Rauch

[1549]

I hope we never make a trade with the cubs, I dont care who its for...there is too much risk involved, at least when you lose a trade with the Pirates it doesn't hurt your revenue, losing a trade to the cubs does hurt your revenue or vise versa

[clujer420]

I hope we never make a trade with the cubs, I dont care who its for...there is too much risk involved, at least when you lose a trade with the Pirates it doesn't hurt your revenue, losing a trade to the cubs does hurt your revenue or vise versa

Well, IMO, we're 1-1 with the Cubs in terms of trades (at least over the past 10 years). We lost when we gave them Sammy for George Bell, and we won when we got Jon Garland for Matt Karchner.

[supernuke]

I hope we never make a trade with the cubs, I dont care who its for...there is too much risk involved, at least when you lose a trade with the Pirates it doesn't hurt your revenue, losing a trade to the cubs does hurt your revenue or vise versa

Well, IMO, we're 1-1 with the Cubs in terms of trades (at least over the past 10 years). We lost when we gave them Sammy for George Bell, and we won when we got Jon Garland for Matt Karchner.

I'd say we're 2-0 Sammy's it's all about me attitude would have hurt this team I don't care how many homers he has hit. Sammy plays for numbers not for wins. He was not a big loss.

[clujer420]

I'd say we're 2-0 Sammy's it's all about me attitude would have hurt this team I don't care how many homers he has hit. Sammy plays for numbers not for wins. He was not a big loss.

I don't know about that.

 

The Sox have had some pretty no-BS players and managers who I don't think would allow Sammy to pull some of his tactics. People like Terry Bevington, Albert Belle, Bo Jackson, Robin Ventura, Jim Parque, Jose Valentin, and even Frank Thomas would have, I believe, led by example and showed Sammy that he either shapes up or ships out.

 

The Cubs seem to have just thrown their arms in the air and said "OK, Sammy can do what he wants", but I don't think the Sox would have ever let it approach that point. I could be wrong, though.

[Jim Fainter]

I liked Sammy until he showed up at Clinton's State of the Union address -- sitting next to Hilary. What a f***ing joke. Fools Rush In.

[witesoxfan]

We're at the very least, 1-1....and I believe 2-0.

 

Throw out all the stats Sosa has put up....because I got 2 numbers for you. George Bell won a division crown while with the White Sox....something SamME has not done to this day with the Cubs. Winning is the point of baseball....and we won with Bell(the guy we got for Sosa), and the Cubs didn't and still haven't won with Sosa(except 1 lucky Wild Card birth and they were then eliminated in 3 straight games).....and I don't think they ever will.

[whitesox247]

Winning is the point of baseball....

And that's why I would be glad to have him on my team. Sosa's a guy that I absolutely DESPISE and ABHOR, but I gotta admit he puts up gigantic numbers, steroid or no steroid.

[clujer420]

We're at the very least, 1-1....and I believe 2-0.

 

Throw out all the stats Sosa has put up....because I got 2 numbers for you.  George Bell won a division crown while with the White Sox....something SamME has not done to this day with the Cubs.  Winning is the point of baseball....and we won with Bell(the guy we got for Sosa), and the Cubs didn't and still haven't won with Sosa(except 1 lucky Wild Card birth and they were then eliminated in 3 straight games).....and I don't think they ever will.

I don't really want to defend Sammy since I'm sure I'll get heat for it, but you cannot blame him because of the Cubs' woes. And you can't tell me that George Bell played an integral role in the Sox' division title. That year (1993), Bell hit .217 with a .243 OBP (wtf?) with 13 HR and 64 RBI. After the trade, George hit 38 HR for the Sox -- Sammy has hit nearly 500 for the Cubs.

 

So, while you would like to say the Sox got the better of that trade, you cannot objectively say that. At least not on the premise that you're using.

[witesoxfan]

247....Sosa has had like 3 or 4 winning seasons with the Cubs....regardless of the talent around him....if he was such a great ballplayer....the Cubs would have been winning.

 

Cubs fans will make the excuse that the Cubs have never had winning seasons with Sosa because he didn't have talent around him....they're too damn stupid to realize that Frank Thomas helped the Sox become a winning team and he had about the same amount of talent Sosa had around him.

 

Great players are on winning teams....and there are very few exceptions throughout the history of the game.....with Ernie Banks being a great example. And wasn't he on the Cubs before their whole streak of non back-to-back winning seasons started?

[Rex Hudler]

I'd say we're 2-0 Sammy's it's all about me attitude would have hurt this team I don't care how many homers he has hit. Sammy plays for numbers not for wins. He was not a big loss.

