southsideirish

QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Welcome. Nice analysis. I'm going to pass on doing that and just leave it as my opinion on the matter. Kay? Thanks. Whatever.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How bad it was for the Sox to tell Widger what they did depends entirely on whether or not it was true. if it was, and his prep and schedule wasn't acceptable, then they did the right thing. If it was actually his play that was the reason, and they chose to spin it otherwise to send a message to the club... then that was just crappy. And here is the thing - we have no idea which is the case. Without that information, its hard to judge. Why say that if it is not true? I don't know why they would spin it that way. What is the purpose of doing that? How does it send a better message to the club? The entire team can see if he is preparing or not. If he is prepared and ready and the team can see and know this, yet he is being called out by the GM and coaches for not being prepared and for being lazy, what kind of message does that send to the team? I think it sends a very poor message. It just doesn't make any sense for it to be spun that way to send a message to the team. If anything, it sends a terrible message and could turn the team against the coaches and staff. QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ^^. Thanks NSS72. However, there is no information to state that they did this. Yet, you are Please, let us hear your information and why you think this is the case. Because it sure doesn't seem to be the case to me.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they did. Really? How do you know? Please tell. Why would the make up that excuse? It just doesn't add up. It is much easier to tell someone that they have to be let go because of under performing instead of singling out one particular thing, especially being under prepared.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Please show me where did I say the Sox went to the media with this information... Does this or does this not pertain to the Widger stuff? If it does not, then why is it there? It leads one to assume that you are continuing to write about the same situation or topic. Yet, you would be talking about something else, perhaps the Padilla situation? OK, but what makes it belong here? How does it all tie in? Unless of course you are talking about the Wider situation. If not, then how did the White Sox show a lack of class in the Widger situation, but did so with the Politte situation? How did Wideger get crapped on? I will now hang up and wait for my answers. QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure seems there like you're saying that the team did something inappropriate in coming out from behind the closed doors to me. Was that post directed at some other incident that came forwards that I didn't hear about? agreed. QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The second comment was in regards to Garland. I copied it over from the closed thread...? Can they not be copied because they are in a locked thread? And no, I didn't say the Sox came out from closed doors with the Wider info. I said have some class about it. Uhhh Ummm, how did the White Sox not show class about this? Did you want them to lie to him?

QUOTE(Whitewashed in @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 06:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't like what the team did in regards to his departure. KW and co don't like calling people out, but in this instance they did. Something must have happened because KW does not show up his players not named Frank. I feel really bad for Widge because even though he has been terrible, its sad. I don't know what really happened, but for them to call him lazy thats terrible. Good luck Widger. When did KW and Co. call him out? They told this to him behind closed doors. A reporter asked Widger if he knew why he was being released/designated for assignment. Widger then told the press that he was told by the general manager that it was due to his lack of game preparation. Widger took the information and went to the press with it. He didn't have to do that, but he did. It is f***ed up that you are going to blame the White Sox organization for something that they didn't even do. That was a moronic statement. Next time get all the facts straight before pointing the finger. QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 01:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm just going to kind of echo the statements of other people here, but I think this situation was handled very poorly. At first, I couldn't believe that Widger didn't KNOW why he was being released. Then I read some more into it, and they're going to straight up call the guy lazy? That's not right. Tell him you're just not getting the job done. In other words, you suck. As a former athlete (and I'm sure there are many former atheltes on this board), I'd rather have a coach tell me I suck than tell me I'm not trying hard enough. Because, quite frankly, that was the case in my athletic career. It wasn't for a lack of effort, that's for sure. It would be different if Widger really wasn't doing anything before games besides drinking gatorade and seeing how far he can spit seeds, but I HIGHLY doubt that was the case. With that said, welcome back Sandy. Good luck Widger, I just hope we won't be seeing your WS ring on eBay in 20 years. So you want your GM and coaches to lie? That is kind of silly. Let me protect the guys ego and confidence and lie to him as to why he is being released. That is a bunch of BS. QUOTE(Steff @ Jul 24, 2006 -> 12:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Agree. And while I agree if they wanted him gone, he should be gone, but for pete's sake... have some class about it. Cliff - who was stinking it up way worse didn't get crapped on despite being obviously worse than Widger. Seems like the Sox forgot how to act like grown ups in the media this weekend. Perhaps they should all shut up, close the clubhouse doors, and fix whatever is wrong. When did the Sox go to the media with this info? Widger is the one that brought this information to the media. He is the one that told the media why he was released, not the White Sox. Why are they getting crapped on?

QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 07:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thames has so many clutch big hits that I'd love to see him go. And if Detroit wants to weaken their primary strength and throw in some of their starting pitching, then be my guest. I don't fear hitters coming from the weak NL to the AL. Thames is not as good and will never be as good as Abreu. Miner is not very good and not even one of their better pitching prospects. The Tigers would be upgrading and giving away basically nothing. This would be a terrible deal for the Phillies. I wouldn't mind seeing Thames going, but I wouldn't want to face Abreu instead of Thames. That is for sure. QUOTE(VAfan @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 08:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm surprised no one picked up on Abreu to the Yankees. I fear that more than I fear him going to the Tigers. Even though the Tigers need on-base guys like Abreu in a bad way, he fits the Yankee personality much better. And, as someone pointed out on another thread, we've had more trouble with the good hitting teams than with teams that can pitch. Unless our starting pitching gets a lot better, I'm not eager to face the Yanks in the postseason without Abreu. I'd be even less excited about facing them if they added Abreu to RF and got Matsui back in LF and Cano at 2B. Where's the weak link in that lineup? What would be really sick is if the Yankees got him for essentially nothing in a salary dump. (I hate it most when they just add useful players because they are the only team that can afford to pay them.) BTW -- I would agree that if Philly would take Thames and Minor that the deal would already be done. The main rumor was that Philly wanted one or more of the Tigers' hot minor league pitchers whose name escapes me at the moment. ********************* Personally, I wish KW would offer Philly Pods and Haeger (or some equivalent minor league pitcher) for Abreu and $6 million cash (to reduce his 2007 salary to $10 million). Then I'd offer Abreu a two-year extension at $10 million per year for 2008-09 to waive his no-trade and tear up his option and $2 million buyout, as long as the new deal didn't have a full no-trade clause (I'd let him veto a trade to some teams). If Abreu balked, I'd offer $12 million for a 1-year extension on the same terms. The value of this is it would be a whole lot more than the Yankees or Tigers will offer. We also have to give up something to get Philly to eat $6 million in contract money. But if we can get him for even less, by all means do so. As I've mentioned elsewhere, Abreu would be a perfect lead off hitter for this lineup. He has created 67 runs (RC27 =7.76) compared to Pod's 47 runs (RC27=5), and I think he can do even better. (Last year the gap was 122RC -- 9th in baseball -- to 68RC -- 124th in baseball.) Why would the Phillies give cash? Their main reason for trading him (especially for Pods/Haeger or Thames/Miner) is to get his contract off their books. There is no reason for them to throw cash in the deal. Plus Abreu said that he will turn down any trade unless his option is picked up. Why would he want to renegotiate for less money if his option is already picked up?

