PDA

View Full Version : From the troll board (Sandy out all year?)


Iwritecode
01-07-2002, 02:50 PM
From fairly reliable poster (even though she is a tribe fan). This was posted by Daisyjane69 on the tribe troll board. It is from Hal Lebovitz.

2/3 of the ML teams have released their schedules ignorning the contraction issue. The Tribe will release theirs Saturday. Juan Gone's price has essentially remained what the tribe paid him last year, and he looks to sign with the team giving him the most years. Some tribe front office people think he can't play more than 125 games.

Nagy is going to be part of the pitching school Mike Brown will conduct. All pitchers are going to attend except for Finley, Wickman and Shuey. Charlie will be assisting Eddie Murray with the hitting of Branyan and Milton Bradley. Alex Escobar will be here next week for a tour of the city and ballpark. Sandy Alomar has had two more knee surgeries in the off season and he may not be behind the plate at all this season.

Hal discusses the behind the scene issues that went on with the David Wells deal, noting that essentially Steinbrenner and Wells both doublecrossed Colangelo. Wells gave Colangelo his word that the deal they negotiated was not going to be shopped to another team. And of course it was. Evidently, neither Joe Torre nor Brian Cashman particularly wanted Wells back but that Steinbrenner did this just to get back at the DBacks for beating the Yanks in the World Series.

What's wrong bith baseball? The Yanks just signed a 9.75 million dollar deal for the RADIO rights to their game. That is more than the Reds, Twins, Royals, Brewers and Expos get for radio and TV combined.

RedPinStripes
01-07-2002, 03:35 PM
I don't think it will hurt anything if Sandy sits out or retires next year. Is he really that good for the young pitching? I don't think so. Mark Johnson did a nice job defensively and I feel better about MJ at the plate then Sandy anyway. Please go sandy. You'll just confuse Manuel.

Iwritecode
01-07-2002, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes
I don't think it will hurt anything if Sandy sits out or retires next year. Is he really that good for the young pitching? I don't think so. Mark Johnson did a nice job defensively and I feel better about MJ at the plate then Sandy anyway. Please go sandy. You'll just confuse Manuel.

I like MJ and have no problem with him. But which would you rather have?


a 70% healthy
:sandy
Hey, I may have bad knees but at least I don't get thrown out at third trying to stretch a double...

or

a 100% healthy
:versatile ???

Hey I'm versatile!!!

RedPinStripes
01-07-2002, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode


I like MJ and have no problem with him. But which would you rather have?


a 70% healthy
:sandy
Hey, I may have bad knees but at least I don't get thrown out at third trying to stretch a double...

or

a 100% healthy
:versatile ???

Hey I'm versatile!!!

That's a tough one. Josh did get some big hits last year, but he is an idiot and terrible defensivly. I would rather have Mark and Josh until Olivo is ready. MJ as an everyday catcher though.

Iwritecode
01-07-2002, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes


That's a tough one. Josh did get some big hits last year, but he is an idiot and terrible defensivly. I would rather have Mark and Josh until Olivo is ready. MJ as an everyday catcher though.

If Sandy can't play at all next year we had better hope and pray that MJ doesn't get injured at all then. I have no idea who we could bring up from the minors as a second catcher if we needed one...

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode
If Sandy can't play at all next year we had better hope and pray that MJ doesn't get injured at all then. I have no idea who we could bring up from the minors as a second catcher if we needed one...

I would assume they would callup Olivo.

Is Mark Dellasandro still with the Knights?

:MD
That would be me.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-07-2002, 06:55 PM
Are the Sox butt-ugly behind the plate, or what?

I agree, MJ is our best overall option. Alomar ought to be his understudy--to the extent his knees permit him to play. Josh Paul will never be a major league catcher. Sorry.

Of course Manuel appears to have no clue what to do behind the plate. It was his genius idea to leave MJ off the playoff roster in favor of Paul. It was Manuel and KW that sent MJ to the minors for most of 2001 while the situation turned from bad to worse on the parent club.

The real solution is to get Charles Johnson back, but that ain't happening.

Has Manuel forgotten that it was MJ who had the most starts and AB's for the 2000 championship team? He's been treating the guy like a dish rag for over a year now. Is he tacitly admitting that the bottom of his line up is too weak with MJ the everyday catcher?

It wouldn't have to do with either of these two guys, would it?
:slowswing :hitless

Will 2002 be different?

:jerry
"I've learned my lesson."

:ohno
"Time will tell."

RichH55
01-07-2002, 07:02 PM
Arguing for Mark Johnson means its a sad day behind the plate....I'm not saying the case for him isn't compelling, but its disturbing nonetheless...Hell bring back Charlie O'brien if we are going to go for a guy who is a hole in the lineup....if they plan on playing Royce, Chris, and MJ every day there are some serious issues for this team

:slowswing :hitless
Come towards the darkness Mark!

RichH55
01-07-2002, 07:04 PM
And speaking of the tribe(and its fans posts)...wow...there is going to be a helluva drop-off...read the ESPN report and it should be worse than I first thought...we better learn how to beat Joe Mays this year

RichH55
01-07-2002, 07:06 PM
RedPinStripes....I love the quote....I am definately going to pass that off as my own in the future...so thank you for the ill-gotten material

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Arguing for Mark Johnson means its a sad day behind the plate....I'm not saying the case for him isn't compelling, but its disturbing nonetheless...Hell bring back Charlie O'brien if we are going to go for a guy who is a hole in the lineup....if they plan on playing Royce, Chris, and MJ every day there are some serious issues for this team


Mark isn't a great hitter by any means but he does draw walks. Which is something that can't be said for Josh Paul. They don't want to play Royce but their forced to.

RichH55
01-07-2002, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Mark isn't a great hitter by any means but he does draw walks. Which is something that can't be said for Josh Paul. They don't want to play Royce but their forced to.

Always back to Royce for me....why are we forced to play him? He is gone after the year either way and he will get his 4.5 million either way and take up a roster spot either way...Joe Crede doesnt get more money for starting and Jose doesn't get more money for being a SS rather than a 3B......simply playing Royce because he makes 4.5 million is asisnine(though I cant rule it out)...Last year I thought the reason he played was injuries in part and the Sox "Braintrust" trying to make him look attractive to other teams....Most likely he is gone after the year barring a miracle in which he is moved earlier....KW can't find any takers, and if we can't buy him out let him be a bench player/insurance policy for a Manos's injury...what is Royce going to do? Demanded to Be Traded? Be a bad Locker Room influence? Too Late on both those fronts, no?

