Chisoxfn

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 26, 2007 -> 05:47 AM) Way too late to work out a deal now, but I would hope next year every game is on local TV. I don't think its too late. The Angels a couple years back had no TV deal as Moreno was in the process of renegotiating with FoxSports and it went up to the deadline. The Clippers had something similar happen and they eventually agreed to a TV deal with KTLA 5 to do some of there games (CW). If Wirtz son wanted to, they could get a deal done, especially since Comcast is set up to be able to do games anyway (they do Sox and Cubs at the same time so they could easily do Hawks/Bulls).

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 03:31 PM) I'm not too familiar with the Denver offenses that Griese led in Denver, but I can't imagine the talent around Griese being anywhere NEAR as good as it was in Denver. He's got no wide receivers, his backs can't pickup blitzes, the line is getting old and has been very hit-or-miss (mostly miss). The only thing Griese has on offense is a decent group of TEs (IMO -- I'm pretty fond of the Olsen/Clark combo). Also, the reason Grossman sucked can be placed squarely on my shoulders. I bought his jersey immediately after he was drafted so Rex was doomed to fail. Sorry bud... Benson has actually done a very good job picking up the blitz this year. Peterson, on the other hand, has been atrocious picking up the blitz and its assinine that he has continued to play.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 02:45 PM) I'll root for the Bears to win no matter who their QB is. However, if Griese struggles, will it be the fans rooting for Orton to come in, or will they want Rex back? As 101 points out above, there are so many other issues with this team right now. Rex has been brutal so far, but guys like Moose, Tait, etc. have been equally worse. I hope the goal is to give Griese a couple starts, let him hold over, in an effort to get Rex back on track and move him back into the starters job. This team has to try to do everything in its power to get Rex to succeed because anything else would be a severe blow to both the current and long term future of the franchise.

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 01:23 PM) lol. It's on PBS. It started Sunday, I think it goes through Thursday and then the second half starts next Sunday. Something like that. You mean the first half is a new piece Sun/Mon/Tue/Wed/Thurs and than the 2nd half will have a few pieces beginning on Sunday? Or are they replaying the first half every day until Sunday?

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 12:57 PM) Great comment and on that note here is what they said in the chat about Salvador Sanchez. Warren from Texas asks: Use your crystal ball and Predict Salvador Sanchez' future five years from now. Thanks for the chat. A: Ben Badler: Well, I'm not some kind of sorcerer, so I can't look into a crystal ball, but I will say that the forecast for Sanchez has a fairly wide range of outcomes, everything from a talented big leaguer to a flameout. Maybe that seems like some kind of a cop out answer, but it's the truth. Some people who saw Sanchez thought he was one of the top prospects in the league because his combination of power and speed might be unmatched in the Pioneer League this year. He played mostly right field this year and has a plus arm, but he played some center field and would be more valuable there. His slash stats—.343.394.544—look nice on the surface, but his high on-base percentage was largely fueled by his .343 batting average, which I don't think is sustainable for a hitter who strikes out in 19 percent of his plate appearances at this level. The power is real, but his plate discipline has always been poor and it needs to improve. He was 21 years old this season, so he’ll have to give low A another try after not faring so well there in his first stint. Sanchez is definitely one of those high tools guys that lacks on major tool (pure baseball skill). Yes he has the ability to generate power (and projects to generate more), great speed, a strong arm, but he does not yet have great baseball skill or IQ (which I really think should be evaluated as a tool). That means he doesn't have the greatest strike zone judgement or the greatest swing (he has very good bat speed but even that doesn't make up for a swing that can get too loopy, although his greatest issue is definitely that of strike zone judgement). If he can overcome those IQ issues (some guys will eventually have a switch flip and just come on strong...heck look at how long it took Sammy Sosa (roids be damned, he still was a good talent and it took him a long time to finally have it switch) for his switch to truly flip) he truly could be a very strong all around player (above average defense, great speed on the paths, 20HR power, .300 AVG....basically everything). The thing is he has yet to show he has made enough strides in that area (hopefully his improved short season numbers are indications of him making strides though and we will see those carry over as he repeats full season ball somewhere next year).

