Second Season :: Round 3 :: Day 2 -- KW's football dreams edition

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 2:02 PM CDT in Game Threads Comment 88 comments

Kenny Williams from Teddy Greenstein's article on Kyle Williams (KW Jr.), ASU's #2 receiver and #1 punt returner:

[T]he only touchdown pass I ever caught [in college] got called back." A touchdown that got wiped out by a penalty. Maybe that helps explain Williams' love-hate relationship with football. He loved it enough to play both ways for Stanford as a freshman in 1982. He hasn't played a down in 25 years, and baseball has given him fame, fortune and a two-carat diamond ring with the inscription: "World Champions 2005." And, yet, Williams calls football "my favorite game." Huh?

"It's obvious that I love baseball," he says. "But if I had one more game to play in any sport, assuming I could get my creaky [butt] out on the field ... heck, I'm still the guy who wants to replay the Stanford-Cal game."

That's the game that ended with play-by-play man Joe Starkey screaming: "The band is out on the field!" Cal used five laterals to turn the game's final kickoff into college football's most amazing finish. Williams, who played cornerback and slot receiver that day, recalls wanting to take the field for the game's final four seconds. But head coach Paul Wiggin held him back. "He said: 'Don't worry about it; it's over,' " Williams says.

That was only true for Williams' football career. He chose baseball after the Sox tabbed him in the third round of the 1982 draft. Williams has said he regrets his decision to say goodbye to Stanford and football.

***** In other news,

Jim looks on The 5 Best and on The 20 Worst Sox games of 2007.
vivaelbirdos thinks Antonetti will be St. Louis' next GM. If that becomes reality Rick Hahn should stay in the South Side. Hahn didn't participate in personnel discussions at the Sox organizational meetings last week.
FJM on yesterday's Ozzie.
The Barons unveiled new logos and uniforms. Take a look at their homepage to see the new look.

0 recs | Comment 88 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So...

bunting and hitting-and-running during Spring Training is a bad thing? Who cares what happens during Spring Training, as long as people don't get hurt?

And "we're going to stress fundamentals" is just manager-speak for "we know you're pissed. We're pissed too." It doesn't mean anything, not really.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 25, 2007 2:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

because

ozzie actually does this shit during the season. ever wonder why juan is 1 for 10 in stolen bases? because ozzie loves to waste outs attempting to hit and run. and bunt. instead of realizing after four years that his team is neither built for nor needs to do this stupid shit, he's going to just keep plugging away until he's got a team full of "executors." so, sometime around 2011.

i would believe that it "didn't mean anything" if ozzie didn't do exactly what he says for four years.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know...

about hitting-and-running, but the White Sox don't sacrifice bunt significantly more than other teams do. The White Sox just talk about it more.

This year the Sox had 41 sac. bunts, the same number as the Yankees.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 25, 2007 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh, jerry

how many more at-bats did the yankees have? how many more baserunners did they have? it's tough to sacrifice when ozzie doesn't get the opportunity. further, you'll note that despite our supposed focus on and predilection towards doing it, we suck at it and are invariably near or at the bottom of the league in success rate.

when ozzie had the opportunites - like in 2005 - we lead the AL in attempts by a large distance.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/not-so-sweet-surrender/

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ST is supposed to be as time to work on

fundamentals, right? Which is why the pitchers regurgitate the "cover first base" move incessantly. Why the eff not have 'em lay a couple down? At least they'd be making contact.

Plus, most of us bitch about how our boys don't move folks over by hitting to the right side, how we don't take the low and away pitch and go the other way, etc. At least put the thought in their goddamn heads that they don't ALWAYS need to swing from the heels and try for a 5 run homer.

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Oct 25, 2007 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

because

other than jerry owens or someone else trying for a base hit (not sure who that would be), bunting is a waste the vast majority of the time. our season total - outside of pitchers doing it in interleague - should be about 9. pitchers cover first or make themselves available to do so quite often. we should not be bunting - or doing hit and runs - often.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

that 9

refers to sacrifices. jerry can bunt all he wants. best way to avoid hitting it to 2B.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would love to see someone hit a 5-run homer!

Especially if it was someone on the White Sox.