PaleHoseGeorge
01-07-2002, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
They don't want to play Royce but their forced to.

Who is forcing it?

:ohno
"Not us."

:reinsy
"Umm... I think I hear my mother calling me."

:KW
"I'm coming with you!"

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 07:37 PM
Exactly George.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 07:48 PM
Okay, I agree that the Sox probably didn't want to play Royce in April and May. But what about Royce made them not want to play him after that? His .310 batting average after June 1 not good enough? Made too many errors? What? Noone has been able to explain to me what, besides his poor performance in April and May, makes Royce Clayton an awful ballplayer who needs to be released. If his batting .115 for April and May is the only reason, then please, someone just say so.

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Okay, I agree that the Sox probably didn't want to play Royce in April and May. But what about Royce made them not want to play him after that? His .310 batting average after June 1 not good enough? Made too many errors? What? Noone has been able to explain to me what, besides his poor performance in April and May, makes Royce Clayton an awful ballplayer who needs to be released. If his batting .115 for April and May is the only reason, then please, someone just say so.

Czal, haven't we been down this road before? We have gone over this time and time again. Arguing this is a moot point since nobody is going to win. Royce is by no means the worst player in the league. Joe Crede has to play, period. Clayton is standing in his way, Valentin has more years on his contract and you know how he is in the clubhouse.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Czal, haven't we been down this road before? We have gone over this time and time again. Arguing this is a moot point since nobody is going to win. Royce is by no means the worst player in the league. Joe Crede has to play, period. Clayton is standing in his way, Valentin has more years on his contract and you know how he is in the clubhouse.

There you go. That's all you had to say, Jerry. I just find all the hyperbole funny here - Sometimes I think people here group ballplayers in two categories here - future hall-of-famers, and sh*t on a stick. There is a gray area, which is all I was trying to say. I've been watching White Sox baseball pretty closely since 1983, and Royce Clayton is by no means the worst player to don a Sox uniform. That's all I've been trying to say.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-07-2002, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Okay, I agree that the Sox probably didn't want to play Royce in April and May. But what about Royce made them not want to play him after that? His .310 batting average after June 1 not good enough? Made too many errors? What? Noone has been able to explain to me what, besides his poor performance in April and May, makes Royce Clayton an awful ballplayer who needs to be released. If his batting .115 for April and May is the only reason, then please, someone just say so.

Go for it, Cz. Tell us precisely why Royce Clayton is the everyday shortstop on your baseball team. I contend these arguments always boil down to how much Royce sucks compared to others--a sure prescription for mediocrity.

I've been waiting for someone to suggest Royce is the best shortstop based on his own merits. No one has taken the challenge yet.

Complete this sentence:

"Royce Clayton should be the everyday shortstop because..."

Can you do it without invoking the names of other players? I bet you can't without looking silly.

Daver
01-07-2002, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge



"Royce Clayton should be the everyday shortstop because..."



:reinsy

I'm paying him 4.5 million dollars,you still wanna argue?

duke of dorwood
01-07-2002, 08:56 PM
"Jason Dalleiro isnt ready"

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Go for it, Cz. Tell us precisely why Royce Clayton is the everyday shortstop on your baseball team. I contend these arguments always boil down to how much Royce sucks compared to others--a sure prescription for mediocrity.

I've been waiting for someone to suggest Royce is the best shortstop based on his own merits. No one has taken the challenge yet.

Complete this sentence:

"Royce Clayton should be the everyday shortstop because..."

Can you do it without invoking the names of other players? I bet you can't without looking silly.

I figured it out, George - the main bone of contention here - you don't believe in platooning, do you? I seem to recall that you like the idea of the same nine guys playing every day, ragardless of matchups or anything. If you don't believe in platooning, I can see why you'd want to get rid of Clayton.

I think that Royce Clayton has something to add as a role-player, starting against left-handers, coming in as a defensive replacement, and be available to start every day if someone goes down.

If I had to complete your sentence, I'd say that Royce Clayton should be our everyday starting shortstop because he's the best defensive player we have at the most important defensive position.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-07-2002, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by daver


:reinsy

I'm paying him 4.5 million dollars,you still wanna argue?

Can't argue with the chairman!

:KW
"Tell me about it."

FarWestChicago
01-07-2002, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I think that Royce Clayton has something to add as a role-player, starting against left-handers, coming in as a defensive replacement, and be available to start every day if someone goes down.:thechoice

I am The Choice. I am no role player. If I don't start, I will bitch up a blue streak. And, I fully expect Uncle Jerry to buy me ice cream after every game.

RedPinStripes
01-07-2002, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
RedPinStripes....I love the quote....I am definately going to pass that off as my own in the future...so thank you for the ill-gotten material

What? the signature? Yeah. it's ill- gotten alright. :D:

WinningUgly!
01-07-2002, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz



I think that Royce Clayton has something to add as a role-player, starting against left-handers, coming in as a defensive replacement, and be available to start every day if someone goes down.

.

I'm not totally against Royce. Most Sox fans keep trying to put 100% of the blame on him for last season's terrible start. He's not that bad, but I'd much rather have Jose at SS with Crede at 3rd, than Royce at SS, Jose at 3rd & Crede in AAA! We're not the Yankees, we can't afford a 4.5 million dollar role player.

Daver
01-07-2002, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!


I'm not totally against Royce. Most Sox fans keep trying to put 100% of the blame on him for last season's terrible start. He's not that bad, but I'd much rather have Jose at SS with Crede at 3rd, than Royce at SS, Jose at 3rd & Crede in AAA! We're not the Yankees, we can't afford a 4.5 million dollar role player.

:reinsy

Ahem,WU,that is why Royce will be your starting SS,I am not going to let my money go to waste.Have you seen all those empty seats?I'm losing my ass here.

bjmarte
01-07-2002, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Sometimes I think people here group ballplayers in two categories here - future hall-of-famers, and sh*t on a stick. There is a gray area, which is all I was trying to say.
Originally posted by czalgosz

If I had to complete your sentence, I'd say that Royce Clayton should be our everyday starting shortstop because he's the best defensive player we have at the most important defensive position.
So is he mediocre or is he our number one player in the number one position? Assume for a minute that I agree the choice is that much better defensively than Manos (but I don't). Even then Jose's attitude, bat, and influence in the clubhouse make him the better choice (no pun intended) for ss on a daily basis.

