PDA

View Full Version : What's going on with the whole pitching staff?


guillen4life13
11-22-2001, 12:21 PM
I'm really confused and unsure about whether the White Sox pitching will be successful next year. The only real proven starter is Mark Buehrle. The oldest one, (as it looks right now) will probably end up being Jim Parque. Keith Foulke may not be here next year. Kelly Wunsch, Parque, Osuna, Biddle, and Howry (he seems like he still needs some more time to recover) are still questionable as to whether they'll return and be as effective as they were in 2000. Wunsch was a key part of this pen in 2000, but in 2001, his shoulder was no good, and he ended up being more of a burden than a help to this team. Hopefully he can return 100% and pitch for this team as he did in 2000. Parque was a starter in 2000, and he did an adequate job. He still is pretty young, but as the oldest man on the staff, can he handle mentoring the young players? I have my doubts. Right now, as we see it, the only guaranteed starter is Mark Buehrle. Jon Garland has also turned a corner in my opinion, and he can handle the pressure of being a starter as well. As we look ahead, the rotation will probably be for 2002:

Buehrle
Garland
Parque
Rauch
Wells? or Guerrier?

I think this team needs to acquire an established veteran to lead these kids in the right direction. Parque is not the answer. Eldred is as good as retired. Someone like John Smoltz (or along those lines, maybe worth a little less money, although I'd really like to see them make a push at Smoltz). He's won a Cy Young award in his career, and still can start.

If foulke goes, I wouldn't be surprised if Edwin Almonte takes over the closers role, or Antonio Osuna. I don't trust Howry with it anymore.

These Sox should be good enough to at least make the playoffs in 2002. I'm just hoping that Kenny Williams doesn't screw it all up.

oldcomiskey
11-22-2001, 12:41 PM
I really do like Parque now that Ive found that people here in the southeast love him because of his toughness--you gotta admit---the little man has some gonads out there---how that will translate into leadership I dont know---and I still say we should re-sign Boomer because Burhle has to take that next step and be consistant and he said that Boomer was the one who helped him the most---

RedPinStripes
11-22-2001, 12:56 PM
I have liked Parque ever since the brawl. He's a little guy out there who is not afrais to throw inside and he took a stand for his team mates. The only problem I see with him is he can be his own worst enemy. He seems like a real hot head with a chip on his shoulder. I hope that doesn't effect his game next year.

I think John Smoltz would be a perfect fit for this staff of youngsters. I'd love to see him here.

I don't think it would be a good idea to have Rauch or Gurrier in the starting rotation right away. Rauch especially. Eventhough he had minor surgury, he probably won't be at 100% with confidence and all. THey might not have a choice though if they don't pick up a few veteran pitchers.

The opening day roster will be interesting to see.

I'm sorry Bernnie.
:kipper

Daver
11-22-2001, 08:03 PM
Rauch will start the year in the minor leagues,the Sox have made too many mistakes in rushing pitchers up to make that mistake again I hope.
Parque will most likely make the move to the pen,he is a marginal starter at best,he rarely goes more than 5 innings and would be much better suited for long releif.

Though I know I am in the minority here,everyone here seems to forget the prescence of Rocky Biddle on this team,he does not have overpowering stuff,but he is a 4 pitch pitcher that is not afraid to go after the hitter.that and the fact that if he got any run support before Nardi killed his arm would have had double digit wins last year.

Buerlhe
Garland
Biddle
Glover
Wells


But then again what the hell do I know?

Spiff
11-22-2001, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by daver
Rauch will start the year in the minor leagues,the Sox have made too many mistakes in rushing pitchers up to make that mistake again I hope.
Parque will most likely make the move to the pen,he is a marginal starter at best,he rarely goes more than 5 innings and would be much better suited for long releif.

Though I know I am in the minority here,everyone here seems to forget the prescence of Rocky Biddle on this team,he does not have overpowering stuff,but he is a 4 pitch pitcher that is not afraid to go after the hitter.that and the fact that if he got any run support before Nardi killed his arm would have had double digit wins last year.

Buerlhe
Garland
Biddle
Glover
Wells


But then again what the hell do I know?

Where do you think Wright fits in there, bullpen or minors or what?

Daver
11-22-2001, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00


Where do you think Wright fits in there, bullpen or minors or what?

If i get my wish Foulke will be traded and Wright will be the closer.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2001, 09:53 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
These Sox should be good enough to at least make the playoffs in 2002. I'm just hoping that Kenny Williams doesn't screw it all up.

Well, we can always dream the dream, can't we? Given KW's first year on the job, I'm pretty sure he will disappoint us. Apparently JR has decided KW can't spend any money to make meaningful improvements to the team (like a true lead-off man, catcher or thirdbasemen) so I'm not very optimistic about our chances next spring. That's just part of being a Sox Fan, I guess.

BTW, welcome to the board. You'll find we're all diehards here, and not one of us is a pollyanna about our support of the team either.

RedPinStripes
11-22-2001, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by daver


If i get my wish Foulke will be traded and Wright will be the closer.

You don't think Almonte will get his shot at being the closer? I think Wright can be a good starter. Sad to say, but I'd rather see him in the rotation then Kip.

Bmr31
11-22-2001, 10:50 PM
Parque??? If Parque is in our rotation next season, we have SERIOUS problems.

Daver
11-22-2001, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by ComiskeyBum


You don't think Almonte will get his shot at being the closer? I think Wright can be a good starter. Sad to say, but I'd rather see him in the rotation then Kip.

Wright is lucky to get three strong innings,he has good stuff,but runs out of gas quick,and his two best pitches are the heater and that killer slider,which makes him a perfect closer candidate.Randar could probably give you better info on this.

I like Kip in the pen,he seems more comfortable there,but the reality of the situation is that the Sox have a lot invested in him as a starter,and are not going to give up easily.Kip could be a good starter if he had a real pitching coach that was willing to work with his mechanics,as opposed to trying to make him throw what he thinks Kip should be able to throw.

Almonte is still a year away,remember he started the year at the A level.

But then again what the hell do I know?

oldcomiskey
11-22-2001, 10:56 PM
we are in serious trouble if Foulke is not our closer--

Bmr31
11-22-2001, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by oldcomiskey
we are in serious trouble if Foulke is not our closer--

that too...

RedPinStripes
11-22-2001, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by daver


Wright is lucky to get three strong innings,he has good stuff,but runs out of gas quick,and his two best pitches are the heater and that killer slider,which makes him a perfect closer candidate.Randar could probably give you better info on this.

I like Kip in the pen,he seems more comfortable there,but the reality of the situation is that the Sox have a lot invested in him as a starter,and are not going to give up easily.Kip could be a good starter if he had a real pitching coach that was willing to work with his mechanics,as opposed to trying to make him throw what he thinks Kip should be able to throw.

Almonte is still a year away,remember he started the year at the A level.

