nilodnayr

Steve Stone can tell you what pitch the pitcher should throw next. Thats about all he can do.

Then I ask those people: what is to stop Williams from turning around and flipping Swisher for a better package in two years if that's the case? He's under contract for so long these arguments don't hold water. Williams can flip Swisher in 2 years for a better package, but in the meantime the Sox will finish 3rd or 4th with Swisher. In 2 years, the package they will have to get for Swisher will have to replace Thome, Dye, Vasquez, Cabrera, and an aging Konerko. As Phil Rogers (Yuch!) pointed out, the Swisher deal is great if you are contending in 2008 or you have a deep minor league system. Neither of those applies to the White Sox. In the meantime the Sox would not have made the playoffs with De Los Santos, Sweeney, and Gio, so whats the point of that arguement? In 2 years will they be better off with those guys than Swisher? Will they be able to trade those guys to replace their current players (although, Dye, Vazquez, Konerko are all under contract, in 2 years, they'll be well on their decline by then)? Swisher is a great deal because hes fills both of their needs. Hes a win now type guy (which they need to show to their owner/players/fans) and hes a win later type guy because hes young(ish) and under contract through 11 with a club option for 12. Plus its a good value deal, IMO. Criticize KW for not trading Dye, criticize KW for not trading Buehrle, criticize KW for not trading Garland for prospects, and the many other guys that he could have used to rebuild. Those are all valid, but this trade has NOTHING to do with any of that. I do not agree. He has now completely cleared his system of all value, and his team is still below par. He would need to continue to add established pitchers in order to get up into the Red Sox, Yankees, Tigers and Indians' class. He can't, so now they will wollow in the middle division with no help on the horizon. Had he kept his prospects he could have at least torn the house down and gone young rather than making a futile attempt to be competitive. You do realize that he also added value to the organization in the form of Nick Swisher, right? Your argument again seems to stem from all other deals/non-deals that KW did/didn't do as opposed to this particular deal. Their minors were crap before the deal and its bigger crap after the deal, but also, their CF for the next 5 years upgrades from Jerry Owens to Nick Swisher. Swisher doesn't save the system, but Gio, De Lost Santos, and Sweeney were not going to save the system by themselves either. I don't see how thats such a hard point to understand.

http://www.dailybreeze.com/sports/ci_7887205 Confirmation from another (or the same) source.

Then I ask those people: what is to stop Williams from turning around and flipping Swisher for a better package in two years if that's the case? He's under contract for so long these arguments don't hold water. Williams can flip Swisher in 2 years for a better package, but in the meantime the Sox will finish 3rd or 4th with Swisher. In 2 years, the package they will have to get for Swisher will have to replace Thome, Dye, Vasquez, Cabrera, and an aging Konerko. As Phil Rogers (Yuch!) pointed out, the Swisher deal is great if you are contending in 2008 or you have a deep minor league system. Neither of those applies to the White Sox. In the meantime the Sox would not have made the playoffs with De Los Santos, Sweeney, and Gio, so whats the point of that arguement? In 2 years will they be better off with those guys than Swisher? Will they be able to trade those guys to replace their current players (although, Dye, Vazquez, Konerko are all under contract, in 2 years, they'll be well on their decline by then)? Swisher is a great deal because hes fills both of their needs. Hes a win now type guy (which they need to show to their owner/players/fans) and hes a win later type guy because hes young(ish) and under contract through 11 with a club option for 12. Plus its a good value deal, IMO. Criticize KW for not trading Dye, criticize KW for not trading Buehrle, criticize KW for not trading Garland for prospects, and the many other guys that he could have used to rebuild. Those are all valid, but this trade has NOTHING to do with any of that.

The optimistic (PETCOTA) projection for Fukudome is .289/.401/.504. Hart's numbers his first full year in the majors were .295/.353/.539. PETCOTA predicted .288/.349/.514 for Hart in 2007, and predicted .285/.354/.517 for him in 2008. A 50-point difference in OBP is significant. Hart had a 293 EQA vs. PECOTA predicting a 303 for Fukudome. Hart had a 39.4 VORP vs. PECOTA predicting a 29.2 for Fukudome. And also, I honestly think that PECOTAs predictions for Fukudome are more than optimistic, but thats just me and every one else in the world.

That he did. Didn't make a move without talking to McD. He reported to McD for his entire Cubs career. Not understanding making Blunk head of Business Operations as he has been a marketing type his entire career. Now Hawks have two guys who know little about the business side of running a franchise. Pretty scary stuff. He won't have anything interesting to say as it will all be in marketing speak. Just watch your back on that event and not a word of what I have told you here to McD. Not sure if any of you saw how he pretty much dissed Woody, Prior and Cubs fans in a quote mid last month at an autograph signing the Hawks had downtown. The hawks didn't have guys who knew anything about running the franchise before McD and Blunk.

He addresses defense later on in the article. The lineup comparison was strictly hitting. My only objection with lineup would be Fukudome/Hart being a push, but that's off the top of my head without looking at Hart's minor leauge #s. I seemed to remember him playing over his head relative to what was expected last year. I don't think push is that unfair of a rating Hart was a huge breakout candidate last year, he just needed to get the chance, luckily for him he did. Heres shorthand what he did in the minors and his age/level Rk-18 yr old, 698 OPS Rk-19 yr old, 937 OPS A+-20 yr old, 929 OPS AA-21 yr old, 807 OPS AAA (IL)-22 yr old, 827 OPS AAA (PCL)-23 yr old, 913 OPS AAA/Milw 24 yr old, 951/796 OPS And an 892 OPS last year Harts #s in his first full year in the majors is the optimistic projection for Fukudome.

