santo=dorf

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Nov 23, 2006 -> 05:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nobody bought tickets to see the hecklers. You don't show up to a concert, pull out your guitar and say "Hey, [insert your favorite artist whose concert you'd attend] watch this!" and start playing your guitar. If the hecklers didn't want to get blasted then they keep their f***ing mouths shut. If you don't like what was said how about leaving? Or getting a drink, taking a piss and coming back when there is another comic on stage? Gee, that would be a logical idea. But no, let's give hecklers a free pass. None of you would like hecklers at your job yet you seem to think it is okay to have them for this man's job. And he was ignorant for saying n***** but the "oppressed" hecklers were not ignorant for calling him a "cracker"? I'm just trying to get my PC thought process correct here. This is really reminding me of the Pacers-Pistons brawl with some people blaming all the events on the fan throwing the cup. I don't think people are defending the hecklers for being jerks, but the fact is these are things professionals have to deal with. I'm guessing a comic is less likely to have hacklers if his/her material doesn't suck. It also wouldn't hurt for a comic to act appropriately, like not using a racial slur that is used to attack a large group of people on one person, when dealing with these types of morons. Richards and Artest weren't the victims. There's been this discussion before on the word "n*****" and other "really bad slurs" compared to "redneck," or "hillbilly." IMO an insult like "honkee" or "cracker" doesn't have the history like "n*****." Also, who is saying that it was ok for the guy to call him a "cracker" but was wrong for Kramer calling him "n*****?" I saw one person make the point that Michael started it, but to me that doesn't make it PC for the heckler to call insult him with a racial insult. LCR, do you have a problems with hecklers at baseball games? I suppose a couple years ago it would have been OK for Craig Monroe to stop patrolling LF, turn around, call me a "honkee" 20 times or so and make a scene because I was asking him to sign my belt and he if he had a receipt??? Yeah right. Oh I forgot, baseball isn't an "art" like stand-up. :rolly

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Nov 20, 2006 -> 11:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you related to him or something? It seems that you have everything completely backwards... Your first assumption is that they heckled him because he wasn't being kramer. Maybe he just a horrible comic?? That's basically been the consensus opinion... Your other assumption is that the "jackasses/douchebags" were "getting it thrown back at them" when it seems from the video that he was getting it thrown back at him. They didn't call him a cracker (tame, in my opinion) until his whole "pitchforking n*****s" comment along with throwing around the n word about 20 times. The ignorant tirade was uncalled for. Saying he's a washed-up has-been after the ignorance he spewed was called for, in my opinion. He's the jackass and the douchebag for not being a professional and handling the situation in the worst way possible. I was going to say the same things. So comics should get a free pass even if their material sucks? Please. Listen closer to the audio at the end. Doesn't that big "Kramer" fan say "all you had was Seinfield?"

Hendry has always loved Soriano. What was the point signing DeRosa again? Soriano would rather play CF instead of second? He should do well in that ballpark, but what's his motivation going to be after getting this kind of money?

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 06:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I counted 14 bad starts last year. Thats 14 games with 4 plus earned runs which seamed to be the criteria used for Javy. Buehrle had 15, Contreras had 13, and Garland had 13. I guess Vazquez was our best last season.

To be honest I can't see why Texas would give up Otsuka. Who's going to be their closer?

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 06:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> //Note to self: Six september starts are worth more than the 27 that preceded those six. Got it. I didn't make that claim so I don't know how you drew that conclusion from my post. I'm the one who has been using the entire season stats for our players. I'm not the one chopping off starts and stats to make a player look worse.

It's so funny. Thome's "bad" September = not clutch when we needed him Garcia's good September = doesn't matter because it was against garbage teams. I'm not saying you're trying to have it both ways Dick, but these are common comments on Soxtalk. The Sox were still in it when Garcia nearly threw a perfecto, but that Oakland series was killer for me. SSI71 thinks the season ended in August. I guess we should just throw some of Jermaine's stats out the window and not have to worry about Buehrle's end of the season struggles.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 04:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Where was this magical stuff during the time when we had a lead in the wild card race and when we were in a stone throw of the division. When we were in Oakland we were on life support for the season. To me the season was lost in July and August when the team crapped the bed, Including your super pitcher Freddy. You can cherry pick all you want. During the 2nd part of the season, he had a crappy July and a crappy August. Which is the stretch run time for the playoffs. By the time we hit september we were on life support and needed all sorts of magic to get in. He had a nice month of september. If he decided to pitch like that in August or in July would it of helped a bit more. Probably. This whole sentence is very hypocritical. I used the ENTIRE season of stats to compare Jon and Freddy. How come you're not as hard on everyone else if the whole team "crapped the bed?" Like I mentioned before. If Freddy pitched like you wanted to (good in April and May) but didn't pitch well in September, you'd be using the same excuse the idiotic Thome bashers were using. " He was great in early on, but where was he in September when we needed him the most?" Anybody know where we can find a pitcher who wins every game and gives the exact same results in every outing?

