Chisoxfn

If you wait a couple weeks, the cheaper (non Premium ones) will also have HDMI. I just had to return mine from Costco as it never worked right (had some disc error issues) but I haven't heard of anyone else I know having problems (and mine had started from day one). Oh and the Xbox comes with a really strong warranty now (thanks to those early f'ups) so even if something does happen its covered.

My entire right leg is on fire. Note to self, don't ever dive and than slide onto concrete (I was going after a play in softball and there were a bunch of runners on so I was going all out and didn't realize I was coming up onto concrete) Now I am sitting at work and I swear my entire hammy is red...leg, knee..everything. Each time I spray bactine on it I have to run around cursing for a minute till the pain subsides (than I put myself through more torture with Pydroxide or whatever its called).

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 08:56 PM) Do you mean legal as in it wasn't specifically banned in the MLB rules book? Or as a legal dietary supplement, or available as a prescription? Both.

QUOTE(danman31 @ Sep 12, 2007 -> 12:14 AM) Mahin played with Bristol. He's going to be a real solid player. Don't know if he has enough tools to make it, but he definitely knows how to play the game and is fundementally strong.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) I noticed the answer you posted on your blog, but I do recall people hyping Prior as the unquestionable #1 selection in late 2000. It jumps out at me because, in my more juvenile days, I was trolling the Cubs official MLB website and first became aware of him through there. Actually I think Texeira was also widely considered the potential #1 pick that far in advance as well but he had some sort of injury early in the collegiate season leading up to the draft and because of that injury slid down a few slots (and of course Prior was amazingly dominant at USC that season).

I'd still be surprised if he got the job. I don't think he's ready in the player development standpoint for the GM role. I do think he'd be a big loss though as he does an oustanding job in the contract negotiations.

I think there is a decent chance the Sox could stick with Brian Anderson as a back-up outfielder (capable of playing all 3 OF positions). That will become more likely if he makes some strides in winterball. Sweeney on the other hand will probably be dealt for another prospect the Sox like that may fill a more immediate hole (Sweeney still has trade value, but I'd say he's considered a B-/C+ prospect at this point and most of that is still based on a lot of "Old" hype). In fact there is a better chance that both are gone next year than both being in the org, imo.

I definitely think there is some cause for concern. At the same time, he has a good arm and this beatdown will be a great learning experience for him (assuming he's mentally tough and can handle this and if he isn't mentally tough than he won't make it in this league). I still think he has a lot to work on and the progression of his secondary stuff really was minimal throughout the course of the season and that kind of scares me. I'm hoping its just a confidence thing and that he's been working with Coop on that sort of stuff and will show up more ready to compete for a full season next year.

That RedEye thing is cool. Congrats to those of you that were quoted.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 12, 2007 -> 09:34 AM) With the talent level the D-Rays have built up in the draft...they really do have a shot at making noise here in the next couple years. They've had great talent buildups for a while, problem is they have trouble keeping the young guys together and they have never went after some vets to put around the young players when they are ready as the final step towards the competing puzzle (well with the exception of when they spent some money on Greg Vaughn and a couple other busts.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 05:10 PM) Couple of things... 1) Those not understanding the timing of this extension...surely, you jest. This is called buying low. This is economics 101 and it is certainly a White Sox hallmark. If believed that Ozzie was not the problem this year and that the White Sox can once again compete for the pennant under his guidance, the board was smart to lock up their man when he asking price was presumably at its lowest. 2) The short-sightedness is staggering. Anyone with at least a half-refined baseball acumen knows Ozzie Guillen was not the problem for the 2007 White Sox. Was he at his best? No. I'll admit it appeared at times that Guillen had his head a bit too far out in front of his skis...paling in comparison to Williams' performance. I don't think this season was due to a lack of trying OR a lack of proper managing--it was due to lack of talent and lack of execution. This is a fine move and a positive one for the organization. Solid post Addy.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 04:47 PM) http://tampabay.devilrays.mlb.com/news/pre...jsp&c_id=tb 3 days ago. Madden is a real good baseball guy too. Really wish he could get a managing position for a better franchise.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 03:18 PM) Oh, and Tony. I'd love to hear your expertise chime in here... Why is it a good idea to extend the manager of the most underachieving team in baseball history's contract? This team has numerous players on it that would not be on a lot of teams rosters so I can't call them the most underachieving based on that. Plus, Ozzie really had little to do with the massive failure in the pen. I actually have no problem with this move because I like most of what Ozzie asks for out of his players. My main griefs are that I don't consider him the strongest in game manager (this is where a top notch bench coach would fit in perfectly) and that at times I question his evaluation skills (sometimes he writes off players solely because they make one bad impression of them and the reality is, to me, that young players deserve a couple chances).

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 01:41 PM) That seems unlikely - the intrastate games like that, the rivalry, they get sellout crowds, big TV money, and the host town gets a ton of business. Any other non-conference game they add is unlikely to draw as well. I honestly can't figure out their motivation, unless they think ISU won't be competitive. It was only a few years ago, though, that ISU had beaten Iowa a number of times in a row. So I really just don't get it. Well I know Iowa's biggest grossing non-conference game this year was the NIU game so I'm thinking they may think they can find another game like that. Personally I want to play ISU because its an in-state rivalry.