I'm not saying that Royce is a crappy ballplayer or that there isn't some roll for him as a SS off of the bench (if he has to) but you will never get the argument for him as the #1 SS to fly with me. The next time you hear me say that Royce sucks (and you will) understand that I mean that he sucks as JM and KW's choice for starting SS, and as a bad influence on the team, and maybe as a person, but not necessarily as an overall player.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte

So is he mediocre or is he our number one player in the number one position? Assume for a minute that I agree the choice is that much better defensively than Manos (but I don't). Even then Jose's attitude, bat, and influence in the clubhouse make him the better choice (no pun intended) for ss on a daily basis.

I'm not saying that Royce is a crappy ballplayer or that there isn't some roll for him as a SS off of the bench (if he has to) but you will never get the argument for him as the #1 SS to fly with me. The next time you hear me say that Royce sucks (and you will) understand that I mean that he sucks as JM and KW's choice for starting SS, and as a bad influence on the team, and maybe as a person, but not necessarily as an overall player.

Can't Valentin's bat, attitude, and clubhouse presence work just as well from third base? If playing Clayton meant that Valentin wasn't getting PT, then I'd be all for getting rid of Clayton, or at least trading Valentin so we could get value for him. But any playing time that Valentin missed last year was due to injury, not Royce Clayton.

So, the real issue is one of philosophy here. If Royce Clayton prevents Joe Crede from getting a shot this season, then yes, he's a hindrance to the ballclub. But I don't buy the theory that Royce Clayton will play 162 games this season because he's making $4 million. Royce and Crede will both be on the 2002 roster, their paychecks will be the same regardless of how much they play, and Clayton's contract is up after this season, so it's not like the Sox have any special interest in playing him every day. What difference does it make to Jerry Reinsdorf how many ABs each one of them get?

Will Royce complain if he isn't playing every day? Probably, but that sounds like something that Jerry Manuel will have to deal with, doesn't it? Isn't that one of the things that they are paying him to do? And anyway, I don't think that it's in Royce's best interest to be a big clubhouse cancer in the last year of his contract. Won't that make him really unattractive as a free agent?

Daver
01-07-2002, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


And anyway, I don't think that it's in Royce's best interest to be a big clubhouse cancer in the last year of his contract. Won't that make him really unattractive as a free agent?

He is already unattractive as a free agent,really could it get any worse for him?

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 11:05 PM
Czal, I don't want Crede on the team if he has to split time with Jose. It does Joe no good to play once or twice a week. Either he starts damn near everyday or he plays in AAA.

bjmarte
01-07-2002, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Can't Valentin's bat, attitude, and clubhouse presence work just as well from third base? If playing Clayton meant that Valentin wasn't getting PT, then I'd be all for getting rid of Clayton, or at least trading Valentin so we could get value for him. But any playing time that Valentin missed last year was due to injury, not Royce Clayton.

So, the real issue is one of philosophy here. If Royce Clayton prevents Joe Crede from getting a shot this season, then yes, he's a hindrance to the ballclub. But I don't buy the theory that Royce Clayton will play 162 games this season because he's making $4 million. Royce and Crede will both be on the 2002 roster, their paychecks will be the same regardless of how much they play, and Clayton's contract is up after this season, so it's not like the Sox have any special interest in playing him every day. What difference does it make to Jerry Reinsdorf how many ABs each one of them get?

Will Royce complain if he isn't playing every day? Probably, but that sounds like something that Jerry Manuel will have to deal with, doesn't it? Isn't that one of the things that they are paying him to do? And anyway, I don't think that it's in Royce's best interest to be a big clubhouse cancer in the last year of his contract. Won't that make him really unattractive as a free agent?

Well at least you are being consistent with your most recent post.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by daver


He is already unattractive as a free agent,really could it get any worse for him?

I hate to be constantly defending Royce Clayton, it's not like he's a hall-of-famer or anything. It's just that there's a lot of hate directed towards the Choice, hate that he doesn't deserve. Frank Thomas was probably more of a jerk and definitely contributed less to the 2001 White Sox, and yet noone says that he should go.

Royce Clayton doesn't do anything extremely well, but he does everything well enough. Really, I have never been impressed enough with Valentin's defense that I was all upset about him changing positions. He seemed to adjust well to it, and it didn't affect his hitting.

And, if you subtract Clayton's April and May, Clayton had a higher OPS than Valentin did (.865 to .845). So from June until October, Clayton was a BETTER HITTER THAN VALENTIN WAS. So your one argument about why Valentin is preferable - that he's a better hitter - falls on its face.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel
Czal, I don't want Crede on the team if he has to split time with Jose. It does Joe no good to play once or twice a week. Either he starts damn near everyday or he plays in AAA.

Wait, is the thinking that Joe Crede will be an All-Star caliber player? Because I've never thought that. My thinking is that he would develop into an average ballplayer, not someone that you stop everything for, like a Frank Thomas or something.

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Wait, is the thinking that Joe Crede will be an All-Star caliber player? Because I've never thought that. My thinking is that he would develop into an average ballplayer, not someone that you stop everything for, like a Frank Thomas or something.

I don't know how good or how bad Joe will be. The only way to find out is by playing him, not one day out of every five. How does that help him? Right now I've really gotten to the point where I just don't care anymore.

Jerry_Manuel
01-07-2002, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
It's just that there's a lot of hate directed towards the Choice, hate that he doesn't deserve. Frank Thomas was probably more of a jerk and definitely contributed less to the 2001 White Sox, and yet noone says that he should go.

Really, I have never been impressed enough with Valentin's defense that I was all upset about him changing positions. He seemed to adjust well to it, and it didn't affect his hitting.

And, if you subtract Clayton's April and May, Clayton had a higher OPS than Valentin did (.865 to .845). So from June until October, Clayton was a BETTER HITTER THAN VALENTIN WAS. So your one argument about why Valentin is preferable - that he's a better hitter - falls on its face.

I'm going to make one more comment on this subject and then I'm done. As I said earlier arguing this is 100% useless since nobody wins. Czal, you know damn well Valentin hurt himself playing center field. Which is why his hitting took a dive. Look Clayton had a good 2nd half but as George has said numerous times the season was over in May.

I know your going to counter me with the statement that Royce didn't cause the team to get off to a bad start. Yes that is true but by the time he turned it on it didn't matter.