But then again what the hell do I know?
I can't disagree there.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2001, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31
Parque??? If Parque is in our rotation next season, we have SERIOUS problems.

Parque would be a great addition to the bullpen, at least for the first-half of the season. Lord knows we have nobody dependable in the 'pen to pitch lefty in relief.

Of course KW isn't permitted to acquire any real (i.e. expensive) talent, so we'll probably end up with another Embree/Pulsipher cast-off from somebody else's roster. And of course, Parque will be jammed back into the starting rotation where his still-recovering shoulder ought to make for plenty of 8-7 ballgames.

Guess which team gets the seven?

LongDistanceFan
11-22-2001, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by daver


If i get my wish Foulke will be traded and Wright will be the closer. are you on drugs?????

do you honestly think that we will get the same numbers from wright as we did from foulke. we need foulke in the pen, the other info about the other players you mention in a later post is good.

Bmr31
11-22-2001, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Parque would be a great addition to the bullpen, at least for the first-half of the season. Lord knows we have nobody dependable in the 'pen to pitch lefty in relief.

Of course KW isn't permitted to acquire any real (i.e. expensive) talent, so we'll probably end up with another Embree/Pulsipher cast-off from somebody else's roster. And of course, Parque will be jammed back into the starting rotation where his still-recovering shoulder ought to make for plenty of 8-7 ballgames.

Guess which team gets the seven?

Lol the sox? yes i agree. Parque should be in our bullpen next season.

Daver
11-22-2001, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by LongDistanceFan
are you on drugs?????

do you honestly think that we will get the same numbers from wright as we did from foulke. we need foulke in the pen, the other info about the other players you mention in a later post is good.

No I am not under the influence of anything other than too much venison,but I still think that Foulke is a two pitch pitcher that is not worth the money he wants,and I think it is in the best interest of the Sox to trade him while his value is high.

But then again what the hell do I know?

Bmr31
11-22-2001, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by daver


No I am not under the influence of anything other than too much venison,but I still think that Foulke is a two pitch pitcher that is not worth the money he wants,and I think it is in the best interest of the Sox to trade him while his value is high.

But then again what the hell do I know?

i agree, but i also feel foulke is easily our best option at closer right now. would i pay him the money he is asking for? No way. conclusion? The sox have problems.

LongDistanceFan
11-22-2001, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by daver


No I am not under the influence of anything other than too much venison,but I still think that Foulke is a two pitch pitcher that is not worth the money he wants,and I think it is in the best interest of the Sox to trade him while his value is high.

But then again what the hell do I know? compare to other "rp" he worth the money, not that you are wrong about his pitch. some relievers only have 1 pitch in their arsenal and still do well. i am not against trading anybody, but lets keep him for another yr or 2 than trade him. then we should see who the heir apparent is going to be.

PaleHoseGeorge
11-22-2001, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by daver
No I am not under the influence of anything other than too much venison,but I still think that Foulke is a two pitch pitcher that is not worth the money he wants,and I think it is in the best interest of the Sox to trade him while his value is high.


Foulke's change up is one of the most effective pitches in all of baseball, but he has trouble getting the mechanics right in pressure situations. He certainly isn't the quintessential candidate for being a top-flight closer. I know Manuel would prefer him in the set-up role.

Foulke will be expensive to re-sign, but quality closers aren't easy to find. If the Sox were serious about winning a championship, they wouldn't think twice about re-signing him. They might even go out and get another guy to match with Foulke, switching off the closer and set-up roles. This would signal the team was serious about winning the ring.

Instead, the Sox are talking about avoiding the free agent market and getting everyone healthy--even when everyone knows it takes more than a year for a pitcher to fully recover from shoulder surgery. (See Howry, Bob).

I get more depressed the more I think about this. :(:

Daver
11-22-2001, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by Bmr31


i agree, but i also feel foulke is easily our best option at closer right now. would i pay him the money he is asking for? No way. conclusion? The sox have problems.

Well I think Wright would make a good closer,and Foulkes value will never be higher than now.

And baseball,not just the Sox,has problems.

Bmr31
11-22-2001, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by daver


Well I think Wright would make a good closer,and Foulkes value will never be higher than now.

And baseball,not just the Sox,has problems.

wright COULD make a good closer. In 2 to 3 years.

LongDistanceFan
11-22-2001, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by daver


Well I think Wright would make a good closer,and Foulkes value will never be higher than now.

And baseball,not just the Sox,has problems. but without foulke right now, our closer is howry............. that is awful to think about....

Daver
11-23-2001, 12:00 AM
Originally posted by LongDistanceFan
but without foulke right now, our closer is howry............. that is awful to think about....

No our closer could be Wright,and I think he would surprise many.

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by daver


No our closer could be Wright,and I think he would surprise many. he hasn't proven that he can hold down that job for the long run.........

Daver
11-23-2001, 12:13 AM
Originally posted by LongDistanceFan
he hasn't proven that he can hold down that job for the long run.........

He hasn't been given the chance,because the Sox managment have only used him as a a starter.The Anaheim Angels did the same thing with Troy Percivel,they realized that he was not a starter but had the stuff to pitch and made him a closer,so why can't the Sox do the same thing?

But then again what the hell do I know?

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by daver


He hasn't been given the chance,because the Sox managment have only used him as a a starter.The Anaheim Angels did the same thing with Troy Percivel,they realized that he was not a starter but had the stuff to pitch and made him a closer,so why can't the Sox do the same thing?

But then again what the hell do I know? how many games did he play in the majors this season???????

Daver
11-23-2001, 12:24 AM
Originally posted by LongDistanceFan
how many games did he play in the majors this season???????

He started at least five.He was unhittable for the first two or three innings and then ran out of gas.Can you see closer out of this? I can.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by daver
He started at least five.He was unhittable for the first two or three innings and then ran out of gas.Can you see closer out of this? I can.

No doubt Wright has good stuff, but I can recall a few games this year that he started where he couldn't locate his pitches early in the game. Once he learns to control his pitches I think he would make a great closer.

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by daver


He started at least five.He was unhittable for the first two or three innings and then ran out of gas.Can you see closer out of this? I can. not based on 5 games............ i need more than that........ lets give him another season to develop before you throw him out to the wolves.

Daver
11-23-2001, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


No doubt Wright has good stuff, but I can recall a few games this year that he started where he couldn't locate his pitches early in the game. Once he learns to control his pitches I think he would make a great closer.

WOW,Jerry agrees with me,this may be a first.


:) :) :)

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by daver


WOW,Jerry agrees with me,this may be a first.


:) :) :) and you are reminding me of bmr amoung others......... :):):)

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 12:35 AM
Originally posted by daver
WOW,Jerry agrees with me,this may be a first.