I don't know about that.

 

The Sox have had some pretty no-BS players and managers who I don't think would allow Sammy to pull some of his tactics. People like Terry Bevington, Albert Belle, Bo Jackson, Robin Ventura, Jim Parque, Jose Valentin, and even Frank Thomas would have, I believe, led by example and showed Sammy that he either shapes up or ships out.

 

The Cubs seem to have just thrown their arms in the air and said "OK, Sammy can do what he wants", but I don't think the Sox would have ever let it approach that point. I could be wrong, though.

The Sox have done that with Frank, so what's the difference. There have been different rules and treatment for FT for 10 years.

[clujer420]

they're too damn stupid to realize that Frank Thomas helped the Sox become a winning team and he had about the same amount of talent Sosa had around him

That is a completely absurd statement.

[whitesox247]

Great players are on winning teams....and there are very few exceptions throughout the history of the game.....with Ernie Banks being a great example.  And wasn't he on the Cubs before their whole streak of non back-to-back winning seasons started?

I cant believe that I'm actually defending Sosa on this, but there have been many players that never led their team to consistent winning teams. Take a guy like ARod for example, we all know his numbers, yet the Rangers weren't even a .500 ballclub last season.

It doesn't take one great hitter to get to the playoffs, it takes a whole team, which is what the Cubs don't have. Do the Angels have just one big impact player? No, they have a whole team of impact players that led them to the World Series Championship.

The only reason that I am willing to take Sosa on my team is that he's a great hitter. He may very well be on steroids, and I know hes the biggest b**** theres is, but I will take him for the offense that he can provide us with.

[witesoxfan]

The 1997 White Sox finished at 80-81(slightly below .500....but we'll call them .500).

 

That year, they had 1 starter finish the year with an ERA below 4.00, that being Wilson Alvarez(and he was dealt later), and 1 starter with an ERA under 5.00, being Danny Darwin(and he too was dealt later). Otherwise, every other starter they used had an ERA of over 5.00. You're not gonna win many games when your starters combine for a 5.00 ERA.

 

On the offensive side of the ball, the White Sox had 2 players with over 60 RBI(being Belle and Thomas....Thomas having 125, Belle having 116)....though they did hit pretty well....having only 1 regular hit under .250(aside from Guillen....because he was a rare example of a guy that really was a no-bat, good-leather guy for us late in his career....and that 1 was Snopek)

 

That year, the Cubs had only 1 real power hitter(being Sosa)....however, they did have good hitters and didn't have a regular hit below .240....they didn't score as many runs, but may have had they been in the AL....it depends on how you convert that kind of stuff.

 

They had 1 starter with an ERA of under 4.00, being Tapani....and they had only 1 starter with an ERA of over 5.00(Frank Castillo). Their pitching was obviously better.

 

When you compare these things all together....the teams are pretty equal, though if you had to give an edge to one team talent-wise....you'd probably give it to the White Sox.

 

I told you the Sox finished about .500 that year....and the Cubs finished 68-94....with the talent-levels not being that big of a difference.....12 games in the standings is huge.

 

At this point....that is about the only example....but it is still there. Maybe what I said wasn't exactly true....but it is not an absurd statement.

 

Also....I don't give a s*** what Sosa has done with the Cubs....however many homers he's hit, the accomplishments....blah, blah, blah....we've won more without him, and that's all I care about.

[witesoxfan]

Great players are on winning teams....and there are very few exceptions throughout the history of the game.....with Ernie Banks being a great example.  And wasn't he on the Cubs before their whole streak of non back-to-back winning seasons started?

I cant believe that I'm actually defending Sosa on this, but there have been many players that never led their team to consistent winning teams. Take a guy like ARod for example, we all know his numbers, yet the Rangers weren't even a .500 ballclub last season.

It doesn't take one great hitter to get to the playoffs, it takes a whole team, which is what the Cubs don't have. Do the Angels have just one big impact player? No, they have a whole team of impact players that led them to the World Series Championship.

The only reason that I am willing to take Sosa on my team is that he's a great hitter. He may very well be on steroids, and I know hes the biggest b**** theres is, but I will take him for the offense that he can provide us with.

So what about the DBacks in 2001? They didn't have 1 impact player...they had 2.....but that's essentially what won them the World Series.

 

Regarding ARod....not only is he in the toughest division in the majors....but he had nothing for pitching around him. If Park can pitch decently this year....the Rangers could be an 85 win team. They have a stronger pen....and have a formidable 1-2-3 punch with Park, Valdes, and Thomson.

