They're playing baseball in the Caribbean

by The Cheat on Feb 7, 2008 12:56 AM CST in White Sox News

Somewhere on those hot little islands in the gulf -- the hurricane magnets -- they're playing baseball. Baseball America has been providing some excellent free coverage of the 2008 Caribbean Series, pointing out such details as a long-winded mariachi band holding up the game for Oneli's (and Timo's) Licey team.

After the mariachi delay, the Cubs' Carlos Marmol imploded, blowing a three run lead and setting the stage for Oneli Perez to get a win in extras. 4 batters into the 10th, however, Oneli had allowed 3 runs himself as Licey lost for the first time in the series. They'll get a chance to redeem themselves as they take on Dominican League rival Aguilas later today for the title. Should they have a lead in that game, Oneli will probably be called on to protect it because Marmol has pitched 3.2 innings in the series and the Cubs have mandated that he pitch no more than 4 innings.

* * * * *

In the comments yesterday, I posted a link to a Baseball America blog post about a heavily attended scouting combine (of sorts) which featured a number of future bonus babies. Today they've posted about a different sort of combine.

Wednesday, however, was a little different. There were no catered meals. There were no large groups of scouts. The only thing this workout had in common with the others was the sound of roosters crowing and goats babbling at one another off in the distance.

[...]

As the workout was winding down, all of the sudden there was a commotion. A man dressed all in black went running across the outfield and people in the stands started yelling at him. Suddenly, two plainclothes police officers-with 9mm handguns in the pockets of their jeans-went running after him.

Apparently he'd stolen a woman's purse from a nearby plaza and was trying to make his getaway. Police ultimately apprehended him, and as he walked down the steep-some might call it treacherous-hill that leads up to the field, the back of his shirt read, "Prepare To Meet Thy Maker."

For essentially the entirety of this site, I've implored the White Sox to increase their overseas scouting budget. And with their $600K signing of the Silveiro kid, they have. But the linked post shows how it's possible to increase your overseas presence without having to completely blow the budget.

Spend the money on more scouts, better scouts. Conduct more tryouts, more actively search for diamonds in the rough. Carry that grinder attitude -- you know, increased effort to disguise your shortcomings ($$) -- into the scouting side of things.

Tweet Comment 157 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Pedro Martinez, Juan Marichal and a Cockfight...

"Video posted of Mets pitcher Pedro Martinez and Hall of Famer Juan Marichal at cockfight"

YouTube already took the video down.

by SSH2005 on Feb 7, 2008 7:24 AM CST reply actions

was

little jerry seinfeld fighting?

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 7:37 AM CST up reply actions

they probably

wont get 1/100 of the shit michael vick has gotten

by Jbasic89 on Feb 7, 2008 10:37 AM CST up reply actions

Well that is because...

roosters are only 1/101 as lovable as dogs

by CatBrains on Feb 7, 2008 2:07 PM CST up reply actions

nice to see known animal lover, CatBrains

weigh in on this one.

there's also the tiny issue of legality.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:12 PM CST up reply actions

cockfight was in D.R.

its legal there.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 2:16 PM CST up reply actions

and that's what i was referring to

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:17 PM CST up reply actions

ah yes

just clearing that up to the people who werent aware... guess i should have replied to the post before.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 2:19 PM CST up reply actions

Isn't it also legal to pork your

relatives there?

"Dad says I'm the best."

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 2:50 PM CST up reply actions

Oh...

ROOSTER fights...whew...I was worried there for a second.

My childish kidding aside...

What is WITH these guys? Dog fights, cock fights, bull fights? What is the allure? Animals dying for sport? Huh? That is some depraved behavior and they should all seek counseling.

Then again, I am a big fan of "Death Race 2000" and "Rollerball" (the original, of course).

"Each one of my (off-season acquisition)targets has that edge to them, that go-getter attitude. We need it. We will embrace it." - Kenny Williams (11/28/07)

by tailgater on Feb 7, 2008 3:52 PM CST up reply actions

Indians Signed Donnally

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/02/indians-sign-do.html

they seem to really want to get as much veteran presence in the pen, but i believe they only have one spot open and a slew of guys auditioning for the spot.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 7:42 AM CST reply actions

Article on Chicago sports

From ESPN's Scoop Jackson

pretty much sums up every chicago teams fans frustrations, not a bad read.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 7:57 AM CST reply actions

Can anyone reference a site

which list the greatest team year over year won / loss improvements in MLB history?

"All this has done is put the Tigers in a better position to contend with us."

by ballyb on Feb 7, 2008 8:14 AM CST reply actions

as far as AL

from what i'm finding, baltimore had a 33 game improvement from '88 to '89.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM CST up reply actions

Thanks. Any sites

that might list 1 - 10 (or 25) most improved / biggest drop?