Yeah odd isn't it?
I'm telling you Daver whenever baseball starts up Jim Parque will be in the Sox rotation. I know your going to say Manuel lies all the time, which is true but I believe him this time. Anyway back to Wright, I think he should and will get another shot at starting in 2002. Now if we can just do something with Kip Wells and his mental problems we'll be set. Oh yeah and catcher to, and a leadoff man.

Damn.

Daver
11-23-2001, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Yeah odd isn't it?
I'm telling you Daver whenever baseball starts up Jim Parque will be in the Sox rotation. I know your going to say Manuel lies all the time, which is true but I believe him this time. Anyway back to Wright, I think he should and will get another shot at starting in 2002. Now if we can just do something with Kip Wells and his mental problems we'll be set. Oh yeah and catcher to, and a leadoff man.

Damn.

I think I see an excedrin headache coming on.

:)

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 12:39 AM
Originally posted by daver


I think I see an excedrin headache coming on.

:) too much red meat today??? :)

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by daver
I think I see an excedrin headache coming on.



Yeah White Sox baseball will do that to you.

kermittheefrog
11-23-2001, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by daver


He hasn't been given the chance,because the Sox managment have only used him as a a starter.The Anaheim Angels did the same thing with Troy Percivel,they realized that he was not a starter but had the stuff to pitch and made him a closer,so why can't the Sox do the same thing?

But then again what the hell do I know?

Why should the Sox give up on Wright as a starter? He's just about to tuurn 24 and he had a great season as a starter at AA Birmingham. Very few guys go straight to the majors from AA with success so we shouldn't give up on Wright because he couldn't do it. Percival is in the pen because he only has one or two pitches. Wright has 4, his fastball and curve are both out pitches when he throws them for strikes. His changeup and slider are both good enough to be major league pitches. Now isn't the time to convert Wright to relief. He could be a starter after a half season of AAA or so.

guillen4life13
11-23-2001, 12:40 PM
You know? There isn't even one pitcher who looks like they'll be in the rotation (to my knowledge) that hasn't been brought up in the Sox Minor League System. They really have to stop relying on ONLY THEIR HOMEGROWN PROSPECTS. We don't have a proven ace, other than Buehrle, but he doesn't really count because that was only one year, and he may falter this coming year. Why can't these guys just go out and get a proven vet? Smoltz is questionable as a starter, and he is also going to be worth a lot of money. I say, they should still make that kind of investment on a pitcher. These guys need a mentor, and as of now, the prospect doesn't look good for them getting one. Wells (David) is gone. Maybe they should try and get him, contrary to my earlier belief. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Mark Buehrle wins at least one Cy Young Award in the next five years. But you will also notice that most White Sox pitchers fizzle when they leave this organization (Alvarez, Hernandez, Black Jack, Fernandez, etc.) I truly feel that this minor league system has the best pitching instructors. Nardi may not be the best, but he's adequate. We can't blame all of the injuries of last year on Nardi, because the fact is that they probably aren't his fault. Crap just hit the fan. An organization can't have such a string of time with hardly any injuries without having a setback year or two.

The other mentor is gone also. I really have to say that I feel pretty bad for Cal Eldred. He wasn't really old, and if his arm was in good condition, he was a pretty good starter. Cal could win you a game. Now his arm is pretty much gone, which is pretty sad. Just think, the oldest person in this whole pitching staff may end up being Sean Lowe. He's only 32-33. The next person is Keith Foulke, who's a year and a half younger. There is no established veteran starter! Lowe in a pinch can start, but his main purpose is long relief and the bridge. The problem posed this year is that not many good pitchers are on the market. Smoltz and Park. That's it. I think that IF THEY HAVE ALREADY MADE THE DECISION TO GET RID OF FOULKE, they should try a sign and trade packaging him and a prospect or possibly someone like Brian Simmons to a team for an all star pitcher. I'm not talking someone like Curt Schilling, but more along the lines of someone like Kevin Millwood? Millwood wasn't too great last year, but if he can get back to form, we've got another potential Cy Young candidate (Mark Buehrle was mentioned earlier).

This is just what I think. I'm not very experienced in this stuff, these moves just seem logical. Almonte, Wright, Osuna, or maybe even Lowe can take over the closers role.


By the way. The best closer in the league has only one pitch.
You know who I'm talking about. :?: :?: :?:

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
Why can't these guys just go out and get a proven vet?

By the way. The best closer in the league has only one pitch.
You know who I'm talking about. :?: :?: :?:

Like a typical athlete I'll answer your 2nd question first.
Rivera and the answer to question one is very simple.

:reinsy
No fans in the seats + no money for Jerry = no fun for the fans.

GASHWOUND
11-23-2001, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by daver


He started at least five.He was unhittable for the first two or three innings and then ran out of gas.Can you see closer out of this? I can.

And if Wright fails miserably? Than JM will be playing Merry-Go-round with the closer role just like the lineup.
:jerry
"Wright, you be the closer on Mondays, Osuna..Tuesdays...Howry..Wed..Wunsh...
Thursdays.. Barcelo..Fri..Lowe..Sat, and I'll pick one out of the hat on Sundays!"

I don't want that. Foulke has put up better #'s than anybody in baseball, even better than Riveria'a #'s, ERA wise. Nobody on this club will put up those kind of #'s.
:walk
"I have closer experience!"

Our pitching staff looks waaaay to young to be a playoff staff. We might have to hire a babysitter for these guys when we go out on the road. Look at the staff of the playoffs teams. Braves:Veteran staff aces-maddux, Galvine, Burkette
D-Backs: Veteran staff aces-Johnson and Shilling.
Yanks: Clemens, Mussina, Pettite, Hernendez.

Those are aces. What are we gonna have??
Buehrle, Glover, garland, parque?

parque probably will go to the pen, but Kenny "I wil not go after any free agents" Wlliams HAS to make a trade to aquire a VETERAN pitcher!!!

Trade one of our 75 DH's and do something about his debacle!
I feel "sort" of confident with our pen if we keep Foulke, than we have guys with specific roles. So I like our pen, but it depends if our returning pitchers will come back to form.
If its 100% healthy, we may have one of the best pens in baseball. But young starting staff= No ALCS, which= No World Series. We might be able to win the division with a youg staff if everything else is above average, i.e, Lineup, bullpen. But NO WAY you gettin far in post-season with a young staff.
So KW, what the hell you gonna do about this??
:KW
"Our youngens can take us all the way!!"

Spiff
11-23-2001, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND


And if Wright fails miserably? Than JM will be playing Merry-Go-round with the closer role just like the lineup.
:jerry
"Wright, you be the closer on Mondays, Osuna..Tuesdays...Howry..Wed..Wunsh...
Thursdays.. Barcelo..Fri..Lowe..Sat, and I'll pick one out of the hat on Sundays!"

I don't want that. Foulke has put up better #'s than anybody in baseball, even better than Riveria'a #'s, ERA wise. Nobody on this club will put up those kind of #'s.
:walk
"I have closer experience!"