I'm done talking about this, I'll wait and see how it shakes down in 2002.

czalgosz
01-07-2002, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I'm going to make one more comment on this subject and then I'm done. As I said earlier arguing this is 100% useless since nobody wins. Czal, you know damn well Valentin hurt himself playing center field. Which is why his hitting took a dive. Look Clayton had a good 2nd half but as George has said numerous times the season was over in May.

I know your going to counter me with the statement that Royce didn't cause the team to get off to a bad start. Yes that is true but by the time he turned it on it didn't matter.

I'm done talking about this, I'll wait and see how it shakes down in 2002.

If Valentin's hitting was hurt by injury, then he's been hurt since he joined the team, because he was as effective at the plate in 2001 (.845 OPS) as he was in 2000 (.834 OPS).

But you're right, noone is going to convince anyone of anything, and I'm tired of the argument as well. It's just that I feel like i'm missing something here, that there's something obviously wrong with Royce that I just don't see. I mean, i'm in a minority of one here apparently, but I just don't get all the Royce-hating.

FarWestChicago
01-07-2002, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
And, if you subtract Clayton's April and May, Clayton had a higher OPS than Valentin did (.865 to .845). So from June until October, Clayton was a BETTER HITTER THAN VALENTIN WAS. So your one argument about why Valentin is preferable - that he's a better hitter - falls on its face. Czal, you're going off the deep end here. You're comparing an obviously injured player gutting it out to a guy on the biggest hot streak of his career. And if you would seriously prefer The Choice to Manos is a clutch situation (do not forget that Choice's biggest clutch moment of the season was only made possible by two* Manos jacks to get us back into the game), I know of a bus you can hitch a ride on. :smile:

* not 100% sure on the two, but I think that's right.

FarWestChicago
01-07-2002, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I mean, i'm in a minority of one here apparently, but I just don't get all the Royce-hating. There are several Choice supporters. Bmr and idseer come to mind. TSOTC are fewer, but far more vocal. :smile:

Daver
01-07-2002, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
There are several Choice supporters. Bmr and idseer come to mind. TSOTC are fewer, but far more vocal. :smile:

There you go FWC,dissing the rocks and garbage contigent.We have arrows you know.

czalgosz
01-08-2002, 12:01 AM
Originally posted by daver


There you go FWC,dissing the rocks and garbage contigent.We have arrows you know.

Laser-sighted arrows, no less.

Daver
01-08-2002, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Laser-sighted arrows, no less.

Rednecks with technology is a scary combination ain't it.

mrwag
01-09-2002, 01:23 PM
A guy can bat .300 and still not be considered a great hitter. Why? You need to dig deeper. Did he hit .400 with nobody on and .100 with runners in scoring position? Clayton may have had better "numbers", but who do you want in a clutch situation? Let's say runner on 3rd, bottom ninth, 2 out, and a tied game 3 in the World Series . At bat is Clayton. Do you pinch hit with Jose? F**k yeah! 'Nuff said.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 01:41 PM
Look, my point wasn't that Royce Clayton is a great ballplayer, or even that the Sox should have traded for him. My point was simply that he doesn't suck. Not by any stretch of the imagination does he suck. I wasn't responding to those who like Valentin better - it's really comparing apples and oranges, to some extent. I was responding to those who said that Clayton was the worst ballplayer that the Sox have had in recent years - and it HAS been said on this board. People who say that either (a) haven't been watching for very long (b) don't know what they are talking about or (c) just are using hyperbole to prove their point.

I don't particularly like Royce Clayton as en everday starter, myself. The Sox should have gone after a true leadoff hitter to replace the Fire Hydrant. But come on, to compare Royce Clayton unfavorably to Jaime Navarro? That's the kind of stuff I'm responding to.

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Look, my point wasn't that Royce Clayton is a great ballplayer, or even that the Sox should have traded for him. My point was simply that he doesn't suck. Not by any stretch of the imagination does he suck. I wasn't responding to those who like Valentin better - it's really comparing apples and oranges, to some extent. I was responding to those who said that Clayton was the worst ballplayer that the Sox have had in recent years - and it HAS been said on this board. People who say that either (a) haven't been watching for very long (b) don't know what they are talking about or (c) just are using hyperbole to prove their point.

I don't particularly like Royce Clayton as en everday starter, myself. The Sox should have gone after a true leadoff hitter to replace the Fire Hydrant. But come on, to compare Royce Clayton unfavorably to Jaime Navarro? That's the kind of stuff I'm responding to.

How about if you quit equivocating and answer the question straigt up, yes or no, so I can decide for sure what names to call you.

Would you choose to have Royce Clayton start at SS on the Whitesox in the 2002 season over Jose Valentin?

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte


How about if you quit equivocating and answer the question straigt up, yes or no, so I can decide for sure what names to call you.

Would you choose to have Royce Clayton start at SS on the Whitesox in the 2002 season over Jose Valentin?

AAARRRGGGHHH!!! Has anybody on the board heard of platooning? Clayton and Valentin both played for the 2001 White Sox, why can't they play for the 2002 Sox?

The real comparison isn't between Clayton and Valentin, it's between Clayton and Joe Crede. Valentin will get his ABs regardless. In fact, forget Jose Valentin. I'm pencilling his name on the lineup card under ss-3b, okay? He's already shown that he can hit regardless of where he's playing in the field.

If you can guarantee me that Joe Crede will be a star, I'll jump on the "I-hate-Royce" bandwagon and ride him out of town. If everyone agrees with Jerry that the 2002 season is going to be a bust, and it's going to be a rebuilding year, then I'll gladly support cutting Royce and sinking or swimming with Crede.

But, if you think the Sox have a shot at the division this year, then why not have both Crede and Clayton on the roster? I mean, Crede could be great, but he could be Gary Scott all over again. Why tie our fate to just one guy? There's noone else in the organization.

So, I hate to do this, but I'll answer your question with a question - are you totally comfortable going into 2002 with Joe Crede as the only answer at third?

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


AAARRRGGGHHH!!! Has anybody on the board heard of platooning? Clayton and Valentin both played for the 2001 White Sox, why can't they play for the 2002 Sox?

The real comparison isn't between Clayton and Valentin, it's between Clayton and Joe Crede. Valentin will get his ABs regardless. In fact, forget Jose Valentin. I'm pencilling his name on the lineup card under ss-3b, okay? He's already shown that he can hit regardless of where he's playing in the field.

