rician blast

Rumors are firming up that perhaps Foulke will accept arb from the Sox after all. To the FO, I say "all this for a a draft pick?" http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-061204baseballwhispers,1,5058149.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines

Is this enough for the Stros? and who'd play SS for the Dodgers?

GAFFanino? Sox have been there...done that. Assuming Sox score a legit SS, I think Cora provides about what the Gaffer would in terms of security up the middle.

Was just looking at the FA list and rotoworld's potential trades and I thought the exact same thing...lots of guys who may be comeback candidates...or could just as easily be has beens.

I heard that there's a burning question in the Sox clubhouse...who throws a harder fastball....Foulke or Wakefield? If Foulke gets $6m in arbitration, as someone suggested is possible, then IMO the Sox fkd up offering arb.

Crunch, could we soon be hearing the same taunts toward Drew that some threw at Garciappara in early to mid 2004 back in the old BH forum.... Drew has a mangina?

I agree its risky. But it is not impossible. Then again, targeting and/or relying on Gagne is risky as well due to health issues, making a trade for a guy like Broxton and expecting him to close carries risk, hoping Hansen or Delcarmen or any other current member of the roster can carry the load is a huge risk. Getting a bonafide closer is going to cost whether its done now or in-season and the FO's approach thus far seems to be NOT to overpay at that position.

It also worked in 2003...sort of. After 4-5 months of "closer by committe", the Sox eventually settled on Williamson as closer, Timlin/Embree as the late inning right/lefty combo and into the playoffs it worked like a dream. Of course there was one guy who apparently didn't notice how effective they were and decided to leave Petey in during Game 7. The audition approach can work...but there is some risk that you never find the right guy and it costs the team in the long-run.

Basing my opinion on what I saw, as opposed to just the raw numbers, I thought Tek looked horrible at the plate last year. His swing, his timing, his pitch selection were all shaky. Personally I don't expect much from him offensively. Then again, this is a guy who (I think) in 2003's ALCS was batting 9th for the Sox behind Billy Mueller. I think that he belongs at the bottom of the order anyway, so if he can still handle the staff effectively and be strong behind the plate, I'm ok with a .260, 12-15 HR type season (provided Manny is still here and there's some production coming out of the 6-7 spots).

Personally I think post-season awards are overrated and because of their subjective nature should be taken somewhat more lightly. I'm not sure what Pujols motivation was for making the comment. Was he asked directly "do you think you should have won the MVP?" or did he just fire-off his comments out of anger that he wasn't selected? If its the former, I'd have liked to hear him say "keep the award...I got one in 2005 and now have a World Series title to go with it," and leave it at that. Just don't know the context of the comments.

But also right now Mulder would not require an open spot in any rotation since he'll only be rehabbing early in 2007. He'd have a lot to prove before a spot was reserved for him. HOSN is absolutely correct in reminding us of 2006...an apparent abundance of starting pitching ended up being a dearth in pitching and it cost the team big time.

There's got to be more to it. If the issue was losing a 1st round pick and getting Lugo vs. going into 2007 with no solid SS, then there'd be no decision to make, IMO. I can't see how they'd proceed with the SS position unfilled, simply to save a draft pick that more often than not turns out to be nothing special. If the Sox are serious that this is a real issue, it must mean that they have other ideas for SS besides Pedroia or Cora. My guess is it is posturing while they work other options and hope Lugo's price comes down.

speaking of 4 hitters...personally I have always felt a team's best hitter s/b in the 3-hole. For the Sox that would be Manny. Imagine his # if he had Papi hitting behind him? Krist, I'm surprised he never complained about who protected him in the line-up.

From MLB.Com, 11/29/06 Mulder, 29, is coming off an injury-shortened season during which he went 6-7 with a 7.14 ERA. The left-hander was bothered by his shoulder throughout the year and eventually underwent arthroscopic surgery to repair a rotator cuff tear in mid-September. When he'll be able to pitch again is unclear, but according to Clifton, there were a few things that were certain. One is that Mulder is four weeks ahead of schedule, and the southpaw will start a throwing program in early January. After that, Clifton said, it should be eight weeks before Mulder is able to throw off a mound, which would be around the first or second week of March. "After that, there are no rules, so to speak -- no timetable," Clifton said. "How he feels will determine how he progresses." Since there are some unknowns, could be teams are hangin on for a while til more progress is made. The worst case scenario would be to sign him and have him have a major setback before we even get out of early December. Of course there's the other side of the coin, where a team waits too long and he's scoffed up by someone. Since it ain't my money I say to the Sox FO grab him.

i thought I read he was going to start throwing in January '07 and be ready in the late spring...unless I'm thinking of someone else.

Funny you should mention Mulder, I was just wondering about where he'd land this a.m. I think any deal would have to be incentive-laden, since he's coming off surgery. But you are right, when the Cards picked him up he was considered a top of the rotation guy. He sucked last year before he went down, but perhaps that was the looming arm-troubles talking. I'm guessing someone takes a shot at him, but wonder if right now he and his agent are playing it based on his 2001-2005 seasons and trying to discount the '06 season. I'd be for the Sox taking a shot at him.

Agree, but I'd have to believe that the Sox would need to include another player and/or eat some of Manny's salary. Seems like too much to give up by the Padres. Gonzalez had an OPS of .862 in his first full season in 2006, we know the line on Peavey and the importance of young, cheap and effective starting pitching, and Linebrink is a solid reliever and is still only 30.

:wtf: Can't let go, huh? Didn't I say "done with this issue" and "movin' on" after I went to great lengths to explain the reason for my post, highlight the general perception of your posts and illustrate how you go too far sometimes? This is priceless. What's really funny is that you say you only incite those with lower intellects and self-esteem...and you said those who respond to your post are the genetic misfits...yet you keep responding to posts by those same supposedly inferior individuals. So by your OWN measure, where does that leave you on your scale? Right...rock bottom. Keep it up, GOMster. You're a comedic genius, but the joke is really on you. Thanks for the entertainment.

Willis may be better and he is younger, but it'd be pretty hard to justify any move of Wang at this point. He may be a Yank but damn the kid has been good...27-11 thus far in his MLB career. What I'd really hate to see is him AND Wang in the same rotation, assuming the Yankees found a way to make a deal without losing Chin.

WMP would become a focal point if Manny goes and LF is Pena's to man.

Lighten up? Grow up? This just keeps getting better. I'd say your tirade above indicates that its you that should lighten up. And as always you entirely missed the point of the post. It was not to attribute your comment to me, but simply to point out that, in general, your postings in this forum are often inciteful and serve no purpose other than to bust balls. The name calling and insults and baiting grow old...yet I'm somehow the one who needs to grow up? I assure you I did not take your post seriously and was not offended, I just was trying to make a point without having to spell it out to you. I apologize for attempting to shed light on the shortcomings of your posting habits in hopes that you might refrain from such boorish postings and actually develop some degree of credibility here amongst the Sox faithful. It was all for you, GOM...see my benevolence knows few boundaries..but since you are not of interested I'll leave you to your own devices. I'm done with this issue...movin' on.

hmmm...genetic misfits? So now you are attacking our parents? unfortunately mine passed away not too long ago, within 6 months of each other, not due to any "genetic" shortcomings, but of cancer. So the very folks you converse with here daily are considered, by yourself, to be "idiots" and "morons", and are now the product of inferior genetics? Nice. Really nice work. Thanks for exposing yourself for what you really are, GOM.