The thing with GM is that unlike the other manufacuters, they are a very good company aside from the legacy issues. I realize you can't just ignore your legacy costs, but those costs are expected to be reduced greatly in the coming decade and when you factor that in with GM having really improved there vehicles (they build exceptoinal SUV's and Trucks and are on the verge, even if its a little late, of becoming big players in the hybrid market) I see them being a company that 10 years from now will be a success story (showing how they fought off a lot of various things and serious doubts to once again become a profitable company).

Its really on MTV? What days/time?

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 12:44 PM) This is extremely disappointing. We didn't draft Poreda with the intention of developing him into the next Matt Thornton. If he doesn't develop several secondary pitches by next season, whether in Kannapolis or Winston Salem, then the criticism should be in full force. Also, SSI71 sent me this link: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnered=rss_cws Merkin addressed several issues discussed on this website concerning the upcoming draft. I find it funny how he mentions in the last paragraph about winning every game this point forward. Almost as if he's indirectly commenting on those of us who believe losing here on out is more beneficial to our future. I think the most interesting thing, and Cheat brought it up over at SouthSideSox as well, is that the Sox need to really focus on there top 10 guys and scout them like crazy. Money should not be an issue as all indications lead to the Sox signing a type A free agent which would cost them there 2nd round pick (meaning that while the 1st round pick will get at least 2M of a bonus, possibly more, they should be able to recoup some of that with them not having a 2nd rounder). However, I would like to see the Sox (regardless of what they give there 1st round pick) still go above slot money and give a 3rd rounder or a couple 10th rounders (who would be worthy of being 2nd or 3rd round picks) a share of the money that would have gone to the 2nd round pick in order to get more talent in here (I truly think this is where the Yanks/Red Sox/Angels have done so well as of late as it allows them to get more talents in with true upside and that means you have a better chance of pulling out a couple good players out of each draft).

QUOTE(29andPoplar @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 12:17 PM) I agree that even the most optimistic of fans shouldn't overreact to having 6 guys on a list like this. Yes it's probably better than having no guys on the list but it's still a rookie ball level. That said, and this is just my opinion, some of those scouting reports were regurgitated from draft time and didn't take into account the growth of these guys this summer. Not that a whole bunch of progress is made in one summer but as an example, I listened to several of Ely's starts. Opposing announcers were raving about how he moved in and out and up and down. Oh well. And I will admit I'm probably biased because I enjoyed that team so much this summer and obviously I want the Sox prospects to do well. Regarding Moreno. Yes he is def. a guy to watch. 90 innings pitched in the Pioneer League, only 4 HR's given up and only 11 walks. That's quite good. His biggest attribute appears to be pounding the strike zone and knowing how to pitch. Ely is the type of guy I want to really keep an eye on as he moves up. He's the type of guy that doesn't have extreme upside, yet if he can continue to pitch succesfully it would indicate he has enough stuff to go along with his intangibles (have the command and smarts to work the zone). I recall hearing he has pretty good movement on his pitches too which is a major positive. Same can be sade for Moreno. Stuff guys can struggle at the lower levels, especially if they are still raw, where as a much more mature control/command pitcher can dominate the lower levels and than blow up at the higher levels (if his stuff just isn't very good) or it could continue on (indicating he has major league stuff, just no plus pitches and there are plenty of good major league pitchers that lack any true "plus pitch as "command" could be considered there plus attribute).