If you can guarantee me that Joe Crede will be a star, I'll jump on the "I-hate-Royce" bandwagon and ride him out of town. If everyone agrees with Jerry that the 2002 season is going to be a bust, and it's going to be a rebuilding year, then I'll gladly support cutting Royce and sinking or swimming with Crede.

But, if you think the Sox have a shot at the division this year, then why not have both Crede and Clayton on the roster? I mean, Crede could be great, but he could be Gary Scott all over again. Why tie our fate to just one guy? There's noone else in the organization.

So, I hate to do this, but I'll answer your question with a question - are you totally comfortable going into 2002 with Joe Crede as the only answer at third?

See if you can answer this question.

Making whatever assumtions that make you happiest about other positions, to fill the SS position you would like it the most if:
a) Jose Valentin played SS most of the time.
b) Jose Valentin and Royce Clayton shared the SS position 50/50.
c) Royce Clayton played SS most of the time.
d) It doesn't matter because I am going to say something different in my next post anyway.

Iwritecode
01-09-2002, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
If you can guarantee me that Joe Crede will be a star, I'll jump on the "I-hate-Royce" bandwagon and ride him out of town. If everyone agrees with Jerry that the 2002 season is going to be a bust, and it's going to be a rebuilding year, then I'll gladly support cutting Royce and sinking or swimming with Crede.

But, if you think the Sox have a shot at the division this year, then why not have both Crede and Clayton on the roster? I mean, Crede could be great, but he could be Gary Scott all over again. Why tie our fate to just one guy? There's noone else in the organization.

So, I hate to do this, but I'll answer your question with a question - are you totally comfortable going into 2002 with Joe Crede as the only answer at third?

Noone can guarantee that Joe Crede will be a star. He's got a pretty good chance though as well as he has played in the minors. The problem is that we can't even make an educated guess because he hasn't seen enough major-league PT! I can guarantee one thing though, Clayton will never be a star. So why are we letting him take playing time from someone who could be?

The reason so many people dislike royce is the fact that he's displacing 2 players. Technically 3 if you still remember Graffy at all... This should be the year that we finally find out if Crede is going to live up to the hype we have been hearing about him for so long. The only way to do that is stick him at third. That leaves one spot for the man who's bat we don't want to leave out of the lineup. SS.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte


See if you can answer this question.

Making whatever assumtions that make you happiest about other positions, to fill the SS position you would like it the most if:
a) Jose Valentin played SS most of the time.
b) Jose Valentin and Royce Clayton shared the SS position 50/50.
c) Royce Clayton played SS most of the time.
d) It doesn't matter because I am going to say something different in my next post anyway.


You're trying to trap me into saying that Jose Valentin and Royce Clayton are mutually exclusive. I won't do it. As long as Jose Valentin is in the lineup, I really don't care whether he's playing short or third. It's Valentin's bat that I care about, not his glove. So forget Jose Valentin. I threw out the OPS comparison to prove a point, which is that Clayton is a better hitter than people think.

Having said all that, I will answer your question. It would make me happiest to assume that Joe Crede will be a star. If that's the case, then I would like to see Valentin play short most of the time. BJ, if you guarantee me right now that Joe Crede will be a star, then I will happily jump on the "bench/release/eviscerate Royce" bandwagon, and I will drop the subject forever. But, barring Crede being a star (not a .260 hitter, a STAR), I would like to see Royce in the lineup.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by Iwritecode


Noone can guarantee that Joe Crede will be a star. He's got a pretty good chance though as well as he has played in the minors. The problem is that we can't even make an educated guess because he hasn't seen enough major-league PT! I can guarantee one thing though, Clayton will never be a star. So why are we letting him take playing time from someone who could be?

The reason so many people dislike royce is the fact that he's displacing 2 players. Technically 3 if you still remember Graffy at all... This should be the year that we finally find out if Crede is going to live up to the hype we have been hearing about him for so long. The only way to do that is stick him at third. That leaves one spot for the man who's bat we don't want to leave out of the lineup. SS.

Sorry, but the time to hand a rookie a starting job is not Opening Day. The time was last year, when we were 14-29. I'm as mad as the rest of you that Crede didn't get more playing time last year. That was the time to see what Joe Crede had, not the time to experiment around with Jose Canseco.

But that was the past, and Opening Day, especially Opening Day of a season in which you expect to compete, is not the time to hand over a starting job to Joe Crede. It's just too late to rectify that mistake. If the Sox go 14-29 again, then yes, do what it takes to get rid of Clayton and play Crede.

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz



You're trying to trap me into saying that Jose Valentin and Royce Clayton are mutually exclusive. I won't do it. As long as Jose Valentin is in the lineup, I really don't care whether he's playing short or third. It's Valentin's bat that I care about, not his glove. So forget Jose Valentin. I threw out the OPS comparison to prove a point, which is that Clayton is a better hitter than people think.

Having said all that, I will answer your question. It would make me happiest to assume that Joe Crede will be a star. If that's the case, then I would like to see Valentin play short most of the time. BJ, if you guarantee me right now that Joe Crede will be a star, then I will happily jump on the "bench/release/eviscerate Royce" bandwagon, and I will drop the subject forever. But, barring Crede being a star (not a .260 hitter, a STAR), I would like to see Royce in the lineup.

I really don't want to be a prick about this but it is pissing me off that you are not being straigt about this. Jose an Clayton are mutually exclusive in terms that we can only have one SS on the field at a time. Yes Jose can be in the lineup playing third or wherever while Royce is playing SS, but then you have chosen Royce over Jose in terms of the SS position.

Just on this thread (in different posts) you have said 1) Clayton is middle of the road but can have a roll coming of the bench or in case someone is injured, 2) Royce should be the starting SS, 3) Jose and Royce should share SS with Jose sharing 3rd with Crede, and 4) You would most like to see Jose as the starting SS.

I'm not trying to make you look stupid but you must have an actual opinion one way or another. Forget everything else, between Clayton and Valentin who do you like better as a shortstop for the Whitesox?!

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte


I really don't want to be a prick about this but it is pissing me off that you are not being straigt about this. Jose an Clayton are mutually exclusive in terms that we can only have one SS on the field at a time. Yes Jose can be in the lineup playing third or wherever while Royce is playing SS, but then you have chosen Royce over Jose in terms of the SS position.