There's a first time for everything, correct. So I say they should start aiming high, and go for those 5-run homers!

GO SOX!

by rhythm on Oct 25, 2007 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

How many times...

did we hear the "lift and pull" lament re: Greg Walker?

I just think that Ozzie Guillen's a lot of talk and not a lot of action re: small ball. There's not much he can do about the quality of hitters he has, so rather than say, "we need guys who can hit better", he says, "we need to execute on fundamentals". It's a way of doing something without really doing everything. We've heard the "even the big boppers will bunt" every spring since Guillen took over, and so far, I haven't seen Konerko, Dye, or Thome laying one down.

Yelling at Guillen for bunting too much is distracting from the larger issues, which is that the roster has way too many guys who can't hit on it. Who cares if Scott Podsednik or Jerry Owens bunt? It's not like they're likely to do anything more productive anyway.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 25, 2007 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That said...

the one guy that I didn't like to see bunting last year, but did bunt way too often, was Josh Fields. I knew, as soon as they put him in the two-hole, that he'd be mis-used.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 25, 2007 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly

this isn't just talk. they apply it. josh fields should have bunted maybe one time last season (i recall one situation where i agreed with it, at any rate). he's not a good bunter because, duh, he's a "power" hitter so he wasn't wasting his or anyone else's time in the minors learning how. and then, suddenly, when he reaches the majors, josh is batted second (fine, who cares) but ozzie wants him to act like the prototypical #2 (not fine).

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i don't care if those two bunt for hits

i care about sacrifices, which is what ozzie is talking about. yes, this team isn't that good offensively. so, duh, giving up outs needlessly probably is an even worse idea.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK, bunting might not be prudent

(Paulie would break his thumb holding the bat improperly, AJ would pop it right into his own face, Thomer would pull a hammy) but what's wrong with going to the opposite field every now and again, especially if the hitter is slumping (which is almost a given)? Meaning an occasioanl hit and run? Just even entertaining the idea of situational hitting would be a beacon of light in a dark, cruel, selfish, stat-driven, contract-securing world. Even Big Papi got props from his teammates last night for grounding out to first with a guy on 2nd.

And, in conjunction with that, to put some teeth into the concept, the Kangaroo Court fines anyone acting selfishly or stupidly (evidenced by failing to execute) by nailing the perp to the "clubhouse cross" to teach the concept of "sacrifice". The pitcher most affected by the poor performance gets to swing the hammer.

We could make a video and call it "The Passion of the Sox". I'd buy it.

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Oct 25, 2007 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're on quite

the religious bent today, huh.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Bent" is right

Bums me out to watch others in the playoffs and realize the season's almost over.

But today I received my "Rookie Questionnaire" for Fantasy Camp in January. A sample of the questions:

Number of children (known to you)? (BWAHAHAHAHA!)

Number of spouses? (BWAHAHAHA! Wait, do they mean current, or historical? Gotta get clarification on that one.)

Estimated running time for 90 feet?

From what side do you bat? Throw? Spit? Scratch? (BWAHAHAHAHA!)

Will you voluntarily sign autgraphs? For how much $$$$? (BWAHAHAHA!)

Do you know all the words to "Na Na Hey Hey"? (If not, learn them QUICKLY!!!)

And the disclaimer:

"The information obtained herein will NOT be held in the strictest of confidence. It will be disclosed to all veterans and be used as they see fit......Be prepared, Meat...the veterans are waiting!!"

(I hope some good Baseball Annies are there. 'Course they're probably 60 years old, too.)

2010 - the waiting is the hardest part.

by winningugly on Oct 25, 2007 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope Erstad doesn't accept a backup role!

Scot Gregor:

Don't expect any major player moves for a few more weeks. And before the Sox bring in some much-needed younger legs, look for them to officially cut ties with left fielder Scott Podsednik, shortstop Juan Uribe and center fielder Darin Erstad, unless Erstad agrees to a reserve role.

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 3:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Come on, Darin...

...if the Sox try to shunt you to a reserve role, pull an Operation: Shutdown. You know you want to...

by JasonC23 on Oct 25, 2007 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

retire damn you!