 

Sosa's actually had some pitching around him at times....and he does this year. He should also have a decent offense around him as well....let's see how he does this year.

[whitesox247]

Also....I don't give a s*** what Sosa has done with the Cubs....however many homers he's hit, the accomplishments....blah, blah, blah....we've won more without him, and that's all I care about.

But we can win more WITH him. You've got to admit you'd rather have a OF of Ordonez, Rowand, Sosa than Ordonez, Rowand, Lee? I dont care what he does off the field, thats his problem. And you've got to admit having Sosa will give us a HUGE boost with our pitching and the offense we already have.

[Chisoxfn]

247....Sosa has had like 3 or 4 winning seasons with the Cubs....regardless of the talent around him....if he was such a great ballplayer....the Cubs would have been winning.

 

Cubs fans will make the excuse that the Cubs have never had winning seasons with Sosa because he didn't have talent around him....they're too damn stupid to realize that Frank Thomas helped the Sox become a winning team and he had about the same amount of talent Sosa had around him. 

 

Great players are on winning teams....and there are very few exceptions throughout the history of the game.....with Ernie Banks being a great example.  And wasn't he on the Cubs before their whole streak of non back-to-back winning seasons started?

I dunno. Baseball isn't like so many sports in the sense that one player can carry a team. It is a team sport. Basketball you can kind of have that happen because there are only 5 players, but in baseball there are 9 starters plus a bullpen and bench and they all have integral parts of the team.

 

I can't believe that people really think that Sosa doesn't help the Cubs and that he wouldn't help the Sox. I know people can complain about his attitude, but he doesn't really have much of one. I think he is a bit me oriented, but he does want to win and he works hard and plays his butt off.

[Chisoxfn]

they're too damn stupid to realize that Frank Thomas helped the Sox become a winning team and he had about the same amount of talent Sosa had around him

That is a completely absurd statement.

We had one of the best pitching staffs some of the years the Sox dominated, with the cy young award winner, etc. We also had Ventura and some other sluggers and quality guys like Raines, one Dog, Harold Baines, etc.

[Chisoxfn]

The 1997 White Sox finished at 80-81(slightly below .500....but we'll call them .500).

 

That year, they had 1 starter finish the year with an ERA below 4.00, that being Wilson Alvarez(and he was dealt later), and 1 starter with an ERA under 5.00, being Danny Darwin(and he too was dealt later).  Otherwise, every other starter they used had an ERA of over 5.00.  You're not gonna win many games when your starters combine for a 5.00 ERA.

 

On the offensive side of the ball, the White Sox had 2 players with over 60 RBI(being Belle and Thomas....Thomas having 125, Belle having 116)....though they did hit pretty well....having only 1 regular hit under .250(aside from Guillen....because he was a rare example of a guy that really was a no-bat, good-leather guy for us late in his career....and that 1 was Snopek)

 

That year, the Cubs had only 1 real power hitter(being Sosa)....however, they did have good hitters and didn't have a regular hit below .240....they didn't score as many runs, but may have had they been in the AL....it depends on how you convert that kind of stuff. 

 

They had 1 starter with an ERA of under 4.00, being Tapani....and they had only 1 starter with an ERA of over 5.00(Frank Castillo).  Their pitching was obviously better.

 

When you compare these things all together....the teams are pretty equal, though if you had to give an edge to one team talent-wise....you'd probably give it to the White Sox.

 

I told you the Sox finished about .500 that year....and the Cubs finished 68-94....with the talent-levels not being that big of a difference.....12 games in the standings is huge.

 

At this point....that is about the only example....but it is still there.  Maybe what I said wasn't exactly true....but it is not an absurd statement.

 

Also....I don't give a s*** what Sosa has done with the Cubs....however many homers he's hit, the accomplishments....blah, blah, blah....we've won more without him, and that's all I care about.

That was a different Sammy Sosa and there is a difference then Sammy Sosa at that time by himself then Frank Thomas and Albert Belle still in pretty much their prime. Frank Castillo isn't a pitcher. We had Darwin who was solid and a lot of injuries, but wasn't that one of the years the cubs had no closer or anything?

[Chisoxfn]

Great players are on winning teams....and there are very few exceptions throughout the history of the game.....with Ernie Banks being a great example.  And wasn't he on the Cubs before their whole streak of non back-to-back winning seasons started?

I cant believe that I'm actually defending Sosa on this, but there have been many players that never led their team to consistent winning teams. Take a guy like ARod for example, we all know his numbers, yet the Rangers weren't even a .500 ballclub last season.