Just on this thread (in different posts) you have said 1) Clayton is middle of the road but can have a roll coming of the bench or in case someone is injured, 2) Royce should be the starting SS, 3) Jose and Royce should share SS with Jose sharing 3rd with Crede, and 4) You would most like to see Jose as the starting SS.

I'm not trying to make you look stupid but you must have an actual opinion one way or another. Forget everything else, between Clayton and Valentin who do you like better as a shortstop for the Whitesox?!

Okay, here's what I would do if I ran the Sox (god forbid). This is the lineup I would field (barring trades or injury) on Opening Day.

2B - Durham
3B - Valentin
DH - Thomas
RF - Ordonez
1B - Konerko
LF - Lee
CF - Singleton / Rowand
C - Johnson / Paul / Alomar (whoever)
SS - Clayton

Now, if the Sox start out the season playing well, I don't tamper with that. Don't mess with success, right? But, if the Sox play poorly like they did last year, then I move Valentin to short and give Crede a chance to play every day.

So, it all depends on the situation. I can't give you a straight answer because there isn't a straight answer. I showed you what I would do if it were up to me, but a lot depends on how the Sox are doing, if anyone gets hurt, etc.

So, yes. All things being equal, I would like to see Royce Clayton as our Opening Day shortstop, and Jose Valentin as our Opening Day third baseman. Clear enough?

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
AAARRRGGGHHH!!! Has anybody on the board heard of platooning? Clayton and Valentin both played for the 2001 White Sox, why can't they play for the 2002 Sox?

If everyone agrees with Jerry that the 2002 season is going to be a bust, and it's going to be a rebuilding year, then I'll gladly support cutting Royce and sinking or swimming with Crede.


Valentin played center in 2001, he can't in 2002. So it's 3rd or short, as I've said before I really don't care anymore. Nobody agrees with me on that Czal, I'm a negative person.

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Okay, here's what I would do if I ran the Sox (god forbid). This is the lineup I would field (barring trades or injury) on Opening Day.

2B - Durham
3B - Valentin
DH - Thomas
RF - Ordonez
1B - Konerko
LF - Lee
CF - Singleton / Rowand
C - Johnson / Paul / Alomar (whoever)
SS - Clayton

Now, if the Sox start out the season playing well, I don't tamper with that. Don't mess with success, right? But, if the Sox play poorly like they did last year, then I move Valentin to short and give Crede a chance to play every day.

So, it all depends on the situation. I can't give you a straight answer because there isn't a straight answer. I showed you what I would do if it were up to me, but a lot depends on how the Sox are doing, if anyone gets hurt, etc.

So, yes. All things being equal, I would like to see Royce Clayton as our Opening Day shortstop, and Jose Valentin as our Opening Day third baseman. Clear enough?

Sure, you made your position pretty clear. And if you decide to stick with it I might even respect it.

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Valentin played center in 2001, he can't in 2002. So it's 3rd or short, as I've said before I really don't care anymore. Nobody agrees with me on that Czal, I'm a negative person.
I never said you were a negative person. I said at one time that you were acting like a crochety old man but only because you were. It must have just been a bad few days because lately it's back to the old Jerry.

irish rover
01-09-2002, 04:21 PM
I sorry but could you guys tell me what are these troll boards you guys talk about

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte
I never said you were a negative person. I said at one time that you were acting like a crochety old man but only because you were. It must have just been a bad few days because lately it's back to the old Jerry.

I'm a negative person by nature. I still believe that the Sox won't win the division in 2002. I haven't been to positive/funny as of late.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by irish rover
I sorry but could you guys tell me what are these troll boards you guys talk about

The "troll board" is the name given to the White Sox message board on espn.com. It's filled with Indian fans and Cub fans spitting out their bs.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I'm a negative person by nature. I still believe that the Sox won't win the division in 2002. I haven't been to positive/funny as of late.

Well, if you don't think the Sox have a good chance at the playoffs, then I can see why you'd want to get rid of Clayton and play Crede every day. If you're rebuilding, that's the time to give rookies their shot. So, like I said, if the Sox start playing like crap again next season, Crede better get his shot.

doublem23
01-09-2002, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Crede better get his shot.

Crede should have gotten his shot like 9 months ago.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by doublem23


Crede should have gotten his shot like 9 months ago.

No argument there - we should already know what kind of a player Joe Crede is by now, and there would be no point to this argument. Instead we go through the same b.s. we did last year. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Well, if you don't think the Sox have a good chance at the playoffs, then I can see why you'd want to get rid of Clayton and play Crede every day. If you're rebuilding, that's the time to give rookies their shot. So, like I said, if the Sox start playing like crap again next season, Crede better get his shot.

Czal, the Sox don't seem to know if their rebuilding or a real contender. Williams is talking out of both sides of his mouth. He claims that he doesn't want to "throw Joe to the wolves" and play him right away. But we know damn well that unless Borchard has an injury or a bad year in AA or AAA that he'll be the man in 2003. I understand Crede and Borchard are two different players, but that logic just doesn't make sense to me.

doublem23
01-09-2002, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


No argument there - we should already know what kind of a player Joe Crede is by now, and there would be no point to this argument. Instead we go through the same b.s. we did last year. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

:jerry
I already know what Joe can do.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Czal, the Sox don't seem to know if their rebuilding or a real contender. Williams is talking out of both sides of his mouth. He claims that he doesn't want to "throw Joe to the wolves" and play him right away. But we know damn well that unless Borchard has a injury or a bad year in AA or AAA that he'll be the man in 2003. I understand Crede and Borchard are two different players, but that logic just doesn't make sense to me.

I was pretty angry about the way they handled Crede last year. Manuel had him on the bench, he had plenty of opportunities to play him, and he didn't. He just sat there. Now, at this point in the season, Clayton was hitting well, and Valentin did deserve to be in the lineup as well, but he should have worked Crede in a lot more - at least 150-200 PAs.

Borchard is a different story - I'm betting that he'll be called up at the latest Sept. 1 this year unless (like you said) he gets hurt or starts struggling. There is a spot open for him right now...

:slowswing

why is everyone looking at me?

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Borchard is a different story - I'm betting that he'll be called up at the latest Sept. 1 this year unless (like you said) he gets hurt or starts struggling. There is a spot open for him right now...


As I've said numerous times in the past week, I fully expect Williams to make one more run at Darrin Erstad. If my hoping/wishing comes through and Erstad ends up here, we know who goes to make room for Borchard.