"All this has done is put the Tigers in a better position to contend with us."

by ballyb on Feb 7, 2008 9:40 AM CST up reply actions

i just googled

so those were the two biggest i came across and were labeled as the laregst turnarounds, so they might not be the biggest anymore.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 9:43 AM CST up reply actions

For NL

looks like it was the D-Backs with a 35 Game improvement from '98-'99

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 9:16 AM CST up reply actions

AL central preview in BP

here. A favorable review of the sox offseason moves.

by onlysoxfaninboston on Feb 7, 2008 9:25 AM CST reply actions

Oh my goodness

I had to read that again. You mean somebody actually believes the White Sox had a good offseason and made the correct decision to try and compete?

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 10:28 AM CST up reply actions

I also agree with his view for Clev

I could see a very disappointing season for the tribe fans.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 10:30 AM CST up reply actions

theres been a lot of

different writers that have said the sox have had a good off-season, but you are correct when you say this is the first, at least that i've seen, that has said KW made the "right call" to go for it to compete this year.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 10:32 AM CST up reply actions

You betcha.

As I've said often but not lately, anybody who has any rational clue of how to handle the 2008 White Sox --- that is someone who looks at the current climate, culture, organizational structure, assets, talent....etc, would be hard-pressed to come to any other way of doing it. KW saw that too, not to mention Reinsdorf. Now, you might be able to more sternly criticize each offseason move, perhaps, but the general direction? No way.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 10:47 AM CST up reply actions

To add to (and support)

your comment, I would once again note how too many critics overlook the reality of the business side of what the Sox are trying to do. In a complete vacuum perhaps the wisest thing to do (considering how good Detroit and Cleveland will be in 2008) would be to tear it down and completely rebuild. But this is Chicago where our Sox are the second show in town, and they're still trying to build a newer fan base from the success in 2005. The club has improved greatly this offseason. Whether or not that will be enough to reach the playoffs remains to be seen (probably not), but I still maintain that we will have a fun, competitive team in 2008.

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 11:03 AM CST up reply actions

sheehan's been saying that for months

his point has been roughly similar to the points others made about houston, i.e. both astros and sox farm systems are pretty bad and they have some immovable veteran parts so they may as well roll the dice. the problem i see for that thinking on the sox side is that rolling the dice in the AL central is a hell of a lot different than rolling the dice in the NL central. the really optimistic upside for the sox isn't 90+ wins, which is what it's historically taken to make the playoffs. again, as has been mentioned ad nauseum, these moves are just done to placate sox fans and put enough of them in the seats. a pretty tribune co. move.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 10:58 AM CST up reply actions

I think that's a slap

in the face to other intelligent fans who happen to differ with your opinion, lar. I don't think it's that simple....at all. Yes, it is partly PR and to placate fans, but it is much more complex than that. They're doing what ther're doing because they think they should for the right reasons.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 11:02 AM CST up reply actions

slap in the face?

i'm not insulting anyone. everyone knows my opinion and i've supported it. others have their opinion and they've supported it. i think we're all capable here of debating the point without getting into invectives. and i don't think there has been much disagreement about the general point that the sox have chosen to compete in pretty much large measure or very large measure to keep the momentum of the fan base they've developed since 2005.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:07 AM CST up reply actions

That factors in,

but to say that justifies what they're doing for only that reason just isn't true. If it was that clear from a purely baseball perspective to "tear it down," I think they would have. There are legitimate , I think, BASEBALL reasons to to do what they're doing, although I think most would agree much more debateable ones.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 11:14 AM CST up reply actions

i'm not seeing anyone suggest

that this team has much more than a snowball's chance this year or in the near future (2009). i see people argue that they want to see a somewhat competitive team. that's what the sox are providing. perhaps you view baseball reasons somewhat different than i do. this is not a team on the rise. this is not a team that is a likely playoff team. those are baseball reasons to do what they did this offseason. this is largely a PR move. everything else is tertiary.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:19 AM CST up reply actions

Right, and...

the question remains as to how effective it will be. Sure, they'll probably sell a few more seats this winter, but after the Sox stumble to another 75-win campaign, do they really think that the fans will rush back out to re-up their season ticket packages? Because they sure as hell can't have another splashy winter again next year.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:21 AM CST up reply actions

And assuming they don't

just win 75 games. And if they spend money again next year, will you at least acknowledge we are not the Chicago, Oakland, Minnesota Braves?

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 11:25 AM CST up reply actions

I acknowledge that.

And the problem isn't spending money. I have no problem with the Sox spending money.

The problem is that you can spend money and still be terrible. Look at the Orioles, or the Giants -- I think that's where the Sox are headed.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:28 AM CST up reply actions

sure they can

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:26 AM CST up reply actions

I may actually agree

with you more than you know, but I disagree that one can't make a rational argument that their current direction makes sense from a purely baseball perspective....I think you certainly can, and to assume you can't is a baseline assumption you have that is distorted.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 11:25 AM CST up reply actions

so make it

you say it's there. put it together.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:28 AM CST up reply actions

I can....but frankly....

don't have the time, typing ability or energy to do it like this, but I appreciate the request.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 11:34 AM CST up reply actions

It would be an interesting diary...

"why these moves make sense from a pure baseball perspective".

