AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Honestly I think Wright would be a great signing for the right price. Solid 1-5 for the first time in decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSFAN35 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 If Wright gets hurt, it still leaves us without a fifth starter. Granted, any pitcher can get hurt, but one who has a history of getting hurt is more likely to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Honestly I think Wright would be a great signing for the right price. Solid 1-5 for the first time in decades. Agree with you jekyl. What is his injury history, does anyone know or have access to that? If I recall, he had an elbow problem, Tommy John surgery ... ? I'd be more ok with that vs. a shoulder problem. This guy was a stud last year, he knows what he's doing. There are others I'd probably prefer but he'd fit well, he's a bulldog and he'll pitch inside. My brother in law is a huge Braves fan and has seen this guy pitch a lot, he loves him. For what that's worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 If Wright gets hurt, it still leaves us without a fifth starter. Granted, any pitcher can get hurt, but one who has a history of getting hurt is more likely to. He may not be optimal, but isn't Danny Wright back next year? At least he has some experience starting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 what can't handle the truth? Keep stirrin that pot, buddy. I cherish the day when you take it one step too far, and it's bye-bye for you... Back to the topic, while I'm not very comfortable with the three year deal, two years for ten million would be a bargain, IMHO. If this guy is healthy, he's a damn good number two, and he's going to be in our three spot. Gotta keep that arm healthy though... The only thing I dislike about him is that he's never pitched over 200 innings in his career. If he's incapable of pitching a lot of innings, that'll really bite us in the ass come September. Ozzie loves keeping the starters out there till 120 pitches, or right around there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 By the way, Anthrax, if it truly makes a difference how you finish, as you say, then Jaret Wright should be right up your alley... From ESPN.com (Post all-star break): ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG 2.96 9 3 0 0 15 15 0 88.1 68 30 29 5 29 77 .215 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/spli...ching&year=2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Just looked it up ... shoulder problems in 2000-2003. Yikes. I hope they know what they're doing. He was healthy last year and was great. But ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 TheDybber, No thanks.. this his first year of an ERA under 4, pitching in a pitchers park.. Ok, for the last time. I'll put it in big font so you can see it, nice and clearly now. OK, ready? Here we go: TURNER FIELD ISN'T A FRIGGIN' PITCHERS PARK! IT'S MORE OF A HITTER'S PARK! CHEAT SHOWED YOU EVIDENCE OF IT BEING A HITTER'S PARK, YET YOU STILL REFER TO IT AS A PITCHER'S PARK! I apologize to the rest of the board for that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 On top of that, we all know we play in a launching pad. Playing in a launching pad is more of a reason to sign Wright because he allows few homers. The launching pad agrument doesn't really matter. It's a launching pad when we bat too. The launching pad won't hurt Wright more than any other pitcher we sign... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Look in the mirror.. This is all you, ever since I came on this baord because as most people do.. not think Polanco would not fit here I get nothing but personal attacks, Because I want the better players here. All you ever talk about is what could of happened if we signed the top FA's in the offseason, and if we dont, our management is terrible. I would suggest that we take a simple approach here so you can understand. The sox dont have enough money to buy every player on the market, as much as you read ESPN.com and think you know what you talk about, its just not going to happen. And as much as you play MLB or MADDEN on your XBOX not every team is willing to approve your dream trade, in fact it rarely works out where everyone gets what they want. This includes your trades that you have posted on this site. Just calm down and wait a couple of years, or at least watch some more baseball before you make your opinion known. Alot of us have different views on everything..if you look at some of my posts, I have gotten into several dissagreements on this site with several different people (you know who you are), but you at least need to listen to what others have to say. Now take a deep breath, turn down the death metal and relax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 One reason USCF is considered a launching pad is that the White Sox, for the past several years, have been built to hit the homerun. One reason Turner Field is considered a pitcher's park is the Braves were built around a strong pitching staff. If the White Sox concentrate on building a deeper pitching staff, and go for on base guys who play small ball instead of the Jose Valentin's of the world, homerun totals will go down, and USCF will not be considered the launching pad it is now. When it opened, Comiskey Park II was considered a pitcher's park. Wind direction didn't and still doesn't seem to matter much, except when balls are hit at the direction of the CF scoreboard. Fences are in slightly from when it opened, but very few balls land in the area from where the fences are now to where they used to be. In fact, I read that the first year the fences were moved in, there were zero that did this. I wondered what kind of effect the new roof would have on carry, and apparently it had none. I wonder if removing the giant billboard where the FUNdamentals is going to be will have any effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 IMO, I think we might see Ozzie's philosphy change with Wright on board. If he does sign, that does give us a pretty solid 1-5. Of the the reasons the starters were so overworked was the bullpen needed to rest after ANOTHER 5th starter disaster. Im not saying that was the case all the time, but I do think that contributed. But your right, Oz does like to put alot of the load on the SP's. IMO, Ozzies "philosophy" was born out of that opening day bullpen meltdown.. He was slow to pull guys throughout most of the year, but he seemed to get the hang of it near the end, with Garland and Contreras... He has a longer leash for some and a shorter for others. It seemed to me like he learned on the job, and a I'm fairly certain that he would learn how long to leave wright in more quickly than he figured others out last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 IMO, I think we might see Ozzie's philosphy change with Wright on board. If he does sign, that does give us a pretty solid 1-5. Of the the reasons the starters were so overworked was the bullpen needed to rest after ANOTHER 5th starter disaster. Im not saying that was the case all the time, but I do think that contributed. But your right, Oz does like to put alot of the load on the SP's. Good point. You're totally correct -- every fifth day, we'd have to use at least three pitchers. It definitely took it's toll on the bullpen at the end of the season. Wright is an 'intriguing' player to talk about, that's for sure. (If that's good or bad, I don't know...