Our pitching staff looks waaaay to young to be a playoff staff. We might have to hire a babysitter for thee guys when we go out on the road. Look at the staff of the playoffs teams. Braves:Veteran staff aces-maddux, Galvine, Burkette
D-Backs: Veteran staff aces-Johnson and Shilling.

Those are aces. What are we gonn have??
Buehrle, Glover, garland, parque?

parque probably will go to the pen, but Kenny "I wil not go after any free agents" Wlliams HAS to make a trade to aquire a VETERAN pitcher!!!

Trade one of our 75 DH's and do something about his debacle!
I feel "sort" of confident with our pen if we keep Foulke, than we have guys with specific roles. So I like our pen, but it depends if our returning pitchers will come back to form.
If its 100% healthy, we may have one of the best pens in baseball. But young starting staff= No ALCS, which= No World Series. We might be able to win the division with a youg staff if everything else is above average, i.e, Lineup, bullpen. But NO WAY you gettin far in post-season with a young staff.
So KW, what the hell you gonna do about this??
:KW
"Our youngens can take us all the way!!"

lmao at the closer thing and the 75 dh's.

I just noticed but it looks like KW is wearing women's sunglasses in that picture.

LongDistanceFan
11-23-2001, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00


lmao at the closer thing and the 75 dh's.

I just noticed but it looks like KW is wearing women's sunglasses in that picture. maybe he been hiding in the closet for a long time.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND
Kenny "I wil not go after any free agents" Wlliams HAS to make a trade to aquire a VETERAN pitcher!!!


I don't mind Williams bashing but he's not making the call not to go after free agents. Our wonderful chairman has made that decision.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND
I don't want that. Foulke has put up better #'s than anybody in baseball, even better than Riveria'a #'s, ERA wise. Nobody on this club will put up those kind of #'s.


The problem is what Foulke wants isn't what the Sox are willing to pay him. So unless he comes down on his demands he will be pitching elsewhere soon.

GASHWOUND
11-23-2001, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I don't mind Williams bashing but he's not making the call not to go after free agents. Our wonderful chairman has made that decision.

That may be so, but KW is the one who came out publicly on the radio saying it so I'm just blaming him. I'm well aware of Reinsy's influence and control, and cheapness.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND
That may be so, but KW is the one who came out publicly on the radio saying it so I'm just blaming him. I'm well aware of Reinsy's influence and control, and cheapness.


Oh it it so, Williams is the mouth piece for Reinsdorf.

GASHWOUND
11-23-2001, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


The problem is what Foulke wants isn't what the Sox are willing to pay him. So unless he comes down on his demands he will be pitching elsewhere soon.

Both better compromise on their demands and stop with the Frank Thomas act already. It just piises me off cause now you see the Spanks arein the lead to get Giambi and his 17 million a year to go along with the other 10 players on that team who make over 10 million and we're arguing over a couple million a year difference.
Damn Chicago owners!!! So damn CHEAP!

:jaime
"They paid me 5 million!"

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by GASHWOUND
Both better compromise on their demands and stop with the Frank Thomas act already. It just piises me off cause now you see the Spanks arein the lead to get Giambi and his 17 million a year to go along with the other 10 players on that team who make over 10 million and we're arguing over a couple million a year difference.
Damn Chicago owners!!! So damn CHEAP!


Neither side will budge on this. Foulke is going to ask for 8 million per while the Sox will counter with 5 or 6. Perhaps they could agree on 6.5 or 7 million per with some incentives to get up to or past 8 million per. Well you know what Reinsdorf will say:

:reinsy
If there was some more sell outs last year we could pay Keith.

Spiff
11-23-2001, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Neither side will budge on this. Foulke is going to ask for 8 million per while the Sox will counter with 5 or 6. Perhaps they could agree on 6.5 or 7 million per with some incentives to get up to or past 8 million per. Well you know what Reinsdorf will say:

:reinsy
If there was some more sell outs last year we could pay Keith.

And this face is the reason there aren't more sellouts.

:reinsy

Who wants to give him more money in the first place? It's not like you can be sure he'll spend it. What stupid damn cycle.

Daver
11-23-2001, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Neither side will budge on this. Foulke is going to ask for 8 million per while the Sox will counter with 5 or 6. Perhaps they could agree on 6.5 or 7 million per with some incentives to get up to or past 8 million per.

I still don't see a two pitch pitcher that has a bad habit of getting torched in clutch situations being worth 8 mil per,sorry.


But then again what the hell do I know?

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by daver
I still don't see a two pitch pitcher that has a bad habit of getting torched in clutch situations being worth 8 mil per,sorry.


I don't think Bret Boone is worth the 8 to 10 million he is asking for either. But you know someone will pay him that much.

Daver
11-23-2001, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I don't think Bret Boone is worth the 8 to 10 million he is asking for either. But you know someone will pay him that much.

Whoever does will get laughed at by me.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by daver
Whoever does will get laughed at by me.

I would as well that just doesn't make sense. It's contracts like that which make baseball money situation what it is.

Spiff
11-23-2001, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by daver


Whoever does will get laughed at by me.

Hey just because he looks like kermit the frog doesn't mean you have to laugh at him....oh wait you meant the contract thing.

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00
Hey just because he looks like kermit the frog doesn't mean you have to laugh at him....oh wait you meant the contract thing.


No he meant he is going to laugh at the team that pays Bret Boone 8 to 10 million dollars per year.

Daver
11-23-2001, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by Wh1teSox00


Hey just because he looks like kermit the frog doesn't mean you have to laugh at him....oh wait you meant the contract thing.

No Kermit looks like this

:kermit

GASHWOUND
11-23-2001, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by daver


I still don't see a two pitch pitcher that has a bad habit of getting torched in clutch situations being worth 8 mil per,sorry.


But then again what the hell do I know?

There is a ton of bad players in this league getting paid that much. And now we want to slow down on someone who's actually good? Foulke is a clutch pitcher who only blew 3 saves last year. People bring up 2 times where they bring up this no-clutch bit. The Twins game and the Mariners game. If you're gonna judge a pitcher on two games than you have a agenda against him. Everybodykeeps telling me he doesn't have the stuff and has only 2 pitches to be a good closer. I heard this 2 years ago. and all he does is succeed and his job. One of the top 4 in closers in baseball. Don't take my word for it..just look at the #'s

guillen4life13
11-23-2001, 07:55 PM
look. why can't jerry just forget money for one season and think about what "w-i-n-n-i-n-g" means?!?! Shove that money up your ass man! At least something's being done with it! If only the mob ran this business. The White Sox would win every game, and when the opponent was threatening to take the lead or win, just have the umpires bribed or have their heads bashed in!