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:38 AM CST up reply actions

sounds like it's a pretty convoluted argument

one strike against it already.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:40 AM CST up reply actions

No more so

convoluted than trying to rationalize how "tearing it down" and going with a mass of unknowns would be, unfortunately.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 1:15 PM CST up reply actions

i can sum up my argument in a paragraph

there's nothing complicated about my argument, disagree with it or agree with it. you've written far more than a paragraph today. seems like you think summing up the argument would require more than that. if an argument can't be made concisely, there is generally something wrong with it. we're not arguing asbestos liability under multiple insurance policies dating back decades with multiple successor entities or something. why this path makes complete baseball sense shouldn't be hard to arrive at if it makes as much sense as you claim.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions

It is convoluted. It is complex.

My gripe, I guess, with you, is that neither do you offer just how they SHOULD BE DOING IT anymore than I do. i comment on the individual transactions often times, and I don't always 100% like them. What I do know 100% of the time is that Oakland's way, which I think is the way you suggest we subscribe to, has AS MANY RISKS AND UNKNOWNS AND THEREFORE AS GREAT A CHANCE OF NOT WORKING AS THE PATH THE SOX HAVE TAKEN.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 1:35 PM CST up reply actions

mOREOVER,

the Sox are tending to their biggest ailment, at least I think....by putting in more time, attention and money into their player procurement and development....that is a long-term process that doesn't preclude them from doing something that appears to be contradictory at any one moment in time, like trade Fautine and Gio. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE SHITTING ON THEIR OVERALL GOAL OF ULTIMATELY HAVING A GOOD SYSTEM, especially if it makes sense to them in the here and now.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions

and there's no need to yell

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 1:47 PM CST up reply actions

earlier

you made a reference to my offseason plan. apparently i did offer how they should be doing it.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 1:46 PM CST up reply actions

Well...

Prospects aren't "unknowns". They're just less known than veteran players. Obviously, the more information you have on a player, the less variability. But the goal isn't to have less variability with your players, it's to have good players.

You begin with this postulate -

The White Sox will not be in the hunt for a playoff spot in 2008.

I think this is a given. The talent to compete in the AL Central just isn't there, and nothing that Ken Williams could have done this winter would have changed that. If you disagree, then I think the burden is to show, despite all the evidence, that this is a playoff contender.

So, what's the next step? You can (a) trade away prospects and spend money to build as good a present team as possible, one that might, if all goes well, get to .500 in 2008, or (b) punt 2008, get a bunch of young guys, and hope that a few of them turn out for 2009 and beyond. Then, once you've got a young core to build around, then you can start adding veterans via trade or free agency.

Ken Williams chose the former. I can understand that from a "Sox fans won't watch a rebuilding effort" standpoint, but I can't understand that from a baseball standpoint.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions

Lar, you're one of my favorite

posters on SSS, but if "a tribune co. move" isn't a "slap in the face" to many of us, it's at least a gentle shove to the chest.

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 11:31 AM CST up reply actions

i didn't realize

you were part of the white sox organization. sorry, jerry.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:38 AM CST up reply actions

But those who agree

with the moves and direction the team taken. And now I need to look up your season ticket package, and move your seats....

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 11:47 AM CST up reply actions

i think most agree

that this is a bread and circus type move. if you don't like the fact that i equated it with the tribune co., well, perhaps you may want to consider what that says. moves to stay "competitive" or "retain fan favorites" are the sorts of things frequently (though perhaps not as much recently) associated with the cubs. i don't necessarily view what the tribune did with the cubs as a negative, especially when one considers they were a public company.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:58 AM CST up reply actions

It's worked for them.

Wrigley Field is a packed house almost all the time. It's hard to criticize them for how they've run the team.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 12:00 PM CST up reply actions

From a strictly...

financial standpoint, that is. You can certainly criticise some of the things they've done baseball-wise.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 12:01 PM CST up reply actions

right

and i'm sure someone will take exception to me calling it bread and circus - but baseball (or the baseball "experience") is supposed to be entertaining. it is bread and circus. obviously the tribune co. et al have done enough to make the team entertaining because people are always in the park. and they were always profitable.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 12:05 PM CST up reply actions

I was actually trying to be funny

with the Tribune Co. comment, but apparently I wasn't.

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 3:08 PM CST up reply actions

I started to go there

But I know Larry has his way.....

You tend to word it like Im right, their not. But I get what he is saying.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 11:09 AM CST up reply actions

i "word it"?

because when you (and everyone else) state your opinions, you usually are pretty equivocal, right? come on.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:11 AM CST up reply actions

Huh.

Sheehan is usually very critical of Kenny Williams.

He likes the Garland/Cabrera trade much more than most do - I see it as a pretty neutral move. And it's odd that he likes it, given that he sees the Sox's biggest need as another starting pitcher.

The "improve by 50 points of OBP" thing is a stretch - it's pretty doubtful that Cabrera puts up a .340+ OBP this year.