Finally saw Zodiac and I really really really enjoyed it.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 06:40 AM) McCarney wasn't going to take the program any further than it was. His staff had grown complacent and he had the option of saving his job if he cleared out some of his staff. He chose to resign. BTW, word is Iowa wants out of the ISU game after 2010. ISU contends that they are set up through 2020. Why does Iowa want out? I assume they want to schedule another game that would allow them to make more money.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 11, 2007 -> 06:14 AM) How can people say that a guy whose arm lags in the stretch at the major league level has a great arm? And he throws 91-93 most the time, 87-89 from the stretch, with a good curveball, no changeup, lousy slider. But what, exactly, makes him a great arm? 91-93 and no ability to pitch from the stretch. Yeah. I, for one, am happy that Ozzie doesn't buy it yet. Jenks/Vazquez/Thornton/MacDougall all have better arms.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 11:27 PM) How do you figure? It's arguably the worst rotation in the AL Central. For the last 3 months or so, Contreras and Danks have had a hard time getting more outs than base runners allowed. Considering how much money is invested in our starting pitching, they've brutally underachieved the last two seasons. Well, Cleveland/Minny/Detroit all have some of the best rotations in baseball and no way is the Sox rotation worse than the Royals. Plus I still like Danks and while things have gotten rough I also think you have to factor in the horrific pen leading to an eventual wall that these starters hit (because you can only so long with getting royally screwed till you start to think you have to pitch absolutely perfect to win and in turn end up giving up more runs because you get into a funk trying to pitch perfect).

On a sidenote, I want to point out I don't have a problem with anyone rooting for the club to lose. I understand all about the top pick. I'm also trying to throw out other points so you guys get an idea of where those that may not be rooting for the club to lose are coming from. I basically take the approach if they lose, fine, top pick here they come, but if they win I see the added benefit in terms of player development that could come with those wins (since typically when you win its because you've played well and if young players play well its a good sign of your future as you may actually have a couple young players that will turn into quality major league players). I'm not about to care much either way, unless of course we have some significant injuries. All I care about is if the young players play well and I hope vets play well to raise trade value.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 11:10 PM) FWIW, the main reason I'm so big on having the 1st pick is due to the reports I had from a first-hand source at the Team USA tournament a few months ago. The reports said that Pedro Alvarez was far and away the best player, and it wasn't even close. The report also said that Danks was god awful, and Smauk is nothing special. I still say usually the draft is at least 10 deep (in terms of really good first round picks). Ocassionally that doesn't hold true but I really don't typically see a massive difference talent wise between the top few picks (that may not be the case this year as I tend to think Alvarez seems to be a very safe pick who also has a lot of upside). Still, you have the college season to play and you'll have plenty of prep players moving up and down on the boards. A lot can happen between now and draft day.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 11:07 PM) Why can't we be happy when Floyd does pitch well, and then a 38 year old pitcher gets the loss? None of us are hoping this team loses 10-0 every game. That Red Sox series was awful. We want to see every young player do well, but the team just barely lose. Like I said, I don't mind games like tonight but I'm also not going to hope for them to lose games. I'd rather see Floyd get major league wins because I think that helps his confidence and in turn helps him hopefully become a long term option for the clubs rotation (and one that can help the Sox turn things around). However, I also have no problem if Cintron/Gonzalez (who I can't stand, although if he does good I tip my cap and I don't see a problem playing him cause you might as well see all you can) Pods/Erstad stink (although I think both Pods/Erstad play hard and I respect them for that) just to make sure that none our on the major league roster next year (same can be said for Uribe) because I feel all those guys stinking is best for the team (same for Mike the Horrible Myers and Ryan Bukvich).

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 11:06 PM) Dear Mr. SSI: The reason that we selected Jordan Danks with the first pick in the draft was due to how he performed in the Cape Cod League. Our scouts thought his skills were projectable, and he's the player we wanted to draft. We tried very hard to sign him out of high school, but he went on to have a great career at Texas. Jordan has a lot of baseball smarts, and we're excited to have him team up with his brother. If Danks has just a decent season and slips, he could very well be there in Round 2. Just liek if he has a great season he probably goes top 15, maybe top 10. I call BS too, cause i don't see the Sox taking Danks over far superior prospects. I have no doubt they take Danks later on if he's there (2nd round or later) but not before (Unless he has a stud season and in which case he may be worthy of being picked at that spot).

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 10:58 PM) C'mon now. Matt Bush was a pick that just about everybody criticized at the time. I don't remember ANYONE saying Bush was close to being the best player available that year. It's really a shame that they booted up the Soxfest prices -- I'd love to ask Kenny a question this year. "Mr Williams -- with the Sox having the first overall pick in the upcoming draft , will the organization be willing to pony up the money for the best overall player, even if it means going significantly over slot?" Bush was definitely a top 5 pick though. Was he a reach as the #1 overall yes, but that isn't the first time thats happened. And I should say I'm not saying I have a problem with the #1 pick but I see more value in this team winning with young players than it continuing to lose. If they end up losing and the club gets the #1 pick fine, but if Floyd/Danks and the rest of the starters pitch well and AJ/Dye/Konerko/Thome/Richar/Fields/Owens all play well (more so the younger guys) and this team gets on a roll than awesome. As someone whose placed baseball very competively (prior to hurting my arm..and my high school did suck so it wasn't like we were competing for titles or anything) but winning is always key. It helps with your development, hell its part of your development (good teams learn how to win and find ways to win while bad teams do the opposite). I'd like our