COME ON!! GO OUT AND GET SOMEONE! I DON'T CARE HOW MUCH MONEY THE PERSON COSTS, JUST GET HIM! FILL THESE HOLES! I DON'T CARE IF THIS TEAM TURNS INTO THE '97 FLORIDA MARLINS #2! AT LEAST THIS SIDE OF TOWN GETS A WORLD SERIES TO BOAST ABOUT TO THEIR WONDERFUL FRIENDS A FEW MILES NORTH! WHY CAN'T THESE GUYS JUST SPEND THE MONEY ON SOMEONE LIKE ALOU, BONDS, GIAMBI, OR SOMEONE LIKE THAT! AT LEAST WE'LL KNOW THEY'RE FOR REAL! SCREW MONEY, AND LETS THINK ABOUT PUTTING A "W, 4-2" IN THE PLAYOFF BRACKET NEXT TO "THE WORLD SERIES!" IF YOU ACTUALLY THINK THAT, "EUREKA! , MAYBE WINNING WILL GET US FANS, AND CONSEQUENTLY GET US MORE MONEY TO RENEW CONTRACTS!"

I know this this message isn't going to make a difference, but I wanna see who agrees with me on this one.

:capone
"Yeah, if I ran this business, there'd be no stopping us!"
:canseco
"Yeah, boss! I can bash their heads in for a few hundred thousand dollars!"
:shoeless
"I won me a World Series! I wonder if Chicagoans today know the meaning of the two words! Gee, I hope I get into the Hall of Fame despite depriving this pathetic city of a championship"

(don't get me wrong, I'd be very very happy to see Shoeless get into the Hall of Fame)

Jerry_Manuel
11-23-2001, 08:00 PM
look. why can't jerry just forget money for one season and think about what "w-i-n-n-i-n-g" means?!?!

Because there is no guarentee that if he spends the most money or close to it that the team will win. That would mean he would lose money. Making money is winning to our owner.

Daver
11-23-2001, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
(don't get me wrong, I'd be very very happy to see Shoeless get into the Hall of Fame)

Shoeless Joe should be in the hall of fame,so should Pete Rose.

Spiff
11-23-2001, 08:08 PM
I agree with you. Maybe when JR dies it'll happen.

Paulwny
11-23-2001, 08:11 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Making money is winning to our owner.

This statement says it all.

CallMeNuts
11-24-2001, 02:30 PM
You can call me nuts, but:
Doesn't it seem like the Sox have an incredible ability to develop pitchers who can go no more than 5 or 6 innings. So why not accept this. Schedule the starter to go 5 innings. Have a started scheduled to relieve in the 6th inning for 3 more innings. Then bring in a closer to finish the game. Here's my 7 man rotation (scheduled reliever in parenthesis): 1. Buehrle (Parque) 2. Garland (Biddle) 3. Wright (K Wells) 4. Buehrle (Rauch) 5. Parque (Garland) 6. Biddle (Wright) 7. K Wells (Rauch). 8 innings every 7 games seems like a good quota for most of our staff. Yes: Buehrle gets to start twice since he's earned it. We'll bring Rauch along slowly so as to not put too much pressure on the rookie.

El Train
11-24-2001, 02:46 PM
YOU'RE NUTS!
its an interesting thought, but i doubt that will ever work.
Although, i could see Jerry "pick names out of a hat" Manuel adopting such a system. It could revolutionize baseball!!!

FarWestChicago
11-24-2001, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by CallMeNuts
You can call me nuts, but:
Doesn't it seem like the Sox have an incredible ability to develop pitchers who can go no more than 5 or 6 innings. So why not accept this. Schedule the starter to go 5 innings. Have a started scheduled to relieve in the 6th inning for 3 more innings. Then bring in a closer to finish the game. Here's my 7 man rotation (scheduled reliever in parenthesis): 1. Buehrle (Parque) 2. Garland (Biddle) 3. Wright (K Wells) 4. Buehrle (Rauch) 5. Parque (Garland) 6. Biddle (Wright) 7. K Wells (Rauch). 8 innings every 7 games seems like a good quota for most of our staff. Yes: Buehrle gets to start twice since he's earned it. We'll bring Rauch along slowly so as to not put too much pressure on the rookie. Welcome to WSI, CMN!!

longshot7
11-24-2001, 03:57 PM
this discussion may be over. but I'd like to point out that Elias Sports Bureau ranks every player by position for salary and other reasons.

In their rankings for the 2001 season, Keith Foulke was rated the #1 closer in the game, AHEAD of Rivera (who was ranked #2), believe it or not.

Spiff
11-24-2001, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by longshot7
this discussion may be over. but I'd like to point out that Elias Sports Bureau ranks every player by position for salary and other reasons.

In their rankings for the 2001 season, Keith Foulke was rated the #1 closer in the game, AHEAD of Rivera (who was ranked #2), believe it or not.

I believe it.

Afterall, everyone saw the World Series.

guillen4life13
11-24-2001, 04:43 PM
It's very believeable for Foulke to be the best closer in the league, but he also has a knack for blowing very important games. I still think that they should keep him without a doubt. Next year he very well could lead the league in saves and SV%. For all you know, this guy will usurp Dennis Eckersley's throne (highly unlikely, but Foulke is good enough). He just has to learn how to not choke in high pressure situations.
NOTICE TO KENNY: SIGN THIS GUY TO A CONTRACT!!! NOWADAYS YOU CAN'T REALLY WIN WITHOUT A PROVEN CLOSER, AND I FEEL WE HAVE ONE RIGHT HERE! PAY HIM WHAT HE WANTS, EVEN IF LOGICALLY IT IS A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH.

Daver
11-24-2001, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
EVEN IF LOGICALLY IT IS A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH.

What he wants is a lot to much.

Spiff
11-24-2001, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by daver


What he wants is a lot to much.

Well it's not like they're going to spend the money on free-agents.

guillen4life13
11-24-2001, 08:24 PM
daver, i have a question for you. do you just have some grudge against me? So far, I can't think of a time where I've made a statement and you haven't contradicted me, and added a comment or two to make me feel like i don't know anything about what I'm talking about.

Daver
11-24-2001, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
daver, i have a question for you. do you just have some grudge against me? So far, I can't think of a time where I've made a statement and you haven't contradicted me, and added a comment or two to make me feel like i don't know anything about what I'm talking about.

No,and I am sorry if you perceive this,your new here,so you don't know that I have been calling for Keith Foulke to be traded for months,and some of your statements have opened up a way to reiterite some of my points.There is nothing personal involved.

Spiff
11-24-2001, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
daver, i have a question for you. do you just have some grudge against me? So far, I can't think of a time where I've made a statement and you haven't contradicted me, and added a comment or two to make me feel like i don't know anything about what I'm talking about.

When I started posting here I thought people were doing the same thing too, that I had pissed them off and they had something against me. But I just kept posting and eventually I either realized they weren't or I just became deaf to it. Most likely the latter.