I know it's a short article, but I wish he would have expanded a bit on his idea that going for it in 2008 was the "correct" move. That's not self-evident at all.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 10:44 AM CST up reply actions

Yes it is...at least going in that direction is.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 10:51 AM CST up reply actions

How so?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 10:53 AM CST up reply actions

I think he gave you several reasons

In his response above

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 10:56 AM CST up reply actions

Read my previous post.

If ALL that was involved was having to operate from a purely baseball perspective....that is, eliminating business, financial, public relations, current culture based on team history...etc....you MIGHT have an argument. End.

by dantesox on Feb 7, 2008 10:57 AM CST up reply actions

See...

I think, even from a business perspective, the Sox going from year to year, and continuing to get older and older, just delays and prolongs the inevitable.

The question facing Ken Williams this winter was, "are we going to really work on the organizational shortcomings and be bad for two years, or are we going to just paper over the cracks and be bad for at least five years?" He chose the latter.

In the end, it doesn't matter how many splashy moves Ken Williams makes every winter. If the team finishes below .500, people are going to stop coming.

But hey, I'm just one guy. I do get the argument the other way. I just wish that Williams and co. would start looking more than a few months down the road.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:02 AM CST up reply actions

so ask him why he thinks it was the right move

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=424

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:09 AM CST up reply actions

The Swisher and Quentin deals are future moves

also. Hell even the Cabrera deal should pay off (if he doesnt sign)

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 11:07 AM CST reply actions

You beat me to this point.

I chuckle when it is suggested that we were trading away our future in the Quentin and Swisher moves. Swisher clearly is the future (he's a young, proven MLB player locked into a great contract for years), and hopefully Quentin will be with the team for many years to come as well. You're just too fast, Tdogg.

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 11:10 AM CST up reply actions

Swisher...

is the present, not the future. He's entering his prime right now. And Quentin is a question mark.

And in both cases, the Sox traded young, high-ceiling prospects to get these guys. You can debate as to how good those prospects will be, but the fact remains that Williams has gutted the farm system to win now.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:16 AM CST up reply actions

come on jerry

entering his prime now so he's the present? you're telling me swisher's prime is a year or something? he's present and future. and what the sox traded for quentin is a question mark too. you can argue all you want about whether the moves were appropriate. but they're certainly future moves.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:21 AM CST up reply actions

What I mean is...

that Swisher's 27, not 24. It's different than the Thome trade, yes, but it's not like Swisher's a kid. And in both cases, the Sox traded players who were younger than they guy they got. The organization as a whole is getting older, and while their short-term prospects look a lot better, things don't look good at all for four-five years down the road.

I've actually come around somewhat on the Swisher trade, but not because I think that Swisher will be part of a good Sox team. The nice thing about the Swisher trade is that Williams can deal him in a couple of years and get good value in return. His contract will probably look great in 2010.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:26 AM CST up reply actions

you're gonna need somebody

on the next sox team that is older than 24 and is in their prime. there ain't many contending teams out there that don't have solid veteran players in their prime. waiting to purchase those - when the price will only be higher - is stupid.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:29 AM CST up reply actions

Except that...

I think that Swisher will be declining by the time the Sox are good again.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:33 AM CST up reply actions

yeah

well it's a pretty pessimistic view - and one that only you hold - that says the sox won't be able to field a competitive team in 2012.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:39 AM CST up reply actions

I've been asked before what

I mean when I say this team will be "competitive" in 2008. So let me ask, what does "good" mean? Is winning the World Series the only way to be good? Making the playoffs every year? Making the playoffs for an extended period? As I read what I'm writing I realized that it might sound like I'm attacking you, but I'm not. I'm very curious what people generally expect/want from the Sox. The fact that I think this team will be around .500 all year and keep most games close makes them pretty "good" to me. I realize others have a different standard.

by palehose67 on Feb 7, 2008 11:40 AM CST up reply actions

I don't have a high standard...

I define "competitive" as "still in the playoff hunt in September".

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:44 AM CST up reply actions

good means

a team that is a legitimate playoff contender. i'm sure there's some wiggle in there regarding what people think is "legitimate" (40% chance? 60%? more? less?) but i think that's what people would agree is "good." competitive, i would imagine, means exactly what you said - a roughly .500 team but is not a likely playoff contender.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:44 AM CST up reply actions

Come on, Jerry

That's a lot of crystal ball reading. To say the Sox won't be good in the next two -- hell, perhaps even three years -- is one thing. But to forecast six years down the road? I'm calling BS.

by CWSKeith on Feb 7, 2008 11:40 AM CST up reply actions

Like I said...

I'm seeing an organization run like the Orioles, or the Giants, lurching from move to move without any kind of long-term plan, not looking beyond the next season or two (not to mention a farm system absolutely bereft of talent).

I think this team will be expensive and mediocre at best for years to come.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:43 AM CST up reply actions

This remains the most ridiculous

Argument that you consistently make. Its borderline arrogant and continues to go against the recent history of the White Sox in which from an on the field prospective have only been eclisped by about 6-7 franchises.

Last time I looked 1 year is not a trend.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 11:52 AM CST up reply actions

One year?

The team was worse in 2006 than it was in 2005, and worse in 2007 than it was in 2006.