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 11:55 AM) Do you have to post everything in a smart-ass tone. The guy was called the most dominant pick of the draft. He obviously performed well. Why do you have to take everything to the extreme? That comment about a fastball that hard is ludicrious. People throw that hard at the collegiate level and most of the guys in Pioneer league tend to be college players are more veteran minor leaguers. I'm not saying every team has numerous guys that throw so hard, but bottom line, Poreda isn't the first guy they've ever faced with a 95MPH+ fastball. He obviously showed good command for a power pitcher and made some strides with his secondary pitches since no matter how good you are, if all you can throw is a fastball (especially if you are a starter) than you aren't going to succeed (whether its Low A, AA, or the Majors). And Rock, don't ask me why Pratt is always so extreme. The whole point of talking prospects is you basically discuss a players upside as well as the potential for them to reach that upside (some players have superb upside but the odds of them making it are very very slim due to mechanical flaws...see Collaro/Borchard/Brian Anderson or on the pitching end Andrew Sisco). While other guys may not have as great of upside but a greater chance of having sustained major league success or serviceable careers (think Aaron Rowand; Aaron Miles; Charles Haeger; Jerry Owens; Lance Broadway). Than of course you have the high upside guys that laso look to have a great chance of major league success (this is a rare breed....Mark Prior/Stephen Drew/Mark Texiera/Matt Wieters (best catching prospect since Mauer and as sure of a thing as there is in terms of catching prospects, imo); Pedro Alvarez (typically highly touted, for the most part collegiate players that are high high draft picks). Weaknesses typically factor in on what the player needs to correct to reach his upside (and these can be mechanical weaknesses which could potentially be corrected or physical weaknesses which usually can't be).

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 09:24 AM) Is it also worth noting that many of those Japanese cars that are made in America are not made here because of any actual price or efficiency reasons, but are in fact made here because of laws enacted during the wonderfully pro-capitalist Reagan years which required the Japanese auto manufacturers to open plants here in order to be allowed into the U.S. market. Once companies meet those requirements, they tend to move factories outside of this country. My favorite example of course is still Toyota's decision they made a few years ago to put a new plant in Canada, when they had it narrowed down to specifically canada and the U.S. as final choices, and picked Canada citing almost exclusively the lower costs to Toyota due to Canada's national health care system. Or in the case of the Pilot the car is pretty much exclusively made for the US/North American markets so it makes sense to have the product produced in those markets to cut down the shipping costs. Than again, GM seems to do just fine shipping many of their vehicles to Mexico where it is eventually assembled. I know my Pilot is more made in a America than many GM products.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 07:42 AM) Whoa - did I type "not" made in America? I meant ARE made in America. Sorry. No idea why I typed it that way. I think you meant to say they are "NOW" made in America

QUOTE(NUKE @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 07:32 AM) Actually, a large number of foregin cars ARE made in America, while an increasing number of "American" cars are made in Canada or Mexico. The lines of "buy American" are very blurry these days. My Honda Pilot is made in the USA and I'm proud of that.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 07:09 AM) Let's be clear - people might "buy American" if American car companies made cars that were at least as good as their Japanese counterparts. Unfortunately, they do not. There are a lot of Japanese counterparts that are more expensive: For example Toyota 4Runner, while a great car, is a lot more money than a Ford Explorer or Chevy Tahoe (especially after you factor in the heavy discount you get when buying the American Car) Toyota Tundra is a great truck but it is also a lot more expensive than the Dodge Ram, Ford F150, and Chevy Silverado (comparing apples to apples as you have a lot of wiggle room on the american branded trucks). Hell, I would never buy a Toyota as I think Honda is superior to Toyota (although Honda does not have as many models as Toyota).

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 08:15 AM) Boy you seem awful familiar with that... Accountant by Day....Male Stripper By Night. Oh Heads, your mom says Hi

Man...I can't wait till I get off work and pick up this game.

Happy Birthday Steff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hope everything is going good

Wow...the Saints are making me feel better about the Bears collapse.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 08:18 PM) I still think Furcal is the guy to go after. He'll make $13 million next season and is certainly has to be viewed as a "bad contract" right about now. This is also his first season in his career where he's going to finish with a slugging percentage below .360. He'll be 30 next year so a bounceback isn't out of the question. The issue then would be matching who the Dodgers would want from the Sox. I wouldn't trade Garland for Furcal straight up -- I might have said that I would have a month or two ago, but not now -- and I don't think Contreras for Furcal makes sense (as much as we might hope). If the Sox could get a good prosepct along with Furcal I'd give them Garland. Otherwise I'd give up Contreras and a good prospect for Furcal (Broadway type of prospect...not Gio/DLS).

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 08:13 PM) I don't know the circumstances, but I would consider the last big move they made to be the Edmonds deal. Guillen turned into a bit of a cancer, the Erstad deal was vetoed, and the Appier deal was more a bad contract for a bad contract. Edmonds had demanded a trade and the Angels were more than happy to meet the request as they were very frustrated with Edmonds consistently getting injured. Of course Edmonds turned into a star in St. Louis (he was good in Anaheim, but never stayed healthy for long enough time to ever be the type of player he was in St. Louis for a good chunk of his career). Bottenfield was coming off a career year and it was an assinine move to pick him up (I still don't know why they did it) and Kennedy was a highly touted prospect (who was a good pickup and had a good career in Anaheim). At the time Guillen was traded, he was a very productive player with a cannon arm, good power, and a solid average (all while knocking in a good number of runs for the Angels).

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 04:11 PM) He is actually pretty good out there, but does still need work. I want to see what his arm is like next year - and know if this "injury" thing is really what is most effecting it, because he is pretty weak right now (almost as weak as Pods). The org has been spouting about some mysterious arm injury with Owens for over 2 years (its a crock of crap). I will say, aside from his arm, he's been better than expected defensively (in fact I consider him serviceable out there).

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 07:33 PM) He had such a massive hitch in his swing. I don't know how they could have ever been confident he'd hit good pitching. Anyone associated with the org could have told you about the holes Anderson had in his swing from day one. I know that pretty much every writeup I had on Anderson (both on here and on FutureSox) back when he was in the minors discussed the fact that he had to make adjustments to succeed and every year I would be proven wrong as he would get to a new level and just rake. Turns out once he got to the major league level, the hole was exploited and the guy ended up looking worse than a good chunk of pitchers in baseball at the plate (I remember saying that after watching about a week's worth of major league at bats and it never ever got much better...but after being wrong for 3 years I figured maybe he would figure things out and get by but I am completely sure he will fail unless he makes some miraculous changes to that swing).

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 05:25 PM) The Angels rarely ever make trades as it is, just because they don't seem to like giving up that talent. And if they need a big bat in the offseason, the GOAT is a free agent, even if he is 44. I seem to recall trying to find the last time the Angels made a huge trade once upon a time, and I really don't think they've made one in the 2000s, and I'm not sure when it was before that. It has been a really long time. They traded Mo Vaughn for Kevin Appier, but both were hasbeens when the move was made (although I still say without that deal they don't win the World Series). Hell, the biggest trade they made was the one that got vetoed (Erstad for Singleton, Garland and another player). The Angels typically make signings, not trades. When they do make trades its typically trading minor league arms or back of the pen arms for other young arms that they like and that Stoneman projects can help the pen for a couple years. Stoneman is also a shark on the waiver wires looking for young guys that he thinks would be good fits (Eckstein would be an example). The last true big move they made would have been the Jose Guillen for Juan Rivera deal (and that was a deal that was kind of forced on them based on Scioscia wanting Guillen out). Oh and the Edmonds for Bottenfield and Kennedy deal.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 05:09 PM) My guess is way too expensive to bring HD equpiment on the road. The Sox don't do it either, I don't think many teams do on the road, maybe i'm wrong. All of the Angels games are broadcasted in HD and the same with the Dodgers from what I know. It doesn't make sense to me because I assume they don't necessarily bring in the camera eqiupment (it just stays at the various stadiums throughout the year). Than again I could be wrong and maybe they do bring the cameras to the stadium for each homestand or game.

I don't get it, why no games in HD. I know the home game thing (and I know how assinine it is and I think its pathetic the league's commissioner doesn't step in and tell Wirtz he has to broadcast the home games to the people within Chicago for the greater good of hockey).