I think it's just that everyone here is so pessimistic that when someone else suggests a major move in the right direction, we all point to the past. And the owner.

Jerry_Manuel
11-24-2001, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
NOTICE TO KENNY: SIGN THIS GUY TO A CONTRACT!!! NOWADAYS YOU CAN'T REALLY WIN WITHOUT A PROVEN CLOSER, AND I FEEL WE HAVE ONE RIGHT HERE! PAY HIM WHAT HE WANTS, EVEN IF LOGICALLY IT IS A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH.

Again it's not up to Kenny. I'm sure if he could he would sign him ASAP, it's up to Jerry to pony up the cash. Which doesn't happen to often and won't happen for Keith.

guillen4life13
11-24-2001, 11:36 PM
ok. thanks for making that clear to me daver and Wh1tesox00. This is the way I percieved it. Sorry for jumping to a conclusion or as I did, daver. Thanks for telling me that this was the way you felt when you started out here and just telling me that no one really means to make it seem as I percieved this whole situation.

Again, thanks.

My fault.

Daver
11-24-2001, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
ok. thanks for making that clear to me daver and Wh1tesox00. This is the way I percieved it. Sorry for jumping to a conclusion or as I did, daver. Thanks for telling me that this was the way you felt when you started out here and just telling me that no one really means to make it seem as I percieved this whole situation.

Again, thanks.

My fault.

No problem.Stick around and you will see why I use this term all the time.

But then again what the hell do I know?

voodoochile
11-24-2001, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by daver


Shoeless Joe should be in the hall of fame,so should Pete Rose.

No... they shouldn't be. There is no room in MLB for people who gamble on baseball, period. If there ever does come a day where that type of behavior is acceptable, I, for one, am gone. Rose even bet on his own team. Albeit, he never bet on them to lose (at least there is no proof he did), but there has to be a line someplace, otherwise it becomes just more WWF (sorry wrestling fans) shenannigans. Pretty soon it would become an exhibition with predetermined winners. Bet on basketball, bet on football, bet on college sports, but leave baseball out of your gambling if you want to play professional ball. Thus has it ever been, thus is it now, thus (hopefully) will it ever be.

Daver
11-24-2001, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


No... they shouldn't be. There is no room in MLB for people who gamble on baseball, period. If there ever does come a day where that type of behavior is acceptable, I, for one, am gone. Rose even bet on his own team. Albeit, he never bet on them to lose (at least there is no proof he did), but there has to be a line someplace, otherwise it becomes just more WWF (sorry wrestling fans) shenannigans. Pretty soon it would become an exhibition with predetermined winners. Bet on basketball, bet on football, bet on college sports, but leave baseball out of your gambling if you want to play professional ball. Thus has it ever been, thus is it now, thus (hopefully) will it ever be.

Can we agree to disagree on this without a long argument?

voodoochile
11-24-2001, 11:59 PM
Okay, so I haven't been around in a while, and I wanted to say something about the pitching discussion.

Has JR come out and said, "No new FA's"? I have been out of touch a lot recently. If so, then the staff will be an open tryout for the 17 pitchers (or so) we have who have experience and have shown at least some talent on the Major league level. Personally, I won't be upset if Parque gets a crack at the rotation, because if he is a starter next year, it will mean he beat out some other pitchers who have been good at times. I agree with Kermit that Wright should be given a chance to start for a while before he gets tried as a closer. Personally, I think Wright has some of the best stuff of any pitcher in a Sox uniform in years (Fernadez?). His fastball is livelier and heavier than anyone else on the staff. He is also the only pitcher on the staff who appears to have the ability to get stronger as the game goes along. Not saying he has it now, but give him a few years and this kid could be ace material, IMO. If not, there is plenty of time to try him as a closer later.

If the Sox do open up their purse strings or trade for a veteran pitcher, than the staff will be the best we have seen here in Chicago since '94. It will also be younger and developing which would put the Sox squarely in the middle of their window of opportunity.

The only shoe in on the staff as a starter next year is Buehrle. If they acquire a veteran starter, the rotation will probably look like this:

Veteran
Buehrle
Wright
Glover
Garland

That leaves plenty of people (Biddle, Wells, Rauch) to fill in if someone falters or gets injured. Personally, I have to agree with Daver that Biddle may come back stronger than ever and earn a spot in the rotation, but he appears to have an injury prone arm and that is NOT a good thing to have as a pitcher (duh!). Personally, whatever happens, if any 3 of these guys can continue to develop, then the Sox are set for starters with the addition of one veteran and all of a sudden, the chance for a WS ring starts to get closer, not further away... (sorry, I am an optimist by nature...)

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:01 AM
Originally posted by daver


Can we agree to disagree on this without a long argument?

Sure, but I would be eager to hear your thoughts on why Pete and Joe should be admitted into the HOF. Are stats enough? Does there need to be SOME line in the sand that cannot be crossed? If so, where is that line, IYO?

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 12:03 AM
Voodoo,
Williams went on the Score and said the team wouldn't sign any free agents. I assume he meant big name guys.

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Sure, but I would be eager to hear your thoughts on why Pete and Joe should be admitted into the HOF. Are stats enough? Does there need to be SOME line in the sand that cannot be crossed? If so, where is that line, IYO?

There has to be a line behavior wise in my opinion. Stats are big key but your going to have people who say the stats are inflated due to bad pitching.

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:08 AM
Thanks, Jerry. I had not heard that. Not overtly surprised, and it does not rule out trading for a pitcher or two. Lord knows we've got the depth covered.

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
There has to be a line behavior wise in my opinion. Stats are big key but your going to have people who say the stats are inflated due to bad pitching.

My bad you meant Rose and Shoeless stats wise. I thought you were asking for now.

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Thanks, Jerry. I had not heard that. Not overtly surprised, and it does not rule out trading for a pitcher or two. Lord knows we've got the depth covered.

No it doesn't rule a trade out but it certainly doesn't mean a trade will happen. We know how the Sox love having that depth.

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


No it doesn't rule a trade out but it certainly doesn't mean a trade will happen. We know how the Sox love having that depth.

KW showed last year that he was willing to trade quantity for quality (so it didn't work out last year, no reason to give up now). Hopefully he continues to work on making the Sox stronger for the next few years. It really won't take much for the Sox to be pennant contenders. They have to be smart, and that is difficult for them at times, but a little luck goes our way (we HAVE to be due some kind of good luck) and who knows...

Daver
11-25-2001, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by voodoochile


Sure, but I would be eager to hear your thoughts on why Pete and Joe should be admitted into the HOF. Are stats enough? Does there need to be SOME line in the sand that cannot be crossed? If so, where is that line, IYO?

Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader in MLB,no one is even close,he should be in the HOF.

Shoeless Joe has a career BA of .347,not a season or two,a career.That is one of the best in baseball history.