It'll probably be a bit better in 2008, but at what price? And what has the team done to be better in 2009 and beyond? Who's coming to replace Pierzysnki, and Dye, and Konerko, and Vazquez?

What possible reason do I have to be optimistic about the long-term prospects of this club?

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 11:56 AM CST up reply actions

I didnt realize 06 was a bad season

I thought your standards werent high?

Psst.. I think trades and free agent signings are allowed after this year. I know its only a rumor but I think its true.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 12:02 PM CST up reply actions

Who do the Sox have...

to trade away? Nobody, at least nobody who will bring value in return.

And last I checked, top free agents weren't exactly hammering on Ken Williams' door, demanding to sign contracts.

When I see the actual moves made to make this team better for the long run, I'll get optimistic. I don't trust this team to do the right thing.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 12:06 PM CST up reply actions

Who said they have to be top?

Dye worked out fine. How long did it take DLS to sky rocket up the charts? Unless you are back from the future give it a rest.

I mean I understand your underlying point, but you go way too far. A few months ago you were throwing around next decade. And no not 2010 but ten years from now!

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 12:14 PM CST up reply actions

Again...

I want to see an actual reason to be optimistic, as opposed to, "we don't know what the future will hold".

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 1:18 PM CST up reply actions

lol

Thats becauseeeee they have never taken the steps to do what it takes to win right? You are certainly entitled to your own view.

Me? The White Sox have given many reasons to give them the benefit of the doubt.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 4:10 PM CST up reply actions

just out of curiosity, what are the many reasons?

"They say that blood is thicker than water. What we have is thicker than blood."

by Toonderstrook on Feb 7, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions

Again

Because unlike some "better" organizations, the White Sox actually won a WS this decade. They have managed to put a decent product on the field more times than not and rank as on the better teams this decade. So yeah. Ill give them the benefit of the doubt.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions

What is it they say?

"Past performance no guarantee of future results".

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 4:43 PM CST up reply actions

opinions are like...

Yes, the White Sox finally won a World Series. And everybody on this site was thrilled. The four seasons prior to winning the World Series, however, ended in three second place finishes behind small market Minnesota (of which only one was close: the Sox finished 9, 4, and 13.5 games back, respectively) and one third-place finish. Two seasons later the Sox took a huge dive. Winning the World Series and putting together a team with a chance to repeat was worth something. I haven't the foggies of how this season will turn out and merely hope that it ends up more entertaining than last. That being said, I have a hard time doling out too much benefit of the doubt on the heels of a disastrous season in addition to the aging core and lack of farm system.

"They say that blood is thicker than water. What we have is thicker than blood."

by Toonderstrook on Feb 7, 2008 4:59 PM CST up reply actions

i imagine the primary point of contention

is that the sox did that largely via trade (and, to a degree more pronounced earlier in the decade, via the farm). KW is going to have to come up with some new tricks (and JR is going to have to open the pocket book big-time, something he hasn't done), to get it done this time.

unlike jerry, i think past performance is a great indicator of the future. heck, a monkey can predict a player's peformance to about 65% accuracy by putting in a player's last three year's of performance and adjusting for age. the problem is, KW has now expended his primary tool (minor leaguers) for reloading the sox. and, frankly, the young players the sox are adding aren't really all that good.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 4:58 PM CST up reply actions

Gentlemen

You can spin it whatever way you please. You asked for my reasons why the benefit of doubt and I gave. I will say it again. The White Sox have been one of the better teams this decade. If you choose to believe otherwise more power to you.

I really want to read this 1-2-3 textbook you people seem to have for what KW will or will not do. I mean folks have done a stellar job thus far predicting things. Give me a effin break.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 5:35 PM CST up reply actions

you base your assumption on past performance

i am, too. i'm just getting a little more specific about that performance than your rather nebulous - though, don't get me wrong, perfectly acceptable - assertion that KW has gotten the job done in the past and will do so in the future. i have a little less faith than you in KW's ability to do what he's done in the past considering he's got nada to do it with and JR hasn't exhibited a willingness to spend big-time money this century. bottom line, KW is going to need to buy talent (and likely a good amount of it) this time around. that's always a tricky thing to do. there ain't much in the FA market after next season. he's got his work cut out for him.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 5:51 PM CST up reply actions

word choice a-ok.

if you mean the white sox are one of the better teams because they are one of only seven teams in the last 10 years to win a world series, you're right. just don't forget to include the marlins in that group as well.

if you mean the white sox are one of the better teams because only 13 teams have more playoff appearances (i.e., opportunities to win the world series) in the last 10 years--putting the sox in the top half of MLB in that category--i guess you're right there too.

i suppose at the end of the day, maybe all the quibbling revolves around expectations. two playoff appearances in 10 years, 5 years apart, is enough for some to give the organization the benefit of the doubt. and for others, it isn't.

"They say that blood is thicker than water. What we have is thicker than blood."

by Toonderstrook on Feb 7, 2008 5:54 PM CST up reply actions

true

but a trend starts with one year. "prophets" tend to be considered ridiculous. until what they've been saying all along comes true. we'll know eventually who is right.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:59 AM CST up reply actions

Jerry aint no prophet

He consistently predicts the worse. That's another word.