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSOX45 Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 If we can get Wright at a cheap price then I have no problem signing him. I'm still concerned about his previous injuries, knowing the Sox luck he'll get hurt before the regular season even starts. I'm still hoping that the Sox sign Clement, even though I can't see them signing two starting pitchers, based on the past. CWSOX45 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Good point. You're totally correct -- every fifth day, we'd have to use at least three pitchers. It definitely took it's toll on the bullpen at the end of the season. Wright is an 'intriguing' player to talk about, that's for sure. (If that's good or bad, I don't know...) I'll tell you what..I liked that his philosophy changed to the point where he was leaving some pitchers in longer than others. I liked when he kept garland in to work his problems out. Jerry never let him do that, and I think it stalled his progress. It definately showed me that if we can eliminate his one bad inning, that he could be effective, and it also lets him develop in a much more mature way IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babybearhater Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 One reason USCF is considered a launching pad is that the White Sox, for the past several years, have been built to hit the homerun. One reason Turner Field is considered a pitcher's park is the Braves were built around a strong pitching staff. If the White Sox concentrate on building a deeper pitching staff, and go for on base guys who play small ball instead of the Jose Valentin's of the world, homerun totals will go down, and USCF will not be considered the launching pad it is now. When it opened, Comiskey Park II was considered a pitcher's park. Wind direction didn't and still doesn't seem to matter much, except when balls are hit at the direction of the CF scoreboard. Fences are in slightly from when it opened, but very few balls land in the area from where the fences are now to where they used to be. In fact, I read that the first year the fences were moved in, there were zero that did this. I wondered what kind of effect the new roof would have on carry, and apparently it had none. I wonder if removing the giant billboard where the FUNdamentals is going to be will have any effect. I thought they said the wind current increased when they took out the old roof and all of the top rows... I thought there was an article on this...I will look for it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 I like the idea of signing Jaret Wright. I expect Odalis to sign for 3/21 or more. If we can get Wright for between 3/15 and 3/18 then I'd be pretty pleased. Will he get hurt again? Nobody knows so it's really not worth getting too excited about.IF we want to be positive (do sox fans ever really want to?), we now would have a solid 1-5 while keeping Lee-Konerko-Thomas in tact with a little money left over for more moves. I'm in favor of the signing. Would this impede a RJ deal? Has KW given up on that dream? OR is this his fallback plan to trading Garland w/ Konerko? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I thought they said the wind current increased when they took out the old roof and all of the top rows... I thought there was an article on this...I will look for it It may have, but it certainly didn't effect the number of balls hit into the seats. My point was if you took the Braves the last five years, and had them play their home games at USCF, and had the same White Sox teams play their home games at Turner Field, opinions on whether the parks are pitcher or hitter friendly would probably be a lot different than they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 It may have, but it certainly didn't effect the number of balls hit into the seats. My point was if you took the Braves the last five years, and had them play their home games at USCF, and had the same White Sox teams play their home games at Turner Field, opinions on whether the parks are pitcher or hitter friendly would probably be a lot different than they are now. I think it did have something to do with it, didn't the sox hit a team record 242 home runs this year without half a season of thomas and a half of season without ordonez? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I think it did have something to do with it, didn't the sox hit a team record 242 home runs this year without half a season of thomas and a half of season without ordonez? The Yankees hit a lot too, without much production from Giambi, and Yankee Stadium is supposedly a graveyard for right handed power hitters. I think the players are more responsible for the high homerun totals, than the park. Even with Thomas and Ordonez out, the White Sox had a power hitter at every position, (exceot when Harris was in the line-up) except catcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 It's a launching pad when we bat too. I think everyone keeps forgetting this. The opposing team has to pitch here too, you know. Unless we're facing a sinkerballer, the Cell won't really be a serious disadvantage to our pitcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Sorry if this was posted already, but ESPN 1000 had nothing about Wright in their update, and 670 the Score said something along the lines of "despite reports the Sox aren't close to signing Wright, but the sides have talked." Take it for what it's worth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Gammons says one thing, the Score says another. Go figure. Sounds like there's a little backtracking going on here. Anyone want to venture a guess that nothing gets done until after Dec. 7 or so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthraxFan93 Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Lets hope the score is right on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Gammons says one thing, the Score says another. Go figure. Sounds like there's a little backtracking going on here. Anyone want to venture a guess that nothing gets done until after Dec. 7 or so? I said that on the first page. No backtracking needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.