As a non 40-man roster guy who is a long way away from ever making any money, and who seemingly turned his career around (if only a little) as a 19-year old in A ball, I could see Beane having interest. If Burke was overvalued, and therefore unattractive to Beane, because he was highly touted for physical tools and due money he probably wasn't worth at draft time, maybe now he's more properly valued. Now that he's just another low-paid prospect whose star has faded, Beane might find it attractive to get a guy like Burke thrown into a trade. Even if he doesn't envision him playing for the A's in the future, Beane knows Hendry is playing for 2008, while Oakland is not. Burke does nothing for the 2008/2009 Cubs, unless he's traded. If he's worth 35 cents, maybe Beane can get him for a quarter and trade him 2-3 years from now for a dollar. You mean Low A ball, Boise---LD%=10.45, BABIP=.317 And in Hawaii IIRC he finished with a BABIP around 600 Sure, Beane might take Burke, but hes nothing more than a throw in until he can prove that his #s are real.

The Rockies already have two closers. I'd like to see him go to Texas with a prospect for Teagarden. I'd also love to see Marquis go to NY for Heilman.

He had his chance to trade Dye and didn't. Hes committed to his players and I'm guessing has the edict from above that they are not going to be rebuilding so soon after a WS Ring (even though thats what they should be doing). Crede is going to go before opening day for sure, but thats not going to get him much. He is doing what sooooo many teams do that they shouldn't, meander in the middle.

He just gave $48M to an OF that probably wont slug over .500.

So I'm assuming Blunk reported directly to McDonough for the majority of the latter part of his career with the Cubs. RedIvy is that a fair assumption? Man, the Hawks are maing waves. As part of the Hawks Alumni Association, I'm going to a dinner/meeting next week that McDonough is going to be the speaker at. I'll post in social if he has anything interesting to say.

While I completely agree with you regarding that with or without they aren't going to the playoffs, it wasn't like he traded those guys for a one year rental. He saw value and he got it. He'll have Swisher locked down for cheap for a while and he should gain a lot of perceived value playing in that park. KW could possibly flip him for better pitching prospects in the future. Although his Dye blunder makes that unlikely. Even with Gio and De Los Santos they aren't going to be a playoff contender. I say good trade because he got value IMO.

Yeah, most definitely not created into a league. Stick with the 24 hour rule, but everyone needs to try to respond quicker. It took us, what like a month and a half last time?

I couldn't agree more.

And dont forget...its half way through the third quarter. With my luck this bowl season theres going to be two more touchdowns, leaving the total score at 63, meaning if they would have just gone for the kick, I would have pushed. Not to mention that I placed the bet lastnight when the line was at 64 and now its dropped to 62. :lol: And now I'm breathing easy. The National Council on Problem Gambling Its only a problem when you lose! Ha, I don't have a problem. The account is being closed after bowl season. I'm just really bored and my girlfriend is out of town so I have time to watch all these games I otherwise couldn't care less about. And as my gamble-aholic ex-roomate said when we had an intervention for him "I don't have a gambling problem, you just have a problem with my gambling!" Hes not that quick witted, so he obviously thought about it before we tried (and failed) at the intervention. He still lives at home because he can't afford an apartment.

And dont forget...its half way through the third quarter. With my luck this bowl season theres going to be two more touchdowns, leaving the total score at 63, meaning if they would have just gone for the kick, I would have pushed. Not to mention that I placed the bet lastnight when the line was at 64 and now its dropped to 62. :lol: And now I'm breathing easy.

And dont forget...its half way through the third quarter. With my luck this bowl season theres going to be two more touchdowns, leaving the total score at 63, meaning if they would have just gone for the kick, I would have pushed. Not to mention that I placed the bet lastnight when the line was at 64 and now its dropped to 62. :lol: I remember in 96 when my roommate who had been on a hot streak bet on BC and lost, only to find out a few weeks later about their point shaving controversy. Hearing the bookie's guys call about collecting the money was funny as hell. I really had no clue people outside of movies talked like they did. I swear to God, Kentucky shaved points on NYE.

The brunette in these tostitos commercials is kinda cute.

And dont forget...its half way through the third quarter. With my luck this bowl season theres going to be two more touchdowns, leaving the total score at 63, meaning if they would have just gone for the kick, I would have pushed. Not to mention that I placed the bet lastnight when the line was at 64 and now its dropped to 62. :lol:

And dont forget...its half way through the third quarter.

Way to kill your momentum. Good job.

What a novel idea, run outside the tackles.

At the 20, I mean the 40, I mean...I don't know how to read :cry:

From the looks of things in these threads, you are not a very good gambler. :lol: I'm just doing it because I'm bored and don't care about most of these games. And I really don't care about the money. My philosophy is that if you don't have it to lose, don't bet it. I haven't done too bad. I won taking the Bears (Chicago Bears that is), on the over in the Cal/AF, and on the over in the Rose Bowl. What hurts were that my two biggest bets were BC-5 (they won by 3 and could/should have kicked a field goal at the end) and Kentucky -7.5 (they won by 7). Both of those were soooooooooo close, but thats what the lines are all about. Well, there was a blocked field goal, interception in the end zone and 4 field goals, yet only a touchdown off pace of the over. OU needs to make some half time adjustments. I'm still confident.