QUOTE(Contreras @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 06:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "Not as well" does not mean "bad." He has an .864 OPS vs. Righties, ya know. That would mean that Abreu's weak side this year is better than what Magglio's doing on the year as a whole. So, at his worst, Abreu > Magglio. As for Thames, look at his minor league numbers. He's a fluke. In fact, so is Minor. They're both outperforming thie minor league numbers IN THE MAJORS. If that's all the price really is, I can't imagine why the deal isn't done yet. I honestly can't believe that this is a real trade proposal. I think this Rob Parker columnist from the Detroit News is making this thing up. If those are the only players involved this deal would have been done already. I find this very hard to believe.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Abreu has a nice OBP because he has walked 87 times this year. He has Pat Burrell as protection, so what would you rather do. Face Abreu or face Pat Burrell. Abreu is great player, but look at the seaosn of the guy he would be replacing. Thames has an 1.009 OPS with 19 dongs and plays half his games in a very large park. Abreu makes a lot of money, and would kill them making other deals. Abreu also hits lefty pitching well, and righties not as well. So it counters why you would pick him up, to be protection for righty pitchers. I would be worried more if they were picking up Ibanez. And what is wrong with walking 87 times? I already answered the second question. Thames is 29 and is a .253 career hitter (.226 career hitter before this year). One season does not make a player. Yes, I would trade him and Minor for Abreu. With the Tigers surplus of good young pitching coming throught the minors I would not mind giving that Minor guy up at all. It is a no brainer trade. They would be getting much better. Is Abreu overpaid? YES! OF COURSE! However, he is still much better than Thames and Minor. Why is Ibanez even being brought up? The Mariners are buyers, not sellers. They are even involved in Soriano talks. I don't know why we are even talking about Ibanez.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 06:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How exactly is the Tigers' order better than the Phillies? I wouldn't underestimate Rollins, Burrell, Howard, Utley and Rowand. Howard is far and away the best hitter between the two teams and Utley is right up there as well, I'd say that's some damn good protection. Yes I was wrong about that. I wasn't thinking. That is why I took it out almost immediately after I posted it. You are too quick for me. Rowand I don't think much of, but the rest you are right on about.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If this is the deal they have to make to get Abreu then let them do it. Look at Thames numbers nad how Miner has pitched. They would be giving up a guy hitting .300 with 19 homers for a guy hitting .283 with half as many homers. Proposed trade: Thames and Miner for Abreu You really want them to do this deal? It would make the Tigers' lineup much better. That is nothing to give up for Abreu. Abreu is behind only Mauer, Hafner, and Pujols in OBP. Those guys also have better than .310 batting averages. Abreu has 61 RBI which is not too shabby either. Abreu is a very good player in the prime of his career. You are drastically underestimating him.

From Sherman of the New York Post Minaya does not have Kazmir on his record. But in late June 2002, desperate to make the Expos a contender, he made one of the worst deals of the decade, obtaining Bartolo Colon from Cleveland for Grady Sizemore, Cliff Lee and Brandon Phillips. These days, Minaya is wise enough to say, "even when you are in first place [by 12 games] you want to act, but what is the price?" He will, in other words, not use Lastings Milledge or Mike Pelfrey for a quick fix. Only Dontrelle Willis, just 24 and years from free agency, would entice him to consider moving either. And it would probably take both just to get Florida's attention. The Marlins seem intent on retaining their most recognizable player in hopes of securing a new stadium and, even if they put Willis on the market, they have indicated the Dodgers, Diamondbacks and Tigers are the teams with the best matches. Unless, that is, the Mets would pair up Pelfrey (who technically is not eligible to be dealt until a year from signing his first pro contract, which is January 2007) and Milledge or the Yanks would combine Robinson Cano and Philip Hughes. So both New York GMs probably must aim lower while having teams that are shooting high and fan bases that expect stars, not supplementary parts. Minaya and Cashman have all the power. All the responsibility, as well.

QUOTE(GoRowand33 @ Jun 29, 2006 -> 06:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 3 weak starts in a row (even though now losses yet) I think he's great, but since the Cincinnati game he hasn't been the dominating pitcher that deserves to start an all star game Yes he does. Plus it is a great way to reward your stud pitcher for what he has done for you last year and so far this year. QUOTE(valponick @ Jun 29, 2006 -> 07:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't think so. I think Ozzie has to go with Santana, maybe Halladay. Why does he have to? They are not head and shoulders above what Contreras has done. Ozzie Guillen is the manager of the World Champion Chicago White Sox. Who cares about the other teams. I remember plenty of times when one of the White Sox players got screwed by not making the team because the manager chose one of his own. Ozzie should do the same.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 01:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It should be: C: Joe Mauer (MIN) 1B: Travis Hafner (CLE) 2B: Tadahito Iguchi (CHW) SS: Miguel Tejada (BAL) 3B: Troy Glaus (TOR) OF: Manny Ramirez (BOS) OF: Vernon Wells (TOR) OF: Jermaine Dye (CHW) Screw that s***: C: A.J. 1B: Paul Konerko 2B: Tadahito Iguchi (if he doesn't win the vote after the overseas/Japanese vote is tallied) SS: Miguel Tejada 3B: Joe Crede OF: Manny Ramirez OF: Vernon Wells OF: Jermain Dye SP: Jose Contreras SP: Mark Buehrle SP: Freddy Garcia RP Bobby Jenks White Sox should have 9 on the All-Star team, possibly 10 if Jim Thome is picked for the All-Star roster by the fans. And all deserve it.

