Chisoxfn

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 12:23 PM) NOT discussion programming packages, do you all out there see a big PERFORMANCE difference between dish network and direct tv? This is a debate I'm having on another forum, but this one provides better feedback for stuff like this. I need some pretty quick answers because if I'm switching, I need to in the next 24-48 hours. Specific answers as to why you think what you do would be appreciated! I'm pretty up on this issue becuase I was about to switch to sattellite. I think the biggest difference is that Dish's equipment is lightyears better than direct tv's. Dish has better DVR's & HD receivers and you also don't have to purchase all the equipment like you would with Direct (even Direct's lease costs are ridiculous as for any of the newer tech boxes you have to drop massive amounts while Dish will throw it in for new customers). Customer Service wise I've heard DirectTV is better and right now Dish has more HD channels, but that will change by months end as DirectTv's new HD sattellite is up and they are already testing all the new channels they are going to add.

I am gonna be dissapointed if it doesn't get picked up by my cable company. Not getting to see playoff games in HD would irritate me.

QUOTE(SnB @ Oct 2, 2007 -> 08:00 AM) i apparently like the girliest wines available. I'm ok with that. And Appletini's.

The Sox are sick of Anderson and they will probably look at moving him, but they won't move him for nothing. They will move him for another highly touted player that has busted a bit (both teams will essentially be counting on a change of scenario helping rejuvanate each players career).

I think the deal would start at two prospects plus one of the Sox starters (likely Javy). If they would take Garland and a couple prospects I'd make the deal in a heart-beat, but they won't nor will they deal Jose Reyes unless they received an absolutely RIDICULOUS offer. I do agree though....Hanley Ramirez >>>> Jose Reyes right now. Ramirez has a little less steals, far more power, and is actually a couple months younger than Reyes. That said, I'd take Reyes in a heartbeat. He's young, cheap, and extremely good and would be a potent top of the order hitter for years. He'd also be playing a premiere position.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 09:28 PM) One of the more high powered offenses in the country. And in your heart of hearts, do you think Wisconsin is the 5th best team in the country? I don't either. We wouldn't have a shot in hell of beating a legit top 5 team Saturday, yet we are (correctly or incorrectly doesn't really matter) favored. Hmm I attacked two specific points you made, both which were ridiculous, call that a hissy fit if you wish. This is one of those games the odds makers are wrong about (just like they were blindly wrong about the Bears being favorites against the Lions...LOL).

Was I the only one stunned that he was found guilty. I'm not going to say Isiah didn't do it, but from everything I heard she sounded like a horrible worker that deserved to get fired. I'm not saying she deserved the other stuff though (ie what Thomas did).

f*** me...I don't know where the hell I was (probably happened when I was out of the country) but I just found out Fullerton lost George Horton (Head Baseball Coach) to Oregon. Motherf***er. I was excited to see they got Serano to replace him though (former Titan pitching coach who was UCI's coach last year). I think Serrano will do a great job but it sucks losing the best coach in college baseball (its either Horton or former Titan HC Auggie Guredo, imo).

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 12:32 PM) I think thats overly presumptious at this point. Let's see what Suzuki and Lucy can do in a full season. Suzuki put up OPS' in the low 800's for the heart of his minor league career full seasons (.818 at A+, .807 at AA - didn't play much AAA), which is roughly 80 points higher than Lucy at the same levels (.724, .733). Significant difference indeed, but neither of those sets of numbers indicates a hitter likely to be an offensive juggeraut at the major league level. Add into the equation defense (where Lucy is far superior, from what few stats and scouting reports I can find), and speed (Lucy was 13 of 14 this year in stolen base attempts, Suzuki didn't steal a single bag all year), and suddenly the gap narrows. Is superior defense and a little speed at catcher worth 80 points of OPS? Maybe, but its not definite thing. The one thing that Suzuki definitely did that Lucy did not was all about time - he is about a year ahead of Lucy in terms of development, give or take. And that definitely has big value. Lucy pays the price for playing behind Garko in college and for a hand injury in 2005, which has put him behind schedule. I am not saying Lucy is better than Suzuki, not at all. But to say that Suzuki was clearly the better choice, at this point, is premature and may turn out not to be the case. Suzuki was never slow for a catcher back in his Fullerton days. I don't know if he had anything that changed it, but you have to remember the A's as an organization don't preach stolen bases. Both are what I call good athletes for catchers.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 12:08 PM) "Probably a better hitter than Lucy will ever be" is selling it WAAAY short. Lucy hasn't produced at any minor league level. His career minor league line is .257/.332/.347. That's crap. It's even worse because Lucy was a college player and, as such, was never considered "young" (for a real prospect, anyways) for any level. If Soxfest didn't (now) cost a lung to attend, that might be the first question I'd ask in the Q&A. Talk about an absolute travesty of a decision. Catchers tend to progress far more slowly offensively as that skill always comes second to the skill of mastering the art of catching. I'd also be all over Lucy if he could produce a similar line (with a better slugging percentage) at the major league level (mainly because I think of him as a long term above average defensive catcher).