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 04:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Garland wasn't good last year either, in fact he was about as inconsistant as anyone but Freddy was worse. Freddy has also lost some stuff, is older and is under contract for less years. Garland is a better pitcher to keep around than Freddy, though if we can't trade Freddy, Jon is my next choice to go. I'm just trying to say Jon shouldn't be untouchable and more people should be discussing his name in trade talks. I rather have a player win the big games and lose against lesser opponents. If it was the other people would be saying "Freddy couldn't stop the big teams like we needed him to, and he was only good against garbage teams."

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> His clutch ass had a 5.72 ERA in August and a 5.52 ERA in July. That was the clutch part of the season when we went from being 6 games up on the wild card to running behind. He s*** the bed in the bronx when we needed him to be clutch. It was on the road, during the day against a good team. Well they were depositing dongs over the fence. We needed him to pitch well when the season was on the line, not after the entire thing was pretty much done. But he decided to show up in september after pretty much the entire thing was put to bed. Thanks for showing up Mr. 86mph. Exactly which day were the Sox dead for the playoffs? For me it was the series in Oakland, you know, the series right AFTER Freddy almost threw a perfect game. Garland vs. Garcia IP: 211.1 vs. 216.1 W: 18 vs. 17 L: 7 vs. 8 ERA: 4.51 vs. 4.53 WHIP: 1.36 vs. 1.28 K/BB: 2.73 vs. 2.81 OBA: .328 vs. .308 SLGA: .460 vs..444 ERA+: 103 vs. 103 (For CWSguy, Cheat and qwerty )

Freddy Garcia had a 5.45 ERA on May 8th. A great outing against the Angels dropped it to 4.64. His ERA didn't hit 5 again until a poor Sunday night performance against the Indians on June 11th. So that's an entire month of NOT having above 5 like some of you are claiming. On Jun 22 his great performance against the World Champion Cardinals got it below 5 again. It didn't go back over 5 (5.07) until his Yankee outing on Jul 16th. So there's 3 more weeks of it not being over 5. He would drop his ERA again and it didn't reach 5 (5.05) until August 29th. That's another 5 weeks with it below 5. After his near perfect bid against the Angels his ERA was below 5 again. So this stretch of season some of you describing (I'm starting with May 9th before Cheat's time frame) was 32 Days out of 144. Hardly "Most of the season" For some perspective, Jon Garland's ERA didn't see the south of 5.00 until JULY 23rd!!! It then went back to 5.01 after his next start, and hit 5.16 on August 9th yet he continues to get a free pass.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And people are actually arguing to keep Freddy, not to be too rude, what the f*** are they smoking. Did they or did they not watch him pitch last year. How many times did this guy dog it against a team that he couldnt get up for, because it was beneath him. Freddy Garcia was arguably our best pitcher last season, yet people are so quick to kick him to the curb. How many times did he step it up big time when we neede him the most? Judging by his record and numbers with the Sox, it happened a lot more time than the situation you are mentioning.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well you can think that way if you choose. IMO the problem with us hitting LHP isnt going to be solved or even partially solved by a backup catcher. It certainly wouldn't hurt to fill a hole (back up catcher) with a guy who has a gun, can throw out runners and is only signed pretty cheap for one more year. It won't fix the whole LHP problem, but it would certainly help.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What are you trying to say about Ervin? He's pitched about 135 innings on the road. Are you saying those innings have any predictive value whatsoever? You honestly believe he's going to be a six ERA pitcher going forward because his road stats (which, as I said, are in an extremely limited sample)? Maybe you're not meaning that, but it sure seems like you're indicating that you'd strongly dislike a Garcia for Santana trade. BTW, call me crazy, I'd throw in Fields even if we didn't get anything back besides Santana. One year of Garcia + Six years of Josh Fields for what, four years of Ervin Santana? Hellzz yes, although I don't really like Fields as a prospect, so maybe that clouds my judgement. IMO Santana isn't a lock to live up the expectations. Yes he will probably get better, and yes we would have him under control for some time, but we don't have time to expect two youngsters develop into our rotation. Trading for Santana doesn't solve our rotation issues. We would still have to trade another starter. Some more on Jose Molina; he's already signed for next season at only $1.25 million, and here's the latest rotoworld blurb on him The Angels were reportedly unhappy with Jose Molina's "conditioning efforts" last season and could trade or release him if he shows up to spring training out of shape. The team is reportedly still high on catching prospect Jeff Mathis despite sending him down after a slow start last year, but at this point the job remains Mike Napoli's to lose. Source: Los Angeles Times

