Jump to content

2008 White Sox


DBAHO

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 11:53 AM)
Eh, that's a little righty heavy.

No more so than our lineup for the last couple years right? 05 lefties were Pods, AJ, and Everett, 06 they were Pods, Thome, and AJ, 07 Pods/Erstad, Thome, AJ, and now the Rally Richar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why all the discussion over trading our starting pitching which is our strength? I think the adage used by the old time baseball execs still rings true:

 

You don't trade pitching for hitting. You need the good pitching to win as 2005 showed us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(elrockinMT @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 11:59 AM)
Why all the discussion over trading our starting pitching which is our strength? I think the adage used by the old time baseball execs still rings true:

 

You don't trade pitching for hitting. You need the good pitching to win as 2005 showed us.

Because we can trade starting pitching and still wind up having starting pitching be a strength. It's also entirely possible we could trade starting pitching and have our starting pitching get even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 01:55 PM)
No more so than our lineup for the last couple years right? 05 lefties were Pods, AJ, and Everett, 06 they were Pods, Thome, and AJ, 07 Pods/Erstad, Thome, AJ, and now the Rally Richar.

True though it's been a while (2004) since this team had anything but a L-R-L-R setup at the top of the order.

 

Pods - Iguchi - Everett - Konerko (2005)

 

Pods - Iguchi - Thome - Konerko (2006)

 

Pods/Erstad/Owens - Iguchi/Fields - Thome - Konerko (2007)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:03 PM)
Because we can trade starting pitching and still wind up having starting pitching be a strength. It's also entirely possible we could trade starting pitching and have our starting pitching get even better.

Also the idea is to deal from a position of strength to address a position of great weakness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 12:35 PM)
1.) Owens, Jerry - CF - L

2.) Eckstein, David - SS - R

3.) Thome, Jim - DH - L

4.) Konerko, Paul - 1B - R

5.) Dye, Jermaine - RF - R

6.) Pierzynski, AJ - C - L

7.) Fields, Josh - LF - R

8.) Richar, Danny - 2B - L

9.) Crede, Joe - 3B - R

 

Just thought I'd jot this down so it is on record.

 

 

Hope you don't mind, but I sent this to a "friend" and got a "thumbs up" response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:23 PM)
The Sox's signing bonuses to players in the top 10 rounds ranked 26th among the 30 major league teams. Baltimore led all major league teams by spending $7,672,500

 

That's per Gonzalez in the Tribune. I don't think Flash will be a happy camper.

Means almost nothing. We drafted late in any case, so I'm not surprised - that's what one should expect. Notice that most teams near the top had lousy records last year, and drafted early.

 

Posted in FutureSox too.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 12:34 PM)
Means almost nothing. We drafted late in any case, so I'm not surprised - that's what one should expect. Notice that most teams near the top had lousy records last year, and drafted early.

 

Posted in FutureSox too.

Still fairly disappointing that we came in that low but couldn't sign everyone.

 

Anywho...That's $5 million more that we have available to spend on a replacement SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 03:26 PM)
Still fairly disappointing that we came in that low but couldn't sign everyone.

 

Anywho...That's $5 million more that we have available to spend on a replacement SS.

I agree, the fact that we didn't sign everyone disappoints me more than the amount of bonuses paid.

 

And that 5M would like nice going to a real CF. ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steff @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 08:36 PM)
Boy.. I can only imagine how much work it much be to have to keep ones ass clentched so tight all season long...

 

Ha, I know. I'm just saying that if KW thinks adding Eckstein is going to get this team back to the promise land of the playoffs, then he must have a lot more confidence in Crede's back being healthy and Richar's ability to hit in the majors. I'd much rather go into the season with Uribe at SS if it means upgrading in CF with a legit offensive talent. Also, don't forget that it's very likely Garland is dealt this offseason. I know a lot of us think KW has bigger plans this offseason that what's predicted here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 02:39 PM)
Ha, I know. I'm just saying that if KW thinks adding Eckstein is going to get this team back to the promise land of the playoffs, then he must have a lot more confidence in Crede's back being healthy and Richar's ability to hit in the majors. I'd much rather go into the season with Uribe at SS if it means upgrading in CF with a legit offensive talent. Also, don't forget that it's very likely Garland is dealt this offseason. I know a lot of us think KW has bigger plans this offseason that what's predicted here.

 

I have no idea what Kenny thinks, and I'm quite positive I said nothing to that effect.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 03:39 PM)
Ha, I know. I'm just saying that if KW thinks adding Eckstein is going to get this team back to the promise land of the playoffs, then he must have a lot more confidence in Crede's back being healthy and Richar's ability to hit in the majors. I'd much rather go into the season with Uribe at SS if it means upgrading in CF with a legit offensive talent. Also, don't forget that it's very likely Garland is dealt this offseason. I know a lot of us think KW has bigger plans this offseason that what's predicted here.

You genuinely think he has bigger plans -- bigger, realistic plans? Obviously, he plans to add some talent, but how much is realistic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 08:48 PM)
You genuinely think he has bigger plans -- bigger, realistic plans? Obviously, he plans to add some talent, but how much is realistic?

 

Getting rid of Jose and Garland's contract will free up a lot of money. It's also another reason to be excited about Buehrle's extension....we won't go cheap this offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every sportswriter basically says the same thing: let's add more Ozzie-style hitters to the team: swing at everything, low obp, moderate to low power - just like Ozzie likes it. Unfortunately, Ozzie's offensive theories have resulted in the worst offense in the AL, if not baseball.

 

Green ( Uribe with long hair), Rowand (ho hum), Eckstein (worse than Uribe - his D is mediocre)....ugh...Any chance we get some real talent on this club?

Edited by GreenSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He swings at everything, just like Uribe and his OBP shows it. He hits a few more HRs, but faces NL pitching.

 

He's marginally better than Uribe....but not that much. Certainly nothing to do a dance over and say we've improved. Plus, to get Green we'll have to give something up. When I see these Garland for Green (plus the obligatory A ball pitcher) suggestions I want to laugh: essentially trading Garland for a minor upgrade over Uribe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(GreenSox @ Aug 18, 2007 -> 02:25 AM)
He swings at everything, just like Uribe and his OBP shows it. He hits a few more HRs, but faces NL pitching.

 

He's marginally better than Uribe....but not that much. Certainly nothing to do a dance over and say we've improved. Plus, to get Green we'll have to give something up. When I see these Garland for Green (plus the obligatory A ball pitcher) suggestions I want to laugh: essentially trading Garland for a minor upgrade over Uribe.

 

I absolutely agree with you....Garland should bring back something better than him and a C prospect. The Padres won't trade him though, so people should stop discussing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Aug 17, 2007 -> 09:45 PM)
Haven't people been saying for awhile now that Garland is as good as gone in the offseason? I honestly don't see Kenny trading him unless he gets a great deal.

Garland goes up to $12 million next year, and for 2 seasons now has complained about a knot in his shoulder. He most likely won't be re-signed and KW had him traded before. If they could get rid of Contreras' contract, I think that's the only way he stays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...