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 25, 2007 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Antonetti

I've met him and he's a personable guy who is interested in statistical models -- he described (in vague terms) the proprietary database the Indians have. Given the issues surrounding Jocketty's departure, Antonetti is a logical hire for the Cardinals.

Hahn might have been shut out of the meeting because Kenny outlined his goals for acquiring players over the next couple of months. No need to have a competitor aware of your targets...though it would have been funny to give him misinformation (like worrying the new Cardinal GM with talk of a 7-year offer to Eckstein).

by asinwreck on Oct 25, 2007 3:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

seems sox interviewed the old mariners pitching

coach, rafael chaves, for a position in the minor league system

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 3:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

new logo/uniforms for the barons

The Barons unveiled new logos and uniforms. Take a look at their homepage to see the new look.

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 4:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i like the old ones better, but i imagine

that merch sales constitute a somewhat substantial portion of revenue and they hadn't changed anything in 14 years. that'll lead to some stagnation, i imagine.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 25, 2007 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

- 1 "i imagine"

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 25, 2007 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

wait

Someone in Chicago needs to stop these people. They are dooming this franchise to another 100 years of title-less baseball.

i think they have the sox confused with another chicago baseball team...

by Jbasic89 on Oct 25, 2007 4:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

They started over again in 2006.

by ballyb on Oct 26, 2007 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

singleton is back

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/cs-071025shermanim,1,5146271.story?ctrack=2&cset=true

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 8:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

dammit, more suckiness...

here's a no-registration link

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

HE'S ALIVE!

Mark Gonzales:

Outfielder Brian Anderson is expected to join Mexicali for the second half of the Mexican Pacific League season.

mexicali is in last place with a 2-11 record, 9 games behind phillips/bourgeois team...

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 8:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Finally...

The season is saved - no need to worry about center field any more!

Rock bottom - not yet, 5 more years to try

by Brush Back on Oct 25, 2007 10:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

since no one mentioned it

and we have so many college students and seniors who are on fixed incomes: free taco. get yours tomorrow.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 9:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

zing!

by The Wizard on Oct 25, 2007 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually

Isn't the 30th from 2-5?

Rock bottom - not yet, 5 more years to try

by Brush Back on Oct 25, 2007 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Free Taco

Link

Rock bottom - not yet, 5 more years to try

by Brush Back on Oct 25, 2007 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

happy happy sox time

larry (chicago): fautino de los santos: great white sox prospect or the greatest white sox prospect? seriously, throw the other sox fans a bone, what should we expect from him over the next five years?

Kevin Goldstein: Here's some bones for you.

De Los Santos is really good.
Aaron Poreda was a STEAL in this year's draft.
They have a pretty impressive group of VERY young talent that nobody has heard about, but will soon.

chew on that poreda haters. and i'm seriously coming around on that last point: looking into the numbers at kanny (and below), i'm not nearly as pessimistic about the minors as i was a few months ago.

by larry on Oct 25, 2007 10:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Plus... BA lives!

Rock bottom - not yet, 5 more years to try

by Brush Back on Oct 25, 2007 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who is KG referring to?

They have a pretty impressive group of VERY young talent that nobody has heard about, but will soon.

Goldstein has mentioned Carter before, (obviously) DLS and IIRC, I think he's also a fan of Shelby, but who else is Goldstein talking about? Guys in rookie ball? The guys below Kanny I'm most intrigued about are Poreda and that big outfielder we have -- Martinez, is it? I'll also be looking at the new crop of shortstops we've just signed, but who else?

by CWSKeith on Oct 26, 2007 1:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think you probably named all of them

or just about. i asked that in follow-up but he didn't respond.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

we're lucky we got that

his answers in the chats are easily the least thorough answers of all the chats that i read regularly. very frustrating.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh and considering that KG

said "very good" when asked about DLS, do you still make him a throw-in in the Bill Hall trade?

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

um, when was he a throw-in?

he was the centerpiece. it was crede/DLS for hall/vargas. are you suggesting crede is the one with value? i'm having a good laugh here.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i guess what i really meant was

your willingness to give him up since you saw him as a closer/set up man type.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not larry...

but I think he really values Hall very highly, and is willing to pay a premium to get him.