How about geting Jose Molina? The Angels aren't happy with him, his conditioning has been questioned, and they have Mathis and Napoli, perhaps we could get him for nothing. Aside from last year, he hits lefties pretty well, career CS% of 43%, and Hawk always talks about how clutch he is. Anybody (Chisofn?) know much about his game calling?

His name is spelled "Vasquez." Easy to remember: Vasquez s=steroids Javy Vazquez z= zoloft

QUOTE(WCSox @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 02:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He was also awful at The Cell in '04, not very good there last year, and then halfway decent there this year (in comparison to his bad overall numbers). I don't put a lot of stock in how a player pitches in a particular ballpark historically, especially when considering stats from several years ago (back when Freddy was an ace... which is obviously isn't anymore). Somebody miss my post. Freddy was "halfway decent" at the Cell this year? His numbers at the Cell were better than Santana's overall numbers, and his 2005 numbers (which you call not very good) aren't too far from Santana's this past season. We're not talking about "several years ago" here. We're talking about the past 2 and a half seasons. What are you trying to say about Ervin?

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's what I mean. If we were to trade for Santana, would you rather trade Ervin or McCarthy to the Rays for Crawford? Which guy is projected to be better? Yes I would.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just for the sake of arguing, would people rather trade McCarthy or Santana for Crawford? I'd be in favor of trading something for Santana then trading him for Crawford. Wasn't Tampa rumored to be interested in Santana last year?

Or maybe the Angels see he only pitches well in Anaheim or there are problems with his elbow.

Actually...... Tracy Ringolsby of the Rocky Mountain News said J.D. Drew is expected to sign a two-year, $30 million deal with the New England Yankees. There have also been rumors of a four-year deal worth about $52 million. If the short-term deal is the choice, it might be because of the Yankees Jr.'s refusal to give out full no-trade clauses.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I would take those #'s from a 24 year old who has 2 years of ML Service time and is making the league minimum. I might too, but I wouldn't do it at the expense of trading Freddy. Soriano was in a contract year, playing in an inferior NL, and batted .260 at Washington. However he was able to slug well enough to get his OPS over .900. As for Nomar, I only see one year where he was healthy and had a huge differential between Road and Fenway Numbers (2003.) Poor example.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree. I give credit, Bruce knows his Chicago stuff. Nationally, no. I agree too. And in case it hasn't been mentioned, earlier in the week Bruce shot down the idea of the Sox going after Rowand. He says the organization views Rowand as a 4th OF.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I can't imagine the Angels would give up Santana and something else for Garcia. Santana's numbers are just as good if not better than Freddy's and he's a lot younger and cheaper, and will be cheaper for a few seasons. I think Deluca is full of it. Santana is not better than Freddy and if he came to the Sox he would be even worse. Look at these splits: 2006 Home: 10-2, 3.02 ERA, 1.10 WHIP 2006 Away: 6-6, 5.95 ERA, 1.40 WHIP Career Home: 19-5. 3.09 ERA, 1.14 WHIP Career Away: 9-11, 6.46 ERA, 1.53 Just some perspective, here's Garcia's numbers at USCF 2006: 4.11 ERA, 1.26 WHIP 2005: 4.38 ERA, 1.39 WHIP 2004: 5.37 ERA, 1.40 WHIP Freddy gets a lot of flack for being "terrible" at home, but Santana's road numbers are much worse than Garcia's numbers at USCF. Just say NO to Santana. He's another one of these guys that ESPN talks up and has splits that tell another story. (See Blalock and Young.)

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 09:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Outside of facing us wasn't Santana a little down last year as oppossed to the previuos year? I could be wrong but I thought he tappered off, again not agaisnt us. For one he's absolutely brutal pitching away from Anaheim Stadium. I thought about the Angels as a partner for Freddy. He always pitches well against them.