In the case of Shoeless Joe his ban was a lifetime ban,for a crime that I am not convinced he commited,but a lifetime ban only lasts a lifetime and Shoeless Joes is over.

As for Rose,I have yet to see proof that he is guilty of betting on baseball,the Dodge report is a load of what can be culled from any port-a potty,Pete is not innocent of making bad decisions,but he should not be barred from the HOF for his mistakes.


But then again what the hell do I know?

guillen4life13
11-25-2001, 12:30 AM
Now, this is what I've read and heard, which will make this message seem very weird when you hear my opinion.
In the earlier part of the century, fastballs were straight, and there were hardly any breaking/trick pitches. Consequently, hitting becomes easier. I honestly think that if Shoeless Joe Jackson was playing now, he would not be a .347 hitter. I would think he'd be in the .320-.330's range.

BUT, I feel that if a person can sustain that type of batting average for a career, they deserve to make the hall of fame, without a doubt.

As for Rose, as daver said, there is no real proof that he actually did make bets etc. He was a damn good hitter, and he deserves the honor of making the Hall. Listen, if an all-time hits leader can't make the Hall of fame, but Jose Canseco does, with a batting average in the .260's for the career, but over 500 jacks (within the next two years probably), then this sport really needs to get it's priorities straight. I would much rather have a hitter like Roberto Alomar as compared to Jim Thome because Alomar knows how to get on base, whereas Thome strikes out half the time. It's the same concept for Pete Rose. If Canseco gets the Hall, Rose should get the Hall with a Ha-lo over his head.

Think: All Time Hit's leader


I hold no grudge against voodoochile, in fact I take a liking to you because I'm a huge Hendrix fan. I just wanna make sure you don't make the same mistake I made and jump to a conclusion.

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:35 AM
Originally posted by daver


Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader in MLB,no one is even close,he should be in the HOF.

Shoeless Joe has a career BA of .347,not a season or two,a career.That is one of the best in baseball history.

In the case of Shoeless Joe his ban was a lifetime ban,for a crime that I am not convinced he commited,but a lifetime ban only lasts a lifetime and Shoeless Joes is over.

As for Rose,I have yet to see proof that he is guilty of betting on baseball,the Dodge report is a load of what can be culled from any port-a potty,Pete is not innocent of making bad decisions,but he should not be barred from the HOF for his mistakes.


But then again what the hell do I know?

Thanks for answering. Interesting take on the Shoeless Joe induction question. Haven't read the Dodge report so I cannot comment on its truthfulness. For me the question is simple. If you bet on your sport, whatever that sport is, you just forfeited every right you had to play that game. From my perspective the slope is too steep and slippery for there to be any leeway in the rule. I think guys like Pete and Joe make excellent examples for young athletes trying to work their way up. Same thing with drugs. If you cannot put your desire to gamble or do drugs on hold for the relatively short length of time that is the average professional athlete's carrer, then you are too stupid to be allowed to play anyway, IMO. These players are spoiled enough as it is. They don't need to be instantly gratified all the time. If they do, then rehab is a better place for them than "king of the world" anyway. If they don't like the rules, they should try flipping burgers for a living for $6/hour for a while and see what is more important to them, the crackpipe/betting rush or being the idol of every high school kid in America. We suffer enough fools in important positions on this planet no reason we have to put up with them in sports we are paying to see too...

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:40 AM
I hold no grudge against voodoochile, in fact I take a liking to you because I'm a huge Hendrix fan. I just wanna make sure you don't make the same mistake I made and jump to a conclusion.

No worries, I've been around for a while. Just ask anyone You say something that ticks me off, I'll tell you all about it in no uncertain terms. :)

I don't worry about grudges. I just fight back, and I never did get the concept of fighting fair (what the heck does that mean anyway? IT'S A FIGHT!!!)

Want to say that on the basis of stats alone, Joe and Pete deserve the HOF. I for one agree with the standards set of zero tolerance for certain offenses. Gambling on your sport is at the top of the list, IMO.

guillen4life13
11-25-2001, 12:54 AM
You live in Columbus, right voodoochile?
What color is your blood? (You had better say black with some white in there, not red, the color of those "indians")

I'm a true Indian who was born in the U.S.!

:indianslose :notoons


I just hope that Bud Selig doesn't bring up Cleveland in the contraction talks. This rivalry is what makes White Sox baseball.

RedPinStripes
11-25-2001, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by daver


Whoever does will get laughed at by me.

It's sad to say, but reality has come to this..........
If someone will pay the money, I guess they are worth it.

Daver
11-25-2001, 01:07 AM
If you want to talk injustice and the HOF,Harold Baines will be the first player with 1500 RBI'S NOT to make the Hall of Fame.

But then again what the hell do I know?

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 01:09 AM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
You live in Columbus, right voodoochile?


Nope VC lives in Chicago. I'm not sure why he is an Ohio State fan though.

Daver
11-25-2001, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Nope VC lives in Chicago. I'm not sure why he is an Ohio State fan though.

He went to Ohio State.

Jerry_Manuel
11-25-2001, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by daver
He went to Ohio State.

I figured that, just didn't post it.

Paulwny
11-25-2001, 11:06 AM
In theory mlb has no ties to the hof.
The rules committee for the hof never enacted a set of moral rules, numbers were the deciding factor. Being banned from mlb isn't supposed to stop one from entering the hall.
Before Judge Landis' edict on gambling, many players had bet on baseball and some are in the hall.
Ty Cobb's life style and views on race never stopped his admittance to the hall.
At one time only numbers counted now, a saintly halo must be over one's head.
Times have changed, admission of Rose and Jackson is a tough call.

guillen4life13
11-25-2001, 11:28 AM
My Fault, VC.

You were born in Columbus. That doesn't really mean anything

does it?

Still, the Indians SUCK! Long live the INDIANS!

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny
In theory mlb has no ties to the hof.
The rules committee for the hof never enacted a set of moral rules, numbers were the deciding factor. Being banned from mlb isn't supposed to stop one from entering the hall.
Before Judge Landis' edict on gambling, many players had bet on baseball and some are in the hall.
Ty Cobb's life style and views on race never stopped his admittance to the hall.
At one time only numbers counted now, a saintly halo must be over one's head.
Times have changed, admission of Rose and Jackson is a tough call.

Actually, I disagree with the "saintly Halo" concept. I feel that the overwhelming qualification should still be numbers. I really don't care about the drug use for example, I merely use it to prove a point about how stupid these guys can be ("$50 million in the next 10 years or smoke a joint today... ummm... err... that's a tough one man, oh what the heck, pass the bong..."). I do feel there are some infractions which should cause a player to be banned from the sport and if necessary the HOF. Gambling on the sport (especially games they are involved in) is at the top of the list. I'm sure there are others (rape, murder (convictions only)) which would taint a players reputation to the point where he no longer be considered, but I don't know if they should affect his eligibility. I don't know where to draw the line though. I feel it should be something that threatens the integrity of the game (as gambling on individual games does) and is in the players control.