That is awesome. I am now forever a Sean Tracey fan.

QUOTE(longshot7 @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 06:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have to disagree with nearly everyone - I don't think the media is blowing this out of proportion. What Ozzie said was wrong - even if it was meant to challenge the guy's manhood and not as a gay slur. No matter the context or connotation, it is a gay slur, just like the n-word is a racial slur and k*** is a jewish slur. What's sad is that homophobia and heterosexism is so ingrained in our culture that using the word "***" is a commonplace insult just like calling something "gay" is an insult. Most people that use those words don't mean them as gay slurs, but does that make them any less hurtful to gays, no. "Get that ***" is a common jeer hurled at the TV at our sports bar during football season, and when I point out that it's not cool, I'm the one who's in the wrong. The n-word is not acceptable by non-blacks, and the use of "***" by non-gays is not acceptable either. Another argument is that it's only words and they should only have power when used in specific connotations. I disagree with that. Words, and language in general, are symbols that have a geat deal of power, and need to be wielded responsibly. Now that being said, I certainly don't think Ozzie should be fired. Whether or not he should be suspended, I will leave to Reinsdorf and Williams. I know Jerry & Kenny talked to him about the issues raised by his comments, and I truly think Ozzie will listen to them. It's certainly possible that Ozzie didn't know, like many others (and some of you), that what he said was wrong. Now he knows, and knowing is half the battle. Please stop comparing a sexual preference to a race/nationality. They are far far far from the same thing. Do you know that idiot, moron, and imbecile are also offensive? Do you use those words? They have double meanings as well. They were once used as classes of mental retardation. You use the terms now, I am sure, as a why of calling someone stupid. However, you use this word to refer to a mentally challenged person and the person's family will be very offended. The words have double meanings. Many words do. *** refers to a cigarette, a drudge, a peon, a british student, and a sissy or girly man. Put what he said in context and you determine the meaning. It didn't sound like he was calling him a homosexual male. Just my opinion. QUOTE(lukeman89 @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 07:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Beware: RANT oh by the way..has anybody heard any gay people call in to the radio stations and say that they are offended? i haven't. but you certainly hear a lot from the media about how it SHOULD be offensive to gay people. as soon as we teach our kids that stuff like that isnt offensive, it wont be a problem any more. same thing with racism. stop recognizing that different races even exist, and it will go away. This from Mariotti's article, but that's it. Obviously, Guillen hasn't learned his lesson about using such ugly language. He hasn't because his boss, Sox chairman Jerry Reinsdorf, is an enabler who is letting Ozzie run amok, whether it's offending homosexual groups that want Guillen punished or saying someone should "shoot the [bleep]'' after Jason Grimsley served as a steroids informant in a federal investigation. Reinsdorf, as I pointed out last year, is co-chairman of Major League Baseball's Equal Opportunity Committee.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 01:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ozzie deserves to be ripped for using the word "f@g". Homophobia has led to people's deaths. It's a sick attitude toward other human beings not unlike racism. I don't believe Ozzie is a homophobe. But his statements have negative repercussions nonetheless. And Ozzie also ought to consider for a moment how his constant use of profanity plays for a family game like baseball. I have a 3-year-old son who loves the White Sox. Fortunately, he hasn't a clue what our manager is saying. But what about those whose kids are 10, 11, 12, etc. -- old enough to listen to the post-game show? Would I want my son to be listening to what Ozzie Guillen is saying? No. And that's too bad. I love Ozzie Guillen. I'm not calling for his head. I'm just suggesting he use his head more often before he opens his mouth. The way Ozzie used the word *** was not in a homophobic way and will definitely not lead to any homophobic deaths. He basically called him a sissy. Put the whole thing in context. If your kids, at age 10, 11, or 12 do not know or have not heard those words by then, then they live very sheltered lives. I think we have all known and heard those words by then. If you don't want them to use those words then do something called "parenting" or "teaching". That should take care of it. It is more important to the children that you don't use those words if that is what you stand for. He will have to be more careful with what he says, because the media as a whole are a bunch of panzie ass ***gots.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 22, 2006 -> 02:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Speaking of Bernie Mack.. that mofo was at the game last night. Had a line of hoe's trailing behind him... Cool. Good for Bernie.

Is *** or f***** really that offensive? I can't believe that it is. This word has been thrown around since I was in grade school. It didn't/doesn't even mean gay or homosexual to us. It meant/means a sissy or girly boy. Now because the gay community has grown a bit and has a voice in the media it has become offensive? Give me a break. I saw a Bernie Mac concert and he continuously calls his little nephew a "little f*****" because he acts like a little sissy boy. The people in this country have to get a thicker skin. It is even blocked out on this website, but words like f***, motherf***er, b****, cocksucker are not? That seems a little odd to me.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 04:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd deal Figgins for Crawford every day of the week. Crawford is absolutely superior. No doubt about it. What would the White Sox have to give up to get him? Freddy Garcia, Scooty P, and Sweeney? I am not saying I would do that, but would that get the deal done?

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 03:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Shame on me for watching a movie at night while eating dinner and an even bigger shame for getting on the internet in the morning. God, what was I thinking! :headshake ok?

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jun 16, 2006 -> 04:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, that is in fact what I did. First off, I missed the entire incident because, like I said earlier, I was watching A Fistful of Dollars. Now, when I logged on this morning, I clealrly did not know that this incident ever happened. So, I get on to SoxTalk and see that there is something that happened between Sean Tracey and Ozzie Guillen in which Guillen snapped. So, I ask politely for someone to explain to me what happens, and then you come back with the comment you did. Now, considering SoxTalk was the 1st website I went to when I got on the computer, I did not hear anything about the incident. You might ask, then, why didn't he see it on TV? Well, because I woke up and watched Soccer (World Cup) all day long. My TV did not switch from ESPN 2 and ESPN all day. Boy, sure is a shame that I had to explain myself in such a manner. Is this a good enough explanation for you Mr. Information? No, it is a shame that this was a day in your life. QUOTE(IlliniBob72 @ Jun 16, 2006 -> 02:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Where is all this talk about Tracey willfully blowing off Ozzie coming from? Hell, the pitch Blaylock grounded to second was a good 2 feet inside, not over the heart of the plate. Ozzie will always hold a special place for me for last season, but he is demonstrating that he is an ass. First with his thoughts on Uggie Urbina and Jason Grmisley, and now this. He'd better continue winning or his welcome will be worn out quickly. To steal Ozzie's line of thinking, if you are an ass and you win, you are firey and a free-speaker. If you are an ass and you lose, you're just an asshole no one wants around. He didn't willfully blow him off? Yes the first 2 pitches were close to hitting him, but they didn't. Then the 3rd pitch was inside but no where near the batter and good enough for Blalock to hit. So did he try with the first 2? Yes, possibly. But he sure didn't with the last. And that last pitch is when he willfully blew off Ozzie's orders.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jun 18, 2006 -> 03:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Exactly, it would be huge if the suckass Cubs could have won the first two games of that series while we beat Cincy the first two. It all counts. You really think the Tigers will be there all season long? First of all they can't beat us or any other good team. Second of all they have a very young pitching staff from top to bottom except for Kenny Rogers. Young pitchers usually break down at the end because they are too tired from pitching such a long season. Young pitchers have never had to pitch 190+ innings in a season until they get to the majors. For instance, Justin Verlander only pitched 120 innnigs last year. He has already pitched close to 90. This is someone that they are counting on in order to compete. Kenny Rogers is known to have bad second halves. He is terrible after the all-star break. For instance last year he was 10-4 with a 2.54 ERA before the All-Star break. After the All-Star break he was 4-4 with a 4.72 ERA. Quite a difference. These are two guys that the Tigers are counting on in order to compete with the White Sox all year long. Not to mention they were 71-91 last year. They would have to have a +28 game improvement to do what the Sox did last year. That would be one of the greatest one year improvements in the history of baseball and very hard to do. The others that improved by that much were terrible teams that became mediocre, such as the 2004 Detroit Tigers who had a +29 game improvement by going 72-90 because they were only 43-119 the year before. So there you have it.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The kid didn't hit Blaylock, he got him out. The $12 million a year pitcher pitches to Blaylock and he hits one 10,000 ft. Maybe the wrong guy was throwing at him. Pitchers usually don't have to be told to hit someone. Buerhle wasn't against Baltimore last year, and he got tossed without warning costing him a streak of games where he went 6 innings. again, so what? QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now that Tracey's gone, who becomes the designated beaner? Montero? QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 16, 2006 -> 12:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not ignorant as in not informed... ignorant as in rude. He asked a question and you snap at him to look it up? Who the hell made you the MB police to tell people what they can and can't ask? Rhetorical. I'm aware you're informed. Did I say you weren't? No. Believe it. I rarely pick up a newspaper and if I do it's to do the crossword, or check movie listings. Hell, I have 71 newspapers from last offseason that I never even looked at and will someday (Jim hopes) will make a scrapbook from. I don't watch the news other than for the weather and traffic, if I'm listening to the radio it's Howard on Sirius or a baseball game on XM, and the internet stuff I read I get from THIS BOARD and the posters HERE. Good riddance.. I wish it were that easy sometimes.. :headshake MB police? Jesus Steff, who made you public defender #1. The incident is all over the freaking place- radio, tv, newspaper, internet- and he comes on a message board to ask what freaking happened? Give me a break. You said I was ignorant. Ignorant has a couple definitions and none mean rude. Uninformed, lack of basic education, unknowledgable all mean ignorant. I have no idea how ignorant means rude. I still find it hard to believe that you don't check out MLB or ESPN or chisox.com. This can not be the only place you get information from. If that was the case you would be highly uninformed about most subjects and from your posts I don't find you as being uninformed about anything. QUOTE(redandwhite @ Jun 16, 2006 -> 03:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Guillen was entirely out of line, yes. Not a single question about it. Can anyone summarize the last nine pages for me, how on earth can someone justify slash defend what Guillen did? Of course there is a question about it. That is why there is a discussion about it. If there was no question about it then there would not even be a debate, vote, or conversation over this whole thing. Tracey disrespects Ozzie by not following orders. Ozzie puts Tracey in his place. The way it should be. End of story.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The problem with how this was handled is that Tracey will always be known as the guy who pissed Ozzie off for not hitting someone, and whether its true or not, the guy who was sent to the minor leagues because he didn't drill someone. If Ozzie would have handled this in the clubhouse or the runway, away from cameras, Tracey would have been a guy who was sent down because a veteran was acquired. So what? QUOTE(shoota @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why does Ozzie always order the worst bullpen pitcher to protect their teammates? Last year it was Adkins; last night it was Tracey, who's also a rookie. It's hypocritical of Ozzie to punish Tracey for not protecting his teammates when Ozzie didn't order Vazquez to hit a Ranger earlier in the game. I bet Sox hitters are more grateful to Tracey for attempting to protect them than to Vazquez, who refused to even throw a brushback pitch to any Ranger batter. Why is the goon in hockey usually the worst in terms of skill? When he leaves the ice the team isn't losing a top skill player. If Vazquez or someone the Sox count on and need that pitcher can be suspended and we could lose him for some time. Right now we need all the bullpen help we can get and our starters have to produce. We can't lose one of them for any amount of time. I am sure all of the Sox players know this situation. Come on man. Tracey is a 25 year old rookie. He is young, but not a 18-20 year old kid.

QUOTE(retro1983hat @ Jun 15, 2006 -> 04:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> On Jonathon Brandmeier's show this morning he played a clip of Rick Sutcliffe in the booth with Len Kaspar and Bob Brenly and they cut him pretty quick because he sounded sloshed. He then played Sut singing Take Me Out to the Ballgame and he was slurring all over. Has anyone else heard this? How come there's not the attention like when he was in the booth in San Diego last month? Dude, it was a joke on Johnny B's show. They slowed down the entire tape. Didn't you notce that the organ was playing slow and the people in the background were all singing slow. Come on man.