:caballo
Send me to New York please.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


As I've said numerous times in the past week, I fully expect Williams to make one more run at Darrin Erstad. If my hoping/wishing comes through and Erstad ends up here, we know who goes to make room for Borchard.

:caballo
Send me to New York please.

Well, if you're right, I hope that KW doesn't get quite so eager as he was last time.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Well, if you're right, I hope that KW doesn't get quite so eager as he was last time.

Do you want to see Erstad here? I for one would love to see his name in the leadoff spot over Durham. I like Ray but he's the leadoff hitter on this team because nobody else can be. Some have suggested Jose but I don't like that idea.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Do you want to see Erstad here? I for one would love to see his name in the leadoff spot over Durham. I like Ray but he's the leadoff hitter on this team because nobody else can be. Some have suggested Jose but I don't like that idea.

I'd love to see Erstad leading off, with Ray batting second, and Valentin 6th, Lee 7th. That lineup would be killer.

It's just that Williams offered a lot, IMO, for one year of Darin Erstad.

bjmarte
01-09-2002, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Well, if you're right, I hope that KW doesn't get quite so eager as he was last time.

Well on that I will agree with you. I wouldn't mind seeing Erstad in a Sox uni, but not at that price.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
It's just that Williams offered a lot, IMO, for one year of Darin Erstad.

There is no doubt in my mind that they we're going to sign him. Williams said that Chairman Reinsdorf would allow that to happen.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


There is no doubt in my mind that they we're going to sign him. Williams said that Chairman Reinsdorf would allow that to happen.

The only way that that is a good deal is if Erstad recovers and plays like he did before last season, and the Sox sign him to an extension before then.

Anyway, I don't think the Sox can afford to trade Jon Garland at this point. Who would you offer at this point to get him? Lee?

longshot7
01-09-2002, 05:55 PM
watching the Angels do an about-face this offseason, and can the rebuilding mode with signing a few pitchers, I seriously don't think they'll be offering up Erstad, one year left or not, any time soon.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
The only way that that is a good deal is if Erstad recovers and plays like he did before last season, and the Sox sign him to an extension before then.

Anyway, I don't think the Sox can afford to trade Jon Garland at this point. Who would you offer at this point to get him? Lee?

I really think it depends on when Williams goes after him. If he tries to get him at the deadline, that won't be pretty. If Williams tries now (before spring training) then I would guess:

Lee
Almonte
West
Singleton?

Looks like to much to give up but I really don't know.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by longshot7
watching the Angels do an about-face this offseason, and can the rebuilding mode with signing a few pitchers, I seriously don't think they'll be offering up Erstad, one year left or not, any time soon.


If he is available at the end of the year, then sign him.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 06:29 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel



If he is available at the end of the year, then sign him.

That will be funny -

:KW

Can I have Darin Erstad for Christmas, uncle Jerry?

:reinsy

I don't know, he's kind of expensive...

:KW

pleeeeeeeease?

:reinsy

Oh what the heck, Merry Christmas, everyone!!!


And Jerry Reinsdorf's heart grew three sizes too large. And all the poor little Sox fans had a merry Christmas after all...

Sorry, I'm being stupid. That's just what popped into my head.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
And Jerry Reinsdorf's heart grew three sizes too large. And all the poor little Sox fans had a merry Christmas after all...

Sorry, I'm being stupid. That's just what popped into my head.

I'd be happy if they signed Erstad. Of course with him signed that means adios Ray, with Hummel taking over 2nd base. Holy Crap! I just remembered that. There is a real chance of the Sox having 3 rookies in the starting lineup in 2003.

2B: Hummel
3B: Crede
CF: Borchard

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I'd be happy if they signed Erstad. Of course with him signed that means adios Ray, with Hummel taking over 2nd base. Holy Crap! I just remembered that. There is a real chance of the Sox having 3 rookies in the starting lineup in 2003.

2B: Hummel
3B: Crede
CF: Borchard

That could be very good, and it could be very bad. If all three of those guys turn out to be stars, we a great lineup 1-8. Of course, you're forgetting future Hall-of-Famer Miguel Olivo, as well... We could have four rookies starting in 2003.

PaleHoseGeorge
01-09-2002, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
No argument there - we should already know what kind of a player Joe Crede is by now, and there would be no point to this argument. Instead we go through the same b.s. we did last year. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

And yet, the everyday line up you posted earlier today sticks Crede on the bench again, presumably so you can accommodate an everyday position for Royce Clayton. You've got Valentin stuck at third base, blocking Crede.

Great thinking. "The more things change, the more things stay the same," indeed!

PaleHoseGeorge
01-09-2002, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
I was pretty angry about the way they handled Crede last year. Manuel had him on the bench, he had plenty of opportunities to play him, and he didn't. He just sat there. Now, at this point in the season, Clayton was hitting well, and Valentin did deserve to be in the lineup as well, but he should have worked Crede in a lot more - at least 150-200 PAs.

Were you watching the same team the rest of us were? If you were "pretty angry about the way they handled Crede last year", you must have been blowing smoke out your ears about how they treated Herbert Perry! Precisely what did our championship team's everyday thirdbasemen do to spend virtually the entire 2001 season on the bench? Play hurt for a couple of weeks?

You're painting yourself deeper and deeper into a corner, Cz. Why don't you just admit you want Royce for your everyday shortstop for reasons you simply can't explain? That much is becoming painfully obvious.

FarmerAndy
01-09-2002, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by mrwag
A guy can bat .300 and still not be considered a great hitter. Why? You need to dig deeper. Did he hit .400 with nobody on and .100 with runners in scoring position? Clayton may have had better "numbers", but who do you want in a clutch situation? Let's say runner on 3rd, bottom ninth, 2 out, and a tied game 3 in the World Series . At bat is Clayton. Do you pinch hit with Jose? F**k yeah! 'Nuff said.

Clayton's June - October "numbers" weren't deceiving. In fact, Royce was best at the plate when there were 2 outs with runners in scoring position.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


And yet, the everyday line up you posted earlier today sticks Crede on the bench again, presumably so you can accommodate an everyday position for Royce Clayton. You've got Valentin stuck at third base, blocking Crede.

Great thinking. "The more things change, the more things stay the same," indeed!