I agree that De Los Santos or an equivalent would probably be what it takes to net Hall (I'm not convinced that one year of Jon Garland does the trick), but I don't value Hall as highly, so I wouldn't pay that much for him.

Personally, if I was running the White Sox, I wouldn't be trading away any minor-leaguers with upside, but that's just me.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 26, 2007 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't trade minor leaguers

for anyone that won't be a significant contributor on the next playoff-caliber White Sox team. I'm not sure if Hall would be there for '10, but he in combination with a nice CF pick up could be good enough for '08 or '09, depending.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would trade...

Garland for Hall (in a heartbeat), but I think the White Sox need to be stockpiling young talent, not trading it away.

And ultimately, I'm not convinced that Hall is a sure thing. It really depends on how much you think Bill Hall can help, and larry and I just feel differently.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 26, 2007 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

let me clarify

i think he will be a starter, likely a #2/3. however, i rarely value a pitcher at the low minors level like that because there's much uncertainty about what will happen to him. he's liable to blow out his arm. or suck as a starter at the higher levels. or whatever. all these considered, that's how i value the player when i think of trades. as such, i think it's a relatively fair trade - based upon what we know about minor league prospects actually panning out and what i know of bill hall and how players like them play.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you wouldn't acquire hall

if he wasn't going to contribute to a playoff-caliber roster in '08 or '09 though, right?

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

he'd be under out control until 2011

and i believe he'd be very, very valuable throughout all those years. you can check his PECOTA card for a rough approximation of my feelings on that, though my valuation is a bit different. i'm acquiring him to have a SS for the next 4 seasons.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

a league average shortstop is more valuable

that a #2 starter?

i know it's not exactly that trade-off, but i wonder exactly how that works.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

we have an extra #2 starter?

why was jose starting then?

by The Wizard on Oct 26, 2007 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

you know it's not that trade-off

but you can't figure out how it works. you've valuing potential differently than i am - ignoring the downside (which is significant with any prospect and is especially significant the lower you go in the minors) and focusing on the upside.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 7:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i

saw your question larry....yeah, it does feel good....but I do wonder about all those VERY YOUNG KIDS.....

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

AND,

although not one of the very young, anybody think Chris Getz has a chance?

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

his injury was a wrist injury

iirc, so if that's the case, he's going to have a long recovery. but i want him to succeed, one because he looks like he could be a poor man's pedroia and two because he went to michigan.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 10:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Honestly, I always thought that was true

looking at my excel spreadsheet, talent doesn't start to fill in until you get to Kanny. But we've got a SS, a CF, a power hitting 1B and DLS from that group. That's exactly what I'd want my core to look like.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 10:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

All those guys...

are probably at least two years away, but I agree - it's the light at the end of the tunnel.

Which lends credence to Kenny Williams' strategy of keeping the team limping along with veterans until these guys are ready. I'd rather they trade those guys for still more young talent, but I understand where Williams is coming from.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 26, 2007 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes

i think i'm understanding the strategy (or at least a possible strategy). now, if he starts signing all sorts of free agents to long contracts i'm going to be confused once again. but having a view that a core of young players (fields, richar, danks, DLS, gio, carter, etc.) coalescing around 2010 while at the same time having lots of money come off the books with which to acquire help is not a bad strategy at all.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 11:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

so to confirm

we should see short term signings that peter out in 2010/11, whether they're for big money or not?

we look like:

C AJ?!
1B Carter
2B Richar/Getz
3B Fields
SS Miranda
LF ???
CF Shelby
RF ???
DH Paulie

1)DLS
2)Gio
3)Danks
4)Egbert
5)Buehrle

That presumes we trade Vazquez and keep Paulie and don't take JD's '10 option. We've got some holes to fill, especially if we decide to dump Paulie, but that looks like a pretty serviceable and cheap team to be able to build around. Buy some power for the corners and that could be a really nice team.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gosh...