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 12:05 PM CST up reply actions

sometimes the worst happens

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 12:06 PM CST up reply actions

I really am sad that I'll miss

the SSS event next month - I believe fisticuffs might ensue (and then the suing starts).

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 12:11 PM CST up reply actions

sigh

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 11:22 AM CST up reply actions

Yep, we've been here before

Come on, pitchers and catchers!

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 12:02 PM CST up reply actions

and re-signing dye and signing linebrink

and giving up draft picks are not future moves. i think we're all aware of the argument and intent of KW to both compete now and build for the future. those of us who think they shouldn't be competing now, as i'm sure we all know by now so there shouldn't be any confusion or misstating of anyone's position, think they shouldn't bother competing and just rebuild.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 11:14 AM CST up reply actions

Caribbean games

For anyone interested, I'm reasonably sure that the games are on ESPN360.com, which -- again, I'm pretty sure -- is free. The picture isn't terrible, either -- I've watched several Marquette games on there in the past couple months, and it's barable, so...

by CWSKeith on Feb 7, 2008 11:43 AM CST reply actions

Does that mean you

watch the games naked?

Perv.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 12:21 PM CST up reply actions

huh?!?

Talking at a Fellowship of Christian Athletes luncheon, Josh Fields said he considered walking away from baseball after last season.
"When I got my first taste of the big leagues in 2006, it was everything that I had dreamed about," Fields said. "But the further I got into my professional career, the more I had to deal with everything else that goes along with being a professional athlete. There were so many things going on in the clubhouse that I really questioned if professional baseball was for me. However, I prayed about it and realized there is nowhere I could have more influence right now than in that clubhouse." If Fields wants Ozzie Guillen to swear less frequently, he should probably start by cutting back on the strikeouts. Fields is expected to start at third for the White Sox this year, though it won't be official unless Joe Crede is traded.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 12:54 PM CST reply actions

I like him.

"All this has done is put the Tigers in a better position to contend with us."

by ballyb on Feb 7, 2008 12:56 PM CST up reply actions

you never had to write a bullshit speech?

that's what this is. come up with something to talk about to a bunch of kids and how jesus helped you overcome a crisis of faith. "am i on the right path? i didn't know. so i asked jesus. and he told me i was. baseball is where i do god's work."

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 12:58 PM CST up reply actions

Priceless

"If Fields wants Ozzie Guillen to swear less frequently, he should probably start by cutting back on the strikeouts."

"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America."

by Tdogg on Feb 7, 2008 1:01 PM CST up reply actions

Hey, Deac: got a link?

And what kind of grinder is this kid? He'd walk away from a pro career because men will be boys?
Ugh.

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 1:26 PM CST reply actions

Wow, that clubhouse

sounds like a real Sodom and Gomorrah. Uribe performing illegal abortions in the shower, all kinds of nastiness.

"Swisher's versatility allows us to give Owens a chance to come back and show he's ready to be that sparkplug like Podsednik was a couple of years ago." - KW

by ChicagoPete on Feb 7, 2008 1:29 PM CST up reply actions

Ah. That's better:

While his strong faith and demeanor seem to be the polar opposite of volatile Chicago manager Ozzie Guillen, Fields says there is only one quality Guillen looks for.

"Ozzie wants us to play hard and win. I've never met anyone who wants to win more than Ozzie, and he expects his players to have the same attitude," Fields said. "He respects his players, no matter your beliefs, as long as you're committed to win."

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 1:33 PM CST up reply actions

I can see why the kid is scared,

probably thinks that Mr. Scratch hisself is lockering next to him:

"Swisher's versatility allows us to give Owens a chance to come back and show he's ready to be that sparkplug like Podsednik was a couple of years ago." - KW

by ChicagoPete on Feb 7, 2008 1:56 PM CST up reply actions

That's fucking golden

Uribe performing illegal abortions in the shower, all kinds of nastiness.

Absolutely wonderful. Made me LOL in the library.

by CWSKeith on Feb 7, 2008 2:10 PM CST up reply actions

i'm not necessarily sure that's what

he's referring to, at least in full.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 1:29 PM CST up reply actions

That's why I asked for a link

What was the context of his remark? Or did he give specifics?

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 1:31 PM CST up reply actions

swish is sure to calm the clubhouse down. ;-)

"They say that blood is thicker than water. What we have is thicker than blood."

by Toonderstrook on Feb 7, 2008 1:32 PM CST up reply actions

But will Fields play

with a guy named "Swish"?

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 1:34 PM CST up reply actions

ooops

rotoworld via tulsa world.
Fields being Un-grinder like

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 1:30 PM CST up reply actions

WTF?