No, George, you didn't read my entire argument. Crede should have been playing third base every day LAST year, when the Sox were out of it. It's too late now. To hand an untested rookie a starting position and get rid of Clayton, which is what so many of you are dying to do, is not a smart idea at the beginning of a new season, unless you're going to call it a rebuilding year.

Crede sits the bench now because he sat the bench last year. It was a mistake to bench him back then, but they missed their window to correct it, until the Sox are out of contention again.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 08:47 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Were you watching the same team the rest of us were? If you were "pretty angry about the way they handled Crede last year", you must have been blowing smoke out your ears about how they treated Herbert Perry! Precisely what did our championship team's everyday thirdbasemen do to spend virtually the entire 2001 season on the bench? Play hurt for a couple of weeks?

You're painting yourself deeper and deeper into a corner, Cz. Why don't you just admit you want Royce for your everyday shortstop for reasons you simply can't explain? That much is becoming painfully obvious.

Herbert Perry was dead weight the second half of last season. He simply wasn't the ballplayer he was when he first joined the club. I always liked Herbert Perry, but his time was past on the ballclub. I hate to say "what have you done for me lately?" but hey, that's the nature of the beast.

And yes, until you show me that the White Sox have a better option, I will take Royce Clayton as our starting shortstop.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 08:47 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
It's too late now. To hand an untested rookie a starting position and get rid of Clayton, which is what so many of you are dying to do, is not a smart idea at the beginning of a new season, unless you're going to call it a rebuilding year.

Crede sits the bench now because he sat the bench last year. It was a mistake to bench him back then, but they missed their window to correct it, until the Sox are out of contention again.

I don't see it as a rebuilding year, I just see way to many hurt players coming back. When I hear the word "contention" I think of World Series, not Central division. Granted, we didn't expect big things from the 2000 team and more specifically the starting staff. Maybe they'll surprise us once again, however what happens in the playoffs is no shock to Sox fans.

This should be the Sox logo:
:ohno

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


I don't see it as a rebuilding year, I just see way to many hurt players coming back. When I hear the word "contention" I think of World Series, not Central division. Granted, we didn't expect big things from the 2000 team and more specifically the starting staff. Maybe they'll surprise us once again, however what happens in the playoffs is no shock to Sox fans.

This should be the Sox logo:
:ohno

Worse teams have gone to the World Series. All you need to do is make the playoffs. The Yankees were not the best team in the league last season, or the season before, yet they managed to go to the World Series both years. Anything can happen in a best-of-5 or best-of-7 playoffs.

the White Sox will not be the best team in the AL next season. They will probably be at best the 4th best team in the AL. But the way things are lined up, that'll be good enough to give them a shot. If you've got a shot, you should go for it.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


You're painting yourself deeper and deeper into a corner, Cz. Why don't you just admit you want Royce for your everyday shortstop for reasons you simply can't explain? That much is becoming painfully obvious.

Jeez, talk about a straw man... If I could have my choice of any shortstop in the world to play for the Chicago White Sox, it would not be Royce Clayton. I don't think of Royce Clayton as an All-Star, and I'm not happy that he's our best option at short. But he is our best option at short. I've already explained why about 10 times. If the Sox can unearth someone who's a better option at short, or give me a reason to move Jose Valentin back there, then I'll happily wave bye-bye to Royce. Until that day, I will defend Royce Clayton.

Daver
01-09-2002, 09:10 PM
I think this adds another chapter to the longest on-going argument at WSI,Manos versus Rocks and Garbage.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by daver
I think this adds another chapter to the longest on-going argument at WSI,Manos versus Rocks and Garbage.

It never ends, does it? Nor will it until all have admitted the glory that is Royce Clayton! Or at least until the Sox get someone better.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Worse teams have gone to the World Series. All you need to do is make the playoffs. The Yankees were not the best team in the league last season, or the season before, yet they managed to go to the World Series both years. Anything can happen in a best-of-5 or best-of-7 playoffs.

the White Sox will not be the best team in the AL next season. They will probably be at best the 4th best team in the AL. But the way things are lined up, that'll be good enough to give them a shot. If you've got a shot, you should go for it.

The Yankees had pitching, the Sox don't. Buehrle is very much unproven and who knows what Ritchie will do. How do you size up the AL Czal? Yes, anything can happen when you get to the playoffs, but just not for the Sox.

Here's my 1-4:

1. Yankees
2. Seattle
3. Oakland
4. I guess the Sox but in my eyes it's like the tallest midget.

czalgosz
01-09-2002, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


The Yankees had pitching, the Sox don't. Buehrle is very much unproven and who knows what Ritchie will do. How do you size up the AL Czal? Yes, anything can happen when you get to the playoffs, but just not for the Sox.

Here's my 1-4:

1. Yankees
2. Seattle
3. Oakland
4. I guess the Sox but in my eyes it's like the tallest midget.

Well, like you said, anything can happen. I'd reverse the A's and Mariners, but otherwise I'd agree with you about the top 4 in the AL.

Jerry_Manuel
01-09-2002, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by czalgosz
Well, like you said, anything can happen. I'd reverse the A's and Mariners, but otherwise I'd agree with you about the top 4 in the AL.

That's not exactly what I said Czal, I agree that anything can happen in the playoffs. However unless I've missed something like 1959 or the early 1900's, playoff madness doesn't work for the Sox.

Huisj
01-09-2002, 10:27 PM
About that 3 rookies thing in 2003 . . . I doubt Crede will be a rookie anymore by then. He should get the needed plate appearances this year to be considered a rookie already this season, even if he does just have a part time roll. just watch.

Fox 2 6 21
01-10-2002, 04:08 AM
Okay, first off, if that fire under Royce's tail is still lit and keeps him in gear like he was in the 2nd half....we got a shot...IF he starts the season out that way....but either way, we've all got him for another season...like it or not....tho, if he stays in gear, I'ld probably be in favore of keeping him for another round.....and two, the only way it'll be a rebuilding year is if someone (please dear lord) gets Lenny the hell outta here.....the three for one deal is IT!!! I was HOPING someone woulda hit him by now.... :angry: .....but all in all....I'm STILL pulling for this year to be ours....it's been TOO long for it NOT to be. :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

- Fox

Jerry_Manuel
01-10-2002, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by Huisj
About that 3 rookies thing in 2003 . . . I doubt Crede will be a rookie anymore by then. He should get the needed plate appearances this year to be considered a rookie already this season, even if he does just have a part time roll. just watch.

True, but I look at guys playing in their first full year as rookies. It's not really that important.