Cobb was an ass, but he always played the game hard and never did anything to undermine the public's belief that the game is real. Joe was a member of a team that conspired to throw the Series. I've seen stats that can prove either side of the Joe question (he hit .350 or something yet gave up 3 triples playing leftfield). Something drastic had to be done to preserve the public perception that the game is not rigged (D-backs proved that conclusively this year, I'd say). Once the smell of impropriety hits a sport, it is as good as fake in the public's eye. And from there it is over, and soon.

Didn't know about gambling on the sport back at the turn of the century. I'd "bet" lots of games were fixed back then especially given the players salaries and how easy it is to get in a hole. I guess the question for me comes down to, "Do we really want the Mob deciding who wins the Series so they can make a bigger buck?" If you answer that, "NO!" then the answer to what to do with players who gamble on the game becomes self evident, IMO...

voodoochile
11-25-2001, 01:09 PM
My Fault, VC.

No worries

You were born in Columbus. That doesn't really mean anything does it?

I was born in Columbus because my parents were both attending OSU. Dad received his PHD 2 weeks after I was born and within a month we were headed out of state. Dad was from Ohio and was a huge Buckeye fan for years (though he did lead the student protest to open the library on Saturdays during football games (it used to be closed so the students could focus on the important stuff :D: )). Around the age of 4 or so, I was picked up and bodily thrown on the OSU bandwagon. They were the first sport I ever watched, the first team in any sport I ever rooted for. I still know their fight song. I did attend college for the first time at OSU in the early 80's (didn't graduate because I didn't take advantage of Dad's earlier work in fact now that I think about it I don't know if I EVER went in the OSU library... hmmm...). Probably the main reasons I went there were because of my loyalty to the team and because my sister was already attending OSU. Anyway... That is why I am a Buckeye through and through...

Still, the Indians SUCK! Long live the INDIANS!

Yes the Toons do indeed suck. How about, "Long live the Native Americans"...

Paulwny
11-25-2001, 05:18 PM
I totally agree, gambling is the worst "sin" for a sport. The hof needs to put this in their guide lines.
Mlb supposedly has info on Rose that they will not make public. I guess they feel the integrity of the game will be jeopardized.
Without all the info on Rose his induction will be discussed for years.

Daver
11-25-2001, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny
I totally agree, gambling is the worst "sin" for a sport. The hof needs to put this in their guide lines.
Mlb supposedly has info on Rose that they will not make public. I guess they feel the integrity of the game will be jeopardized.
Without all the info on Rose his induction will be discussed for years.

All baseball has is the Dodge report and the testimony of a convicted bookie,and the Dodge report is crap,I've read it.

And though it isn't baseball,Paul Hornung is in the HOF in Canton Ohio.

Paulwny
11-25-2001, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by daver




And though it isn't baseball,Paul Hornung is in the HOF in Canton Ohio.

Ah yes, I forgot about "The Golden Boy". Thanks for reminding me.I'll have to mention it to my friend who is very much against Rose.
Hornung's gambling and "hanging-out " with known gamblers didn't seem to effect the integrity of nfl football.

guillen4life13
11-29-2001, 05:44 PM
who is paul hornung?



I'm confused.

Paulwny
11-30-2001, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
who is paul hornung?



I'm confused.

Running back for GB during the Lombardi era, some what of a play boy , known to have gambled on nfl games which created a scandle but is in the football hof.

ma-gaga
11-30-2001, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by daver


All baseball has is the Dodge report and the testimony of a convicted bookie,and the Dodge report is crap,I've read it.

And though it isn't baseball,Paul Hornung is in the HOF in Canton Ohio.

I scanned through the 'Dodge' report, and I agree, it is crap. Judge for yourself. (http://www.dowdreport.com) However, Pete signed a lifetime ban in order not to be prosecuted by MLB. Pete Rose is a disgraceful human being. He made repeated bad decisions, hung out with the wrong people, and cannot/will not prove his innocence to a court of law, and he's selling his signature for money. He is relying on public sentiment to argue for him. If he was innocent, and if the only evidence was that report, he never should have agreed to the ban. I think they had more information than what was written. I'd love to be wrong, but until I get some concrete evidence that Pete Rose is innocent, I have to assume he's guilty. He's admitted to having a gambling problem, and he signed a lifetime ban.

His numbers and his playing style deserve to be in the HOF. I cannot argue with that. He's being held out because they have a simple policy which he broke. No betting on baseball.

guillen4life13
11-30-2001, 09:49 PM
Yeah.


But I still think that they should be allowed in the hall of fame, but banned from playing, coaching, or being a part of any team or management in the MLB.


Just my belief.

Daver
11-30-2001, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by ma-gaga


I scanned through the 'Dodge' report, and I agree, it is crap. Judge for yourself. (http://www.dowdreport.com) However, Pete signed a lifetime ban in order not to be prosecuted by MLB. Pete Rose is a disgraceful human being. He made repeated bad decisions, hung out with the wrong people, and cannot/will not prove his innocence to a court of law, and he's selling his signature for money. He is relying on public sentiment to argue for him. If he was innocent, and if the only evidence was that report, he never should have agreed to the ban. I think they had more information than what was written. I'd love to be wrong, but until I get some concrete evidence that Pete Rose is innocent, I have to assume he's guilty. He's admitted to having a gambling problem, and he signed a lifetime ban.

His numbers and his playing style deserve to be in the HOF. I cannot argue with that. He's being held out because they have a simple policy which he broke. No betting on baseball.

No one has proven that he bet on baseball,which is my point.He was pressured into signing that agreement to keep MLB from taking it to the courts to convict him of illegal sports betting,not betting on baseball,but betting on sports outside the city of Las Vegas.

He should be in the HOF.

Mathew
12-03-2001, 02:22 AM
I know that no one will change their mind here because we all have different standards as to what a Hall of Famer represent. I feel it is the best ever to play the game yes, but I think to be great you have to be able to fend off those temptations. I know a few athletes who are just breaking the league. Dan Blackburn is an 18yr old Goalie plays for the Rangers and he got there because he surpassed expectations,he is from Canmore. I played with him when he was 12 and got cut from th AA team and came down to play a hockey with us. However, brilliant he is and has been he will now have to cope with life as a star. In NY there are many temptations for a star. To be great you must avoid those temptations. I can't condone rewarding people who don't show the rising stars how to acheive greatness. Plus i have biases and therefore don't like Pete Rose's persona. I don't like his attitude and his secrecy and trying to "back door it" if he signed to avoid prosecution for sports betting than he could confront MLB to come with the baseball proof now and the public support would wash the gambling charge. Finally I always played with heart and it is crucial, but when he ruined the career of an opposing catcher in an all star game I get a bad feeling, hence the bias.