Talking at a Fellowship of Christian Athletes luncheon, Josh Fields said he considered walking away from baseball after last season.
"When I got my first taste of the big leagues in 2006, it was everything that I had dreamed about," Fields said. "But the further I got into my professional career, the more I had to deal with everything else that goes along with being a professional athlete. There were so many things going on in the clubhouse that I really questioned if professional baseball was for me. However, I prayed about it and realized there is nowhere I could have more influence right now than in that clubhouse." If Fields wants Ozzie Guillen to swear less frequently, he should probably start by cutting back on the strikeouts. Fields is expected to start at third for the White Sox this year, though it won't be official unless Joe Crede is traded.

Source: Tulsa World

by SSH2005 on Feb 7, 2008 1:34 PM CST reply actions

welcome to 12:54:03 PM CDT

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 1:45 PM CST up reply actions

LOL

larry, how many times have YOU been asked to speak to an FCA group? I have to think it's in his belief system to regularly associate with them, as opposed to VFW Posts or Deadheads. I do think it is telling that he had difficulties last year. All the ML 'tang offering itself to him, the 5 star hotels, the per diem, the first class travel.

The major suck. I'd prefer taking a bus to work, getting $15/day to eat, and playing in front of 1500 people a night. Yeah, I think we have a future Crash Davis at 3rd this year.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 2:10 PM CST up reply actions

what are you talking about?

and why was it directed towards me?

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:14 PM CST up reply actions

The LOL was the CDT reference

The FCA speech:

'you never had to write a bullshit speech?
that's what this is. come up with something to talk about to a bunch of kids and how jesus helped you overcome a crisis of faith. "am i on the right path? i didn't know. so i asked jesus. and he told me i was. baseball is where i do god's work."'

After that I was expounding how tough it must be in that major league locker room. Being efficient, I was condensing 3 responses into one. You couldn't read that?

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 2:53 PM CST up reply actions

i'm still not getting it

whatever

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:57 PM CST up reply actions

I didn't think it was a BS speech

even though the idea that his words were distorted makes more sense. I thought it was entirely conceivable he would say that in earnest.

Whatever - it was a clumsy retort. I wish to recall it.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:02 PM CST up reply actions

what i meant by bullshit speech

was he had to come up with something to tell the campers. so he fell back on the usual "struggle, question, overcome" speech, with the added twist of jesus whispered in my ear to make it connect with the program. voila. josh made a speech.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 3:10 PM CST up reply actions

I got it -

I don't agree - if he is a guy of faith I doubt he'd wing it in front of an FCA group. These guys testify constantly (Smoltz, Hershisher, etc.) and are usually pretty damn good at it.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:13 PM CST up reply actions

yeah

i'm sure he "really questioned whether pro baseball was for him." there's tad bit of exaggeration that goes into these things. he's making a speech. you play things up. puff piece with a grain of truth. whoop de doo. this is what happens with the internet - puff pieces become news.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 3:21 PM CST up reply actions

I'm just sayin'

folks of faith tend not to BS about their faith, and certainly not to a group of their "believing" peers. Sure way to take the highway to hell, bro.

And I hear you are conducting tours, Lawyer Guy. And as a financial advisor, I bought a ticket.

;)

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

they don't BS about their faith?

yeah, right. i've heard these guys talk before. everything is the end of the world until they pray/accept jesus and then everything is super great. what they're saying is no different than when someone else says everything sucked and then they took/did/met/found x and now everything is great. it's a speech. they need a story. with a point. exaggerations abound in these. even for jesus folk.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 3:36 PM CST up reply actions

Man, I wouldn't be standing near

larry right about now. The Big Guy is getting perturbed. I just know it.

ZOT!

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:47 PM CST up reply actions

If Susan Sarandan, or at least

a younger version, is part of the deal? I'll take those bus rides!

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 2:27 PM CST up reply actions

Next time do some research...

;-)

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 2:07 PM CST up reply actions

Fields says "I didn't say that"

Or "I said it, but didn't mean it" or something:

Josh Fields knows that the starting third base position is at stake with the White Sox.

That's why he was startled when he saw Thursday's editions of the Tulsa World, in which he was said to have told a group that he considered leaving baseball after last season.

"I said the struggles and ups and downs start to make you wonder if I'm in the right profession," Fields said in a telephone interview. "I never said the word `retirement.' I didn't mention my 2005 season at Birmingham, when I hit .200. I did wonder why the White Sox took me in the first round."

Fields, who seems destined to take over at third base if veteran Joe Crede is traded, spoke Wednesday to a group of about 50 people at a Fellowship of Christian Athletes luncheon. He did not dispute the accuracy of his quotes in the Tulsa World story, but he insisted that he never suggested he considered walking away from the game.

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2008/02/fields-consider.html

Next time, Bhoov, do some research.

by Chiburb on Feb 7, 2008 2:34 PM CST reply actions

aaaahh

word travels fast

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 2:36 PM CST up reply actions

The 'Net is a beeyatch

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:13 PM CST up reply actions

wait, the sports press distorting?

tell me another.

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:39 PM CST up reply actions

schilling out for the season?

hmmm, that contract doesn't look so good now. likely why the bosox are trying to void it.

having shoulder issues of unknown variety and (obviously) if it requires surgery, he's out. i'm sure more concrete info on this will be forthcoming.

