Miami. They got a steal at No. 13 with Courtney Hawkins, but Barnum had me and many scouts scratching our heads.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 11:27 PM) The baseball draft bores me. Call me in 5 years and we'll know if this guy can play. C.J. Henry went No. 15 overall to the Yankees one year and quite possibly might be the worst player in organized baseball history. It only took him 3-4 years to leave the game completely. He was "five tool." Luke Hochevar No. 1 overall? My god. Wow, what a totally unnecessary downer.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 06:25 PM) Twins went for the more talented guy. Great move for them. I thought they'd take the guy with a high ceiling (not as high) but the lower floor. I agree, good move. They know they're further away than Appel, who I think goes to a team that wants to use him next year.

6 central. And I agree regarding Heaney. I'd like them to choose Stroman, a guy with big time stuff that is overlooked because he's short. With Stroman, I can dream on Tim Lincecum, but with Heaney, I can only dream on John Danks.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) I agree with that, but at the same time, that strategy has long excited. However, it was more a matter of internal budgets. Now, everyone is on a level playing field and I for one am very happy about that. Let the best scouts/front offices/coaches (to develop said players) win. Not who has the biggest budget/resources to spend on the draft. I like it, as a Sox fan, because Reinsdorf wasn't going to spend either way. But before this deal, there existed a real opportunity for smaller market teams to spend big on the draft where their dollars would go much further than on the free agent market -- and in fact, teams like the Pirates, Blue Jays, and Rays did just that. In a lot of ways, I actually think that this situation favors the big markets by eliminating and opportunity for the others to gain a competitive advantage.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 05:00 PM) Think of it this way, I'm a #1 pick and the slot is 1.5M. If I'm going to pay $1.5M for that pick and don't sign it, nothing lost. All I lose is what was slotted there. On the flipside, if I was strategically going overslot at that pick (say spending $2M), then that could hurt me, since I probably went underslot in other areas. However, that is strategy and whose to say you don't hedge that bet by grabbing another guy in the draft who you have cushion for if you do think that is a possibility (so you can go overslot on that guy if you miss out on your projection here). Say your sandwich pick signs for $300k above slot. You didn't plan it that way, but that's how it worked out. Some later picks sign at slot or are unsigned still. Now your first round pick demands to be X overslot, forcing you to choose between signing him and some other guys go later in the draft. He has extra leverage because if you DON'T sign him, you lose his slot money and have to pay a penalty because you are already over-budget. This is the first time there's been any discernable cost associated with NOT signing a guy. Now you have to sacrifice either way.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 04:50 PM) I must be living in a hole but I was not aware of this (excerpt courtesy of bleachererport): DRAFT LOTTERY – This is not what it sounds like. For those who may have watched the anti-climactic NBA lottery the other night in which they put on display for all to see how they fix the draft to award their agenda, you will not see that concept here. Instead, it will work like this. Teams with the 10 lowest revenues (not payrolls) and 10 smallest markets will be entered into a lottery for a total of six selections immediately following the first round. Clubs that lose that lottery will go into a second lottery for six supplemental picks immediately after the second round. Also included in the second-round lottery will be any clubs that received money as part of baseball’s revenue-sharing plan. Obviously there will probably be some overlap in the qualifications as a good amount of low revenue teams also fall into the small market category. This is designed to off-set the fact that lower market teams like the Pirates who can’t typically afford to make a big splash in the free agent market but instead spend their money in the draft will now be under restrictions. Personally, I don’t think it’s a fair solution for either side. The small market teams are penalized by not allowing them to allocate their revenue the way they see fit, and the large market teams receive less bodies in the draft that is essentially a lottery to begin with. Wait, what? I never heard anything about this.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 04:29 PM) You are mistaken. They would receive the draft pick in the following year. Yes, you would lose the slot for that pick (but that isn't that big of a deal in most instances, unless you went under slot on that pick with a plan of spending a little more later on). However, if the Sox couldn't sign the 13th pick, they would get the 14th pick next year. I think it will be Stroman. DJ Davis is another guy I think the Sox like and could go after (tools wise, they like guys like Davis; the prep thing, not as much, but if they go position player, its almost surely going to be a prep guy). Oh, I'm sorry, I think I misunderstood your question. I get it now. Sorry to confuse my info. However, I still think the slot dollars are a big deal, not because you need them later, but because of the leverage created by semantics as I described.

QUOTE (Jbabs34 @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 03:44 PM) Do teams still get compensation for not signing their first round pick or did that change with the new draft rules?....If it's still the same, i think it's worth drafting Giolito at 13. I know the injury is a concern and if he has TJ who cares - guys are coming back fine if not better after TJ. This draft seems pretty weak, so not signing your first round pick shouldn't hurt that bad if the rules are the same No, in fact the leverage has swung the other way. If a guy doesn't sign, the team LOSES the recommended slot for that pick from their available pool of funds. Imagine the implications: if a later round pick has signed for anything above slot, the early round guy can threaten not to sign and thus subject the team to penalties! This is just one of the new rules that I think is going to make the next couple drafts a mess until they rethink it.

Final FanGraphs mock up by Marc Hulet. He has Sox choosing Stroman: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/f...phs-mock-draft/

I'm hoping Brinson falls to #48. Stroman sounds goo at #13, but is it too much to hope for Fried to fall there?