It doesn't take one great hitter to get to the playoffs, it takes a whole team, which is what the Cubs don't have. Do the Angels have just one big impact player? No, they have a whole team of impact players that led them to the World Series Championship.

The only reason that I am willing to take Sosa on my team is that he's a great hitter. He may very well be on steroids, and I know hes the biggest b**** theres is, but I will take him for the offense that he can provide us with.

So what about the DBacks in 2001? They didn't have 1 impact player...they had 2.....but that's essentially what won them the World Series.

 

Regarding ARod....not only is he in the toughest division in the majors....but he had nothing for pitching around him. If Park can pitch decently this year....the Rangers could be an 85 win team. They have a stronger pen....and have a formidable 1-2-3 punch with Park, Valdes, and Thomson.

 

Sosa's actually had some pitching around him at times....and he does this year. He should also have a decent offense around him as well....let's see how he does this year.

Offensive players and pitchers are two different areas. It doesn't matter how good an offensive player is if they got crap pitching. Having two aces can do so much cause its almost a guaranteed win two out of five and they hope they play semi .500 with the other three.

 

Remember, Gonzo had a monster year, Finley was good, so it still wasn't just a two man show. Plus in the playoffs, two starters can take you a very very long way.

[witesoxfan]

The 1997 White Sox finished at 80-81(slightly below .500....but we'll call them .500).

 

That year, they had 1 starter finish the year with an ERA below 4.00, that being Wilson Alvarez(and he was dealt later), and 1 starter with an ERA under 5.00, being Danny Darwin(and he too was dealt later).  Otherwise, every other starter they used had an ERA of over 5.00.  You're not gonna win many games when your starters combine for a 5.00 ERA.

 

On the offensive side of the ball, the White Sox had 2 players with over 60 RBI(being Belle and Thomas....Thomas having 125, Belle having 116)....though they did hit pretty well....having only 1 regular hit under .250(aside from Guillen....because he was a rare example of a guy that really was a no-bat, good-leather guy for us late in his career....and that 1 was Snopek)

 

That year, the Cubs had only 1 real power hitter(being Sosa)....however, they did have good hitters and didn't have a regular hit below .240....they didn't score as many runs, but may have had they been in the AL....it depends on how you convert that kind of stuff.  

 

They had 1 starter with an ERA of under 4.00, being Tapani....and they had only 1 starter with an ERA of over 5.00(Frank Castillo).  Their pitching was obviously better.

 

When you compare these things all together....the teams are pretty equal, though if you had to give an edge to one team talent-wise....you'd probably give it to the White Sox.

 

I told you the Sox finished about .500 that year....and the Cubs finished 68-94....with the talent-levels not being that big of a difference.....12 games in the standings is huge.

 

At this point....that is about the only example....but it is still there.  Maybe what I said wasn't exactly true....but it is not an absurd statement.

 

Also....I don't give a s*** what Sosa has done with the Cubs....however many homers he's hit, the accomplishments....blah, blah, blah....we've won more without him, and that's all I care about.

That was a different Sammy Sosa and there is a difference then Sammy Sosa at that time by himself then Frank Thomas and Albert Belle still in pretty much their prime. Frank Castillo isn't a pitcher. We had Darwin who was solid and a lot of injuries, but wasn't that one of the years the cubs had no closer or anything?

Frank Castillo....he is on the Red Sox this year. He has nearly lost 20 games a couple times I know.

 

And in 1997....Terry Adams had like 18 saves. That's not a lot....but it's still there.

 

Some of the stuff I said was blown a bit out of proportion....but great players do make success contagious, or so it seems. Thomas has never really been on a big-losing team....he was here at the end of 90 and from 91-00 in full seasons(except 99 when he had surgery after 135 games). He was injured in 2001 and hit s***ty in 02. The most games Thomas has ever lost in a season is 86....in 99. He's had some good talent around him, however, in 99, that team was still very raw. To win 75 games....that's incredible. That would be like the Indians winning 75 games this year....I don't think that's gonna happen, personally.

[YASNY]

No thank you, I don't want Sosa. When he came to the Sox, you could see a great baseball player developing. He was a 5 tool guy. But, he gave up his other tools just to become a slugger. It really is all about "me" with Sammy. Baylor tried to get him to put some emphasis on the other aspects of his game, and basically, Baylor's influence over the Cubs as a team ended right there. The front office did not back Baylor up. That is the type of ballplayer Sosa is... screw the team, I want to hit 65 homers.