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 07:08 AM) You are correct. The White Sox thought Lucy had a lot of potential, he was buried a bit on his college team. It was simply a matter of the White Sox thinking Lucy would be better long term. So far, it clearly looks like the wrong decision. Lucy looks like he knows what he's doing defensively but Suzuki looks to have more all around abilities. The dumb move wasn't even the Lucy one (even though he hated it). He had been burried behind Ryan Garko (stud all american at Stanford) and IIRC Lucy only had only one season as a full time starter at Stanford. The horrid draft move was that of Wes Whisler. I still shake my head to this day that the Sox drafted this guy about 5 rounds earlier than any other team in baseball would have grabbed him. The Sox better move him to the lineup next year and see if he can rekindle any of the talent that made him one of the premiere hitters in the cape cod league.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 10:55 AM) Is there anyone on this board that didnt realize he was tipping his pitches. How about the fact that he always threw sidearm to righties and therefor eliminated his forkball. Or the fact that he had no command of the outside corner anymore. Tipping pitches doesn't explain why he had half the life on his forkball and for most of the season about 5-7 MPH off his fastball.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 08:16 AM) Well according the rumors that were putting him on the northside... He wants an ownership share of the team he goes to. According to the 2007 Forbes numbers the Sox are valued at $381 million. If they could come up with a small minority share, you could knock off $10-20 million, depending on how big you are talking. Plus a guy like Rodriguez pays for himself at the turnstyle. The Sox know this. Think about how many Arod jersies would get sold? I doubt it will happen, but then again knowing Kenny's history, and JRs business savvy, maybe it isn't that crazy afterall... It is 100% against major league rules to even offer something like that in a major league contract. And if an owner were even stupid enough to try to do it hush/hush it would eventually come out and league may just force the owner into selling or severly force the franchise (remember, MLB forced Marge Schott to sell).

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 07:22 AM) This is a good thread with lots of good comments. I agree with DickAllen on Uribe although I will add he is extremely frustrating to me. Unless they can swing a trade for the guys he mentioned or some super stud prospect, he may be the best option. He is a good fielder but the regression at the plate should cause all of them to take a good long look at what they're doing. Particularly, Uribe himself. I am also disturbed Guillen commenting about Uribe staying in shape. Uribe needs to be a pro and not get fat every year. Richar, I believe he will improve and I did see some defensive improvement in the last two weeks of the year. He gives 100%. I am not certain he has much to prove in AAA, by the same token his numbers are not overwhelming. This will be a case of seeing what's out there and determining if they can get someone clearly better and at what cost. Williams brought up the Carlos Lee trade again Saturday. Interesting. He told the reporters "you guys know how we do business" and mentioned the "fit" and trading a big name for a bunch of smaller pieces and then said no one is untouchable unless they have a no trade clause. Hmmmm. If Kenny was implementing anything it would have to be Paulie. Dye and Thome have protection and Buehrle/Vaz aren't gonna go anywhere. Jenks has value but no major salary so he won't be going. I do think the Sox could move Paulie, free up payroll all while adding a few real solid young players (that could turn into great players) but you obviously risk taking some PR heat as Paulie is one of the faces of the franchise. However, it should also be noted that I've never heard the Sox question Paulie "fitting" in as he's really liked by Ozzie/Kenny (but if they got blown away I think they'd do the deal).

I'm sure he wasn't the first Sox to use roids nor will he be the last Sox to use roids/hgh/etc. I can say that about every team in baseball too.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 1, 2007 -> 09:03 AM) List is up. Sox players: DLS is #3, Carter is #10. I'm kind of surprised Carter is that high. I am also, as I alluded to earlier, disappointed that Miranda wasn't there. Carter is one of the Sox 5 best prospects and one of the better power prospects in the game (note I said power prospects as I'm not calling him one of the better prospects in baseball, although this time next year he may just be exactly that).

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 08:53 PM) Or if our defensive ends can get to Favre like they did Kitna. The important thing will be for the offense to win in TOP so those ends can actually have time to rest and be able to go full engine throughout the game. They were gassed by the end of the game and Kitna was finally able to have enough time to torch the unknown secondary of the Bears (due to injuries obviously). The Bears pass rush has been awesome this year for 3 quarters but the offense has been so futile its dead for the 4th, hence the Bears losing games late in the season.

QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 06:20 PM) So the Pack went to 4-0 today by beating the Vikes. What are Bear's fans thoughts about the Bear/Packer game next week? If Vasher/Tillman/Briggs are back I'm picking the Bears in a WIN. If the secondary is out, Bears lose.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 08:30 PM) That I can understand. I was thinking he was saying because Rex would not be able to handle it as many people have said in the past. Oh by the way, I was just in a pissed off mood in the NFL thread. You are right, that two drive span to finish the first half was halfway decent (until Griese threw another pick). The only problem was just before the TD drive I started a Bring Back Rexy chant at the bar. By the time the game was over, not only were my 4 best buds (we spend every Sunday at the Bar) agreeing with me about how horrid Griese was, but all the Bears fans at the bar (a good collection of them) were agreeing with me that Rex is better (I was stunned too cause they were the type that s*** on Rex like nothing other). Not that it means anything of course. The only thing that matters is what Lovie and the rest of the staff thinks.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 08:21 PM) How exactly was he an improvement? Im not saying he wont be down the road but Griese pretty much lost the game today. We made the switch to eliminate turnovers and play with less mistakes. If he cant do that hes useless. His arm is so weak its amazing that hes in the NFL. He cant go downfield and since theres no running game hes gonna get eaten alive by shallow zones all year. I have no doubt that a couple of my friends have stronger arms than Griese (I'm not being sarcastic either). Hell I think I could potentially throw the ball with similar velocity (even now that my arm is toast thanks to rotator cuff issues).

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 08:20 PM) So if this season continues down this route, would anyone be apposed to a draft of Jake Long and John David Booty in the first couple of rounds. If they take anything but an olineman in the first round I'll throw up. In fact, I think they should take at least 3 lineman in the first day (one tackle and two guards...the tackle being the first rounder).

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 06:24 PM) Why are the Bears in a position where they have to stick with Griese? Because Lovie went out and said that he is going to give Brian an ample chance. Once he did that it would come off poorly, imo, for him to make a quick pull as it could lead to people in the lockeroom start questioning things. Maybe I'm overlooking things, but bottom line, after Lovie did what he did (and I'm not saying he didn't have reason) we are gonna have to see Brian unless he plays as awful against the Pack (and at that point the backs will already be against the wall). What I think will happen: I think if Brian plays poorly in that game (GB), at 1-4 (If we are really really lucky, they somehow win in spite of Brian and be 2-3), you'll quickly turn things back to Rex and see if he can fire things up. If he can't and he plays poorly, he will quickly get benched with Orton coming in for the rest of the season as the Bears begin to evaluate whether he could be the guy (and if he isn't they'll look at McNabb).

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 06:22 PM) It was amazing how much criticism he received when there's been so many other players playing just as bad. I repeat, Bernard Berrian has played the worst out of anyone on this team (in terms of dropping critical passes and bad route running). Cedric Benson was far more responsible for the game-changing turnovers in the games Rex played in as well (which I know you'll agree with). The back-up QB is always the most popular player in town, and now the Bears are in a situation where they basically have to stick with Griese. Don't look at me. Even if Rex is a horrible horrible QB I have so much respect for Rex the man. Sure he had his new years eve fiasco where he didn't prepare. However, bottom line he's never made excuses, always worked hard, and even at his worse would take time to answer the media despite how they always s*** on him and s*** on him and s*** on him. I'm disgusted at it all and its why I've gone out of my way to defend the guy (plus I believe in him as a QB, much less now than ever before, but I still would not be shocked to see him turn into a good to solid QB). Its still not as bad as Jets fans (biggest POS's out there) for cheering when Pennington got hurt.

If Uribe is back than I see Richar probably being an utlra utility guy who replaces Cintron (playing both 2nd and SS). Hopefully Ozzie would find a way to get him into 110-120 games in this role as well.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Sep 30, 2007 -> 03:28 PM) Plus, aside from winning a defensive award in his (weak) college conference, we've never heard anything about his defense. And while we know errors aren't necessarily a direct indicator of poor defense, 20 errors in half a season could be a troubling sign. I think of him as a younger Chris Getz. I don't know why, but I think Getz is gonna have a real solid career. I don't think he'll ever be an all star but for some reason I think of him as the typical type of player that would come up with the Twins and just do all the little things and just be a real solid all around player (its too bad he had that injury that held him up this year cause he was really having a break-out season and establishing himself as someone to at least keep your eye on). He'll never be an all star, but I could see him on the high end being a Mark Grudz type.