If AJ's rotting corpse is our catcher in 2010 or, worse, 2011, we're going to be in some big trouble. He'll be what, 35, 36 by then? I'd hope that Francisco Hernandez can take a step forward next season. He's still young enough (21) so it's not like he's really old for Kanny, but he's been with that team for what, the better part of two years now? Hopefully in 2008 he can handle it well enough so the Sox are comfortable to send him to Winston Salem in 2009 (or, better yet, Birmingham).

by CWSKeith on Oct 26, 2007 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

freal

here's hoping

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

send paulie home to boston this offseason

they need a 1B. and a guy to clog the bases up further (har, har).

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know he's from...

Rhode Island, but I thought I read somewhere that he grew up a Yankee fan (and the Yankees could definitely use a first baseman...)

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 26, 2007 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wonder if that means we make

a run at Dunn if Krivsky screws up a trade. which is a definitely possibility.

Peperony and chease

by colintj on Oct 26, 2007 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So,

he's doing exactly what he should given the team and all that goes with being the general manager of the Chicago White Sox in 2007....just as Nate Silver recommended in a recent chat. I like the approach, myself.

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wouldn't call it exactly what he should do

there's a better way. but we've already had that conversation.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I

know what you'd prefer, larry....and Kenny just might slant that way IF he can get younger players HE WANTS for the Garland's and Konerko's of the world...and is remaining competitive for 2008/09 at the same time....you see, I think it's possible....and it's the only plausible approach for the general manager of the 2007 Chicago White Sox.

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and

I'm waitingto hear you say you wouldn't have re-upped with Dye, Pierzynski....etcetc

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i've already said that

at least with regard to dye. i'd take the picks. AJ's contract is better and we have no other options at C.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the thing is

they're not going to be competitive. they're just making it look that way.

the time to invest in players who will play prominent roles on future teams that have a real chance is now. it's only going to cost more - maybe much more - later. i'm sure everyone by now has seen the report on how flush with money MLB is. free agents will cost much more in 09, 10, 11. the contracts you see players sign over the next few years will cost more, too. similarly, this will make young (read: cheap) talent even more attractive to teams and thus even more difficult to acquire. the time is now to get players who are either locked into ridiculously cheap contracts (like my leit motif of bill hall) or prospects who will be under control.

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You

do what you can when you can trying to retain a balance of idyllic and realistic baseball strategy/organizational philosophy with an eye towards the business/economics of your particular franchise. I think guys like you and jerry royster are too idyllic, and it doesn't completely work with the 2007 White Sox...but I love your knowledge and how much baseball I learn from guys like you....and that is sincere without trying to be too sappy.

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Chicago White Sox have outrighted right-handed pitcher Ryan Bukvich to Class AAA Charlotte, and reinstated infielders Joe Crede and Pablo Ozuna from the 60-day disabled list. Bukvich will become a free agent. ... The White Sox 40-man roster now stands at 39.

by The Wizard on Oct 26, 2007 2:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

40...

Scott Merkin:

Being assigned to the Arizona Fall League gives Egbert an understanding that the White Sox want to see a little bit more from him even after 2007's breakout effort. His run of dominance should be good enough to get Egbert added to the 40-man roster and bring about his first big league Spring Training appearance.

by The Wizard on Oct 26, 2007 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i saw some ridiculous speculation

or what i hope is ridiculous, on BP that egbert wouldn't be protected and/or the sox would trade him. based this on the fact that the sox didn't give him a look at the majors or another higher level and thus don't think highly of egbert. i don't really buy that but, let me just state for the record, that i will be very, very upset if he's not on the major league roster next season. and we all know what happens when larry gets upset...

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does Egbert...

need to be protected? I'm not up on my rules for when minor-leaguers need to be added to the 40-man roster to be kept.

In any case, there's no way that the White Sox leave him unprotected. Ken Williams isn't stupid. I doubt they trade him, either, as I doubt they get enough value for him.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Oct 26, 2007 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes, he needs to be protected

by larry on Oct 26, 2007 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I saw that, too...

and it bugged me as well. I'm a little scared though....even though IT IS AN INCREDIBLY SMALL SAMPLE SIZE....he's walking people all of a sudden and I wanna say his GB/FB ratio is out of whack....against consistently better hitters....when you see any sudden lack of numbers coupled with his rather pedestrian stuff, you get nervous a little quicker...

by dantesox on Oct 26, 2007 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs