On the Wilder Fiasco
A Quick Recap
Last Friday, taking a page out of the maybe they'll ignore it if we release this on Friday Bush Administration's book, the White Sox announced the firing of player personnel director Dave Wilder and two Dominican area scouts. While details were non-existent, I speculated that the firing had to do with money (the skimming/theft of), drugs (pefromance enhancing) or documents (the falsifying of).
At least initially, the Sox well-timed release seems to have worked. There have been no details leaked to the press from within the Sox aside from the acknowledgment that Wilder was fired for "violations of club policy and standards," which could mean anything. Mark Gonzales has turned up two sources -- the ubiquitous "scout" and "an MLB investigator" -- that point to money (the skimming of) being at the heart of the issue, but offers no specifics.
Late Tuesday night, a poster at Soxtalk -- no ordinary member, mind you. This member claims to be a fairly recent addition to the Sox scouting staff, a former MLB Bureau scout, which has been confirmed in some manner by the Soxtalk admin -- listed some shocking details on the Wilder firing, which I linked in a FanShot on the front page. He then continued to answer questions and post more details over the next 16 hours. The former bureau scout's posts were not without bias -- he has a particular disdain for Baseball America, and perhaps Phil Rogers, by proxy -- but they generally pass the smell test of plausibility.
His credibility is probably best summed up by noting the contrast between what he posted about Alan Regier and Buddy Bell compared to the official word from the White Sox, which came about 6 hours later. He clearly knew Regier was out as director of player development, and knew Bell would be taking over the job title. But Regier appears to have been reassigned, given more input on the upcoming draft, not fired. Close, but not 100% accurate.
The offending posts have since been removed from Soxtalk, though most of the juicy details remain in the aforementioned FanShot and comment section. I'm not exactly sure why the posts were removed, but it's not difficult to guess. He seemed quite gleeful at the possibility of a Regier-free front office, for instance. Even though the poster in question has posted "I can not get fired for this," or some other such phrase, often in bold lettering, multiple times, it seems like he's had some message board remorse. I've been asked by an admin at Soxtalk, and at least one random Instant Messenger, to remove the offending FanShot, which I will not be doing.
I could be jeopardizing my cushy relationship the the Soxtalk staff, but I feel strongly that the poster in question knew exactly what he was getting himself into, and chose to throw caution to the wind. I feel no obligation to remove the quoted text that he posted on a message board with no expectation of privacy. He can't unring the bell simply by getting the offending posts removed.
It's out there. We've seen it. And we'll continue to discuss it.
While I can feel a tad bit sorry for his dumb decision, and that it might ultimately cost him his employment. I think we can all agree that the last thing the Sox organization needs is another dumbass in the scouting department, as that is the reason for this post in the first place.
It should also be noted that those behind Soxtalk also run FutureSox, a website devoted to the Sox minor league system. They have incentive to keep the offending scout employed and maintain an amicable relationship, because it will likely yield future scouting info and possible scoops.
I have no such obligation. I write this site for me (and sometimes you). If there is a White Sox related story that I don't feel like writing about (blow up dolls, the latest Ozzie verbal explosion, anything written by a certain Sun-Times columnist) I don't write about it, but if there's an under-reported story out there (the alleged Uribe shooting, the draft, etc.) I'm probably going to be consumed by the lack of information. And this story really hits home.
One of my biggest complaints as the Sox farm sank to become perhaps the shallowest in all of baseball, was their seeming lack of involvement in the international free agent market. It's incredibly frustrating that, if the rumors are to be believed, the Sox lack of production from outside the country stem not from a lack of effort, but from a concerted effort to line the pockets of a high-level front office member, thanks to a laissez-faire approach by GM Kenny Williams, and may have extended to the draft as well.
I've held off posting this until the last possible moment before I go to bed to make sure there was no new information reported in any of the local dailies. I expect that we'll see something eventually, but until then we'll be left to read between the proverbial lines, deleted though they may be.
0 recs |
95
comments
Read Related
Comments
This is excellent, Cheat
Keep telling the truth! I am surprised not one major sports site has run with this story. And the Friday release/Bush admin. comparison is apt.
SSS will not be silenced! And that is great news for all of us who like speaking and hearing the truth.
Thanks, and keep it up.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on May 22, 2008 1:39 AM CDT 0 recs
Nobody forgives a newspaper...
...or other mainstream outlet for having an anonymous source be wrong, so I don’t see why ST should get off easy if it’s trying to play media source.
Never trust a big butt and a smile.
Sox Machine
by Sox Machine on May 22, 2008 1:53 AM CDT 0 recs
I don't think they're concerned about the info being wrong
It is, after all, and internet message board. Reader beware.
I’m pretty sure he asked for it to be removed… It was removed almost immediately following the Regier announcement… And reading those comments, he seemed to be doing a Balky Bartokomous dance of joy at the supposed news of Regier’s firing.
AIM: SouthSideCheat
by The Cheat on
May 22, 2008 1:57 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Ah.
If ST was merely asking on his behalf, that’s one thing. If ST expected their removal, that’s another. Poster beware.
Never trust a big butt and a smile.
Sox Machine
by Sox Machine on
May 22, 2008 2:03 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Absolutely.
I love larry, but if he effed up and posted something he shouldn’t have and then asked Cheat to remove it I’d be disappointed if he would. Same for me, same for anyone. Just like the Whole Foods CEO (Mackey) who was posting on a site under an “Internet” name touting his stock – once it’s public, it’s out there, and the chips fall where they may.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on
May 22, 2008 2:07 AM CDT
up
0 recs
And I only bring larry up because he's one of our more popular,
prolific, and integral posters here. (One of our MVP’s.) Just stating that no one ought to be able to get a post removed because they were idiotic enough to post career-threatening opinions or information on an Internet site.
I took the "under".
by winningugly on
May 22, 2008 2:09 AM CDT
up
0 recs
as dumb as I am I know I threaten myself simply by the sheer mass of comments i've made at various Internet stops
but somehow, I feel really intently like that what your saying has to hold true. Your semi-anonymity is semi-guaranteed. Likewise the freedom, which for me has been a revelation, has some possible consequence. I like that. It should be your fault to underestimate the power of this huge new medium.
At the same time, the application of corporate capital toward punitive acts against Internet users for various “offenses” ( downloading and whatnot) is something that ought to be well watched. Fortunately, the connectivity and bitchiness of web users combines for a good pics force. Example A: livejournal users.
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on
May 22, 2008 3:20 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Damn iPhone.
pics = police …sigh
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on
May 22, 2008 3:21 AM CDT
up
0 recs
it's a real bitch when a lawyer who is an avid fan of a certain baseball team happens to know some other lawyers
who happen to be (this first lawyer thinks) working on a certan internal investigation of said certain baseball team and that first lawyer happens upon someone posting internal information from that certain baseball team and then so happens to forward the link to the posting of that internal information to one of those other lawyers who also happens to be an avid fan of that certain baseball team. not like it wouldn’t have been found sooner or later (or already was) by those other lawyers.
a little tip for all you youngsters out there. when your employer tells you not to comment on something and there are lots of lawyers running around, i would recommend not commenting on it. especially, you know, on the internet or something equally traceable.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 10:34 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Indeed. Especially if the Feds are involved (as alleged).
Hypothetical question:
IF the Feds (specifically the FBI) are investigating this whole (alleged) sordid mess, do they issue the “keep your mouth shut” cautionary? If so, would violating that cautionary be cause for a possible Obstruction of Justice indictment at grand jury?
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 10:43 AM CDT
up
0 recs
well, they probably would caution the employer about that sort of stuff
but the employer probably would have already issued such a warning/instruction to their employees. most of the time, as it appears was the situation in this case, an internal investigation will have begun before government authorities get involved. as most of us who are employees know (or should know if we actually read all that stuff we signed at our orientations), disclosing confidential information about your employer is a no-no. most of the time this stuff isn’t taken that seriously (maybe like when our friend was discussing scouting reports on sox players publicly?). but when the situation is as serious as this one is, they are going to enforce it more vigorously.
it would likely need to be a unique or at least not usual situation where leaking information would constitute a crime. the feds really aren’t the ones who can make an employee keep their mouth shut.
and, by the way, i’m in no way saying that me pointing out this information to a person who is likely involved was the cause of all of this. i’m more pointing out how easy it is to get caught when the shit gets as serious as this is. when you have a team of lawyers and others doing these investigations, one of the first places they’re going to start monitoring is sites related to the company/industry. when they say “shut up”, take it seriously. this guy (or whoever has been feeding this guy information) obviously didn’t and now is rightly scared and/or caught.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 11:08 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Thx. Btw, are you going to represent Cheat when he
fights the injunction?
;-)
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 11:14 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Wouldn't be the first time!
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on
May 22, 2008 11:22 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Thanks for the good advice
here and above
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on
May 22, 2008 11:24 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Bernstein
I had Boers and Bernsie on as I headed home today and heard Bernstein talking about this. It almost sounded like he was paraphrasing the fanshot that you posted. Other than though, I have yet to find anybody in the media who has caught onto this and doubt we will since this is just “internet rumor”.
However, you obviously don’t know as many details as that guy did unless your on the inside. Nobody should be surprised by this though, the FBI wouldn’t get involved unless it was some serious stuff.
by whitesoxfan101 on May 22, 2008 2:06 AM CDT 0 recs
Someone at the Score
At the very least takes a look at this site somewhat regularly, because you will here them make comments that come almost directly from here or ST. Just doing their job I guess, but he actually usually prefaces with “from a posting on the internet or a blog,” so that people listening know he isn’t 100% sure of the credibility of it himself.
by Grinder in Training on
May 22, 2008 8:22 AM CDT
up
0 recs
in the head.
"Jenks, who was never afraid to say "no" to a hamburger..."
by BobbySouthSide on
May 22, 2008 10:11 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Great job Cheat
KW has a bit of a reputation as a know-it-all who is very cocky. I hope this wakes him up or at a minimum wakes up Jerry to not give the keys away. Good mangement (and ownership) calls for being diligent.
Trust everyone: but cut the cards.
Show mercy. I get to watch the Rangers.
by Tim from Texas on May 22, 2008 2:30 AM CDT 0 recs
I really like what the blogging/MSG board communities are doing for fleshing out the
real scope and further details. The probability of truth dips but you get to decide for yourself on the basis of the evidence in front of you. That’s pretty cool and I think Cheat is pretty badass for appealing to that notion (as I see it, anyway).
At the same time, I request that you all refrain from letting us in on any “hijinx” at Stanford Q! May have engaged in for which the statute of limitations has yet to expire. And anyone who does otherwise isn’t a true patriot!
dude, that was totally not swish you saw on rush street last night. swish was at home playing xbox.
by colintj on May 22, 2008 4:26 AM CDT 0 recs
If anyone posted
Something to take down Q I imagine someone would find where they live and end that problem pretty quickly. Sox fans are a rabid bunch.
by Grinder in Training on
May 22, 2008 8:23 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Great read!
Good stuff. At minimum, electronic media communities can keep the pressure on MSM. Thanks, Cheat!
Mosi Tatupu! Mosi Tatupu!
by Nordhagen on May 22, 2008 8:04 AM CDT 0 recs
Agreed, with one minor suggestion:
As the ‘tubes’ become increasingly Main Stream (name a newspaper or broadcast network without a web presence), “MSM” becomes a little outdated. I believe the ‘preferred’ term at the SportsblogNation parent is “Traditional Media”. Though that’s the beauty of the internets: call it whatever you want!
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 8:31 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Cowley today:
An MLB investigator confirmed to the Chicago Tribune that the probe involved skimming of finances, but because it is now a federal investigation, everyone involved is being tight-lipped. That includes Regier, who only would discuss his job change.
’’Kenny asked me to fill in the gaps created in the scouting department,’’ Regier said. ’’With my scouting background, he was comfortable in turning to me to get things done. We are fortunate to have Buddy in position in player development.
’’It’s an unfortunate set of circumstances to cause this to happen, but I can’t talk about that.’‘
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on May 22, 2008 8:35 AM CDT 0 recs
Well, if BE is to be believed, not everyone in the org is being tight-lipped
by hitlesswonder on
May 22, 2008 8:56 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Maybe that’s why he wanted the post removed because he leaked info about a federal investigation?
Granted, once the genie is out of the bottle, well, nothing you can do at that point.
by vince_ on
May 22, 2008 9:04 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I don't think so
if this was the case he probably wouldn’t have posted it
The greatest trick the White Sox ever pulled was convincing their fan base that "Ozzieball" ever existed.
by The Wizard on
May 22, 2008 3:09 PM CDT
up
0 recs
If BE is to be believed, Regier was fired and drives a TOO expensive car
and wears Rolex watches.
The older I get, the easier to say fuck if I know.
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 9:05 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I believe that's called becoming wiser
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on
May 22, 2008 10:20 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Very good for all of us avid readers to see posts like this.
Keep up the great work.
How do you fuck a nut?!
by omnipotent grab on May 22, 2008 9:39 AM CDT 0 recs
Cheat is on spot with this
It is poster beware. Anything posted to the public internet can be captured, quoted, archived or spidered. If this happened later at night the google bot could of spidered that info forever. Or an archive site could of come by and captured the information. This is another good lesson for people who post anything to the internet. The minute you click submit or post, or upload something its public record.
This reminds me of a time when I worked for a development company and one of our lead developers was sharing music out to the net at his house, and instead of pointing his music folder out over Kazaa, he put one of our new applications in that folder. A few weeks later I have legal storming into my office trying to have me locate, and shut down these sites that are distributing our new app. I told them, its too late. How do you shut down a peer to peer distribution of an app, or bit torrent. The genie is out of the bottle. You can’t contain this.
by southsideirish71 on May 22, 2008 9:45 AM CDT 0 recs
it has been cached
the google cache has conveniently been ‘disappeared’, there are however other search engine spiders nearly as aggressive as the google spider.
nevermind, the yahoo cache of the posts in question have also disappear. i saved them though, in the event they are needed at some other time.
by explodingpinwheelsforfunandprofit on
May 22, 2008 11:35 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Not all Google caches have disappeared:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:XEFqn7KgXpYJ:www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php%3Fs%3D20be75d6226da332b16e310564310c72%26showtopic%3D64794+bureauemployee17&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=49&gl=us
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 11:37 AM CDT
up
0 recs
nothing like publicly accusing someone of some rather serious crimes
especially when that someone may very well be your boss. oops!
by larry on
May 22, 2008 11:40 AM CDT
up
0 recs
bad link, sorry. but i'm reading his posts now.
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 11:41 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Initial Post from Sox Talk
I think you should bear in mind that in initial post because I read it 2 nights ago when it was posted that it had the words “All information following is 100% alleged” at the top when considering all of this. That alone makes me question what this guy knows. If he is simply alleging then he is protecting himself and simply could be telling completely fabricated stories. Buyer beware in SSS as this could be just made up to give you some juicy fake info.
by keitholson60 on May 22, 2008 10:15 AM CDT 0 recs
Quick Question:
BE17 wrote this:
Reiger was Farm Director & Director of Player Development. He has STOLEN many players careers in the last few years by relegating them to the bench or extended spring training to promote “Wilder’s guys” under Wilder’s supervision – not to mention stealing money & lying to White Sox fans.
If true, why the promotion. If false, can he be trusted on anything?
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on May 22, 2008 11:38 AM CDT 0 recs
I think the answer is...
no, he can’t be trusted on anything.
by The Jerry Royster Experience on
May 22, 2008 11:40 AM CDT
up
0 recs
obviously it's not true
BE17 clearly knows some (or lots of) stuff, either because he is a sox employee or knows someone who is. however, just like with any organization, the guys who are pretty low on the totem pole, like BE17 has pretty much admitted he his, hear rumors that are filtered through the proverbial game of telephone. he was right about there being a change in the employment status of reiger. the specifics, however, were just a tad, shall we say, less than accurate.
it’s been pretty obvious who and what this guy is from the start: some low level-ish guy who gets off on showing off some of the cool information he has access to and the plaudits he receives from sox fans over at ST for doing so. his “speculation” and opinion is worth more than your average poster. but not much more.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 11:46 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Understood. Just found this which confirms what you wrote:
Though you probably have read it already:
I am not front office – meaning – I don’t know who is getting promoted to the big league level in the spring, or who is getting traded. I work with developing & scouting the 2 lowest levels – Bristol & GF. My job is to provide reports on those players for future promotion, releases, trades, etc. Not all parts of the baseball tree are directly connected – therefore I don’t know the “plan” for everything. But I do have access to any and all scouting report. And lets just say that I’m bored & feel like helping some people learn the game. Its not so fun sitting at a ballpark and being surrounded with people who don’t have a clue. I can also try to provide insight – whether you started watching the game yesterday or 50 years ago.
http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=62383&st=135&p=1552302&#entry1552302
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 11:52 AM CDT
up
0 recs
i just remembered that he said he was scouting rookie ball
that’s about as low on the totem poll as you can get.
at any rate, one thing that’s pretty obvious from all this – aside from the federal investigation and all – is that the cleave in the organization between “new” and “old” is pretty darn big. when a new guy feels comfortable enough to post inside information on such a site and delight in the purported firing of one of the higher level employees in the organization and, if that wasn’t enough, publicly accuse the guy of some rather serious crimes, it’s bad. real bad. this shit needs to get straightened out and fast. because, if nothing else, you’ll end up with the “new” guys disagreeing with the “old” guys just for spite (or at least it may appear that way) and vice versa. and then it’s difficult to trust the opinions of either side because you’re not sure if their opinions are based on baseball things or personal things.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 12:01 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Well put, sir.
Good insight, cogent, not impulsive. Try not to get arrested – the site would be severely damaged without you. (If only until the next WB III posted. ;) )
I took the "under".
by winningugly on
May 22, 2008 12:16 PM CDT
up
0 recs
If he is even
a low level scout. I suspect that he is not. He’s probably some local great falls yokel who is “buddies” or cousins with a low level scout. Once he realized he could be jeopardizing his buddy’s job (or when said buddy told him he was) he tried to have it removed.
by bhoov on
May 22, 2008 12:44 PM CDT
up
0 recs
well, yeah, i've said as much, as well
from reading his posts and the fact that ST administrators have supposedly “vetted” him (not hard to confirm if someone is a scout for a team), i’m more inclined to say that he is actually a low level sox scout. but who knows.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 12:51 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Is it?
What if he told them that he was his “buddy”? I know we mostly agree, but confirming someone’s identity over the internet is not easy if they know enough about the person they are impersonating.
by bhoov on
May 22, 2008 1:05 PM CDT
up
0 recs
this is true. For example, I believed that you were a diligent researcher
of baseball knowledge ‘till set straight by SSH. Now I know you are really WTGTD impersonating same.
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 1:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
like i said
he’s been vetted. take it for whatever it’s worth. and, sure, it’s easy to impersonate. perhaps i’m giving the ST guys more credit than they deserve but i would hope that before letting this guy run amuck on their site they did the sensible thing and confirmed his identity via an email account that just anybody can’t set up (i.e., not a hotmail account but a school account or a work account). or an in person meeting, of course. or whatever. those guys really pinned their reputation and the reputation of their site on this guy being who he said he was. i’ve never been a fan of their site but i think they are smart enough to do at least that, especially considering they repeatedly stated they had done so. i’m not convicned but i’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on his identity and position.
by larry on
May 22, 2008 1:15 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I'd guess that he really was a low level scout
from his posts assigning the OFP’s of Fukudome and Ramirez. Or if you’re right, his friend the scout passed along some real MLB Bureau reports that he used at Soxtalk.
The only REAL thing we know about him is he’s an ardent Ron Paul supporter, and doesn’t believe we should be paying taxes to support the next door neighbor on Medicare.
Too depressing to link to.
Btw, this was my first visit there (Soxtalk). I see why I’d never been there before.
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 12:53 PM CDT
up
0 recs
is that a fraternity there?
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 12:57 PM CDT
up
0 recs
In economics if I remember his posts describing why the gold standard is necessary.
Which is also when he mentioned he was ivy league and summa. You’d think someone that smart wouldn’t comment on an ongoing fed investigation of his employer.
by hitlesswonder on
May 22, 2008 1:21 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You'd be surprised
graduating summa cum laude from Harvard and knowing not to comment on an ongoing fed investigation are different types of smarts.
FWIW, many Ivy League graduates that I’ve encountered often feel the need to be the smartest person in the room and make sure to prove it when they get a chance. Actually, a lot of people are like that. It seems to mellow out with age.
Plus, as stated by larry (and perhaps others), it’s obvious this guy wants attention. Glory Grabber.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
by rhythm on
May 22, 2008 4:36 PM CDT
up
0 recs
If this guy is a
summa cum laude harvard grad I’ll eat my hat.
by bhoov on
May 22, 2008 4:50 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Farm Director Alan Regier has been fired.
Purple monkey dishwasher.
Never trust a big butt and a smile.
Sox Machine
by Sox Machine on
May 22, 2008 12:12 PM CDT
up
0 recs
So..
They gave him a new position then fired him the next day?
Chain of events from the outside:
Our friend the low level scout; says Alan Regier is fired.
Alan Reiger is put in a new position.
Alan Reiger is fired.
by Grinder in Training on
May 22, 2008 12:26 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Nope.
Merely a Simpsons reference.
Its use in “The Simpsons” was accurate; Bart starts a rumour by whispering to one person who whispers it to another, etc. By the time the rumour reaches the front of the crowd, the phrase “Purple monkey dishwasher” has been added to the end due to people mishearing the original rumour as it passed from person to person.
Never trust a big butt and a smile.
Sox Machine
by Sox Machine on
May 22, 2008 12:28 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Google is a beautiful thing
I took the "under".
by winningugly on
May 22, 2008 12:29 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Nice ref
"I got the shotgun. You got the briefcase. It's all in the game though, right? "
by onlysoxfaninboston on
May 22, 2008 12:33 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Cheat seems
to be giving him credit for “knowing” that a postion change for Regier was coming. I don’t.
In fact a column on the mlb.com site from the day before this guys post suggested regier would have more scouting duties. So, basically i could have predicted this change with greater accuracy than this guy just based on reading on the internet. I said yesterday if this guy was right about Regier, I would believe the rest of his fantastical story. The fact that he was dead wrong has destroyed any credibility whatsoever. Some of his more fantastical claims:
1) That Regier and Wilder had an “accomplice” at BA that was pushing their prospects.
2) That there are many propsects in the Sox system that have illegal documents showing much lower ages. Since “agegate” MLB and the DR have gotten much more stringent. The idea that the sox have decieved the tightened system on multiple prospects when we haven’t had any (or very few) new “age-gate” prospect revelation from all of MLB in the last couple of years seems implausible.
There are other examples, but I’ve gotta get back to work.
The bottom line is I think this guy is a fake, and if he’s not he sure is stupid and I wouldn’t want him in the organization.
by bhoov on May 22, 2008 1:01 PM CDT 0 recs
"but I’ve gotta get back to work"
Why can’t you slack like the rest of us?
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 1:12 PM CDT
up
0 recs
lol
We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievment.
by Chiburb on
May 22, 2008 1:25 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Neither is pimpin', man...
Alright—I’ll see myself after that one.
by CWSKeith on
May 22, 2008 1:36 PM CDT
up
0 recs
BP's sheehan on how the sox are getting it done
pretty sure it’s free for all.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=7563
by larry on May 22, 2008 2:00 PM CDT 0 recs