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/baseball/red_sox/view.bg?articleid=1071967&pos=breaking

2/6/1958: flowers of manchester

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 2:43 PM CST reply actions

He'll have plenty of time...

to try to salvage the '86 Red Sox season.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Feb 7, 2008 2:44 PM CST up reply actions

and

plenty of time to rip on everyone he wants to in his dumb blog.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 2:46 PM CST up reply actions

Hard to believe a 58 year old guy

might have physical problems.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions

i really hate schilling

he sucks at life.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions

if i could build a

"death plane" or a plane that mysteriously gets lost in the bermuda triangle, schilling would be sitting first class, thats for sure.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 3:00 PM CST up reply actions

ROFL!

I've had similar thoughts about any number of people, but never put it quite so eloquently!

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on Feb 8, 2008 5:50 PM CST up reply actions

verdict is partially torn rotator cuff

no surgery (yet) but this would put him out until july.

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 9:18 PM CST up reply actions

goin to vegas tomorrow morning

what were the sox odds of a world series? ill probably throw like 10 bucks down on it for the hell of it.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 3:25 PM CST reply actions

60:1, if IIRC

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions

hell

its worth a shot.

12/12/07- We'll miss you Andy Gonzalez

by The Deacon on Feb 7, 2008 3:27 PM CST up reply actions

One of my earthier friends

commented years ago when we were talking about gambling "Hell, I'd pay 100 to watch a money f**k a football". So if that's the line of demarcation, $10 on the Sox is perfectly justifiable.

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:33 PM CST up reply actions

(Lose the redundant "if")

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 3:26 PM CST reply actions

Little Help, Larry

Xiefrank needs some PECOTA based counting stats for Alexie Ramirez to give us a more optimistic projection.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Feb 7, 2008 4:29 PM CST reply actions

Surprised

no one has posted about Buehrle's F650 in the Redeye today.

How do you fuck a nut?!

by omnipotent grab on Feb 7, 2008 4:50 PM CST reply actions

heres the link

http://redeye.chicagotribune.com/red-020708-starcars,0,3321199.story

How do you fuck a nut?!

by omnipotent grab on Feb 7, 2008 4:51 PM CST up reply actions

Not the biggest one in the city

http://bugsandcranks.com/philadelphia-phillies/lemme-apologize-to-jon-lieber/

Lieber's got one with 6 doors.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Feb 7, 2008 4:58 PM CST up reply actions

The No-Hitter

kept Buehrle from going bigger.

How do you fuck a nut?!

by omnipotent grab on Feb 7, 2008 5:04 PM CST up reply actions

OPEC's favorite ballplayer?

"They say that blood is thicker than water. What we have is thicker than blood."

by Toonderstrook on Feb 7, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions

Mark's all about bein' green

Jeff Cox: I'm going to call you "FN".

by winningugly on Feb 7, 2008 5:31 PM CST up reply actions

...as he runs you over in his mega-truck...

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on Feb 8, 2008 5:52 PM CST up reply actions

how many people would he have to run down

in order to offset his truck's carbon emissions?

I think we should also factor in vegetation run over / destroyed on this one.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on Feb 8, 2008 5:54 PM CST up reply actions

Re: Mallett

"You know who else was about to run off Ryan Mallett? Saintly Lloyd Carr, who according to a source told him "I don't like anything about you" and then hurled transfer papers his way halfway through this season. Mallett almost transferred two seconds after he showed up on campus, then almost transferred the summer between his early enrollment and fall, and then actually did transfer as soon as Rodriguez was hired. There's a common thread here. It is not Rich Rodriguez.

About every week I got an email from someone on campus who had seen the kid getting high or trashed. Some talked to him; all who did came away with the opinion that the guy didn't care about anything. Sources inside the program confirmed multiple times that Mallett had a major attitude problem, something that was so pervasive that it even worked it way into one of the local newspapers. The dissent was evident on the sidelines during the disastrous Wisconsin game, when Mario Manningham bitched him out on the sidelines, or during Mallett's disastrous stint in the Illinois game, when Carr bitched him out for two solid minutes."

per mgoblog

This is well astray from my understanding, but Brian has a lot more access than I do. This is that evidence that I thought was lacking. He's still just 18/19, so keep that in mind, but it sounds like he ought to be cut less slack than I figured on.

dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.

by colintj on Feb 7, 2008 10:03 PM CST up reply actions

LOL!

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

by rhythm on Feb 8, 2008 5:51 PM CST up reply actions

niiiiiiice

Putting the b in subtle

"Swisher's versatility allows us to give Owens a chance to come back and show he's ready to be that sparkplug like Podsednik was a couple of years ago." - KW

by ChicagoPete on Feb 7, 2008 5:10 PM CST up reply actions

john sickels prospect book

finally arrived. sox had the least players in there (31). (thanks nick!) technically, because he still counted phil rogers' boy and wiz's boy as sox players, it's 29.

anyone want to know the scouting report on archie gilbert?

crickets

by larry on Feb 7, 2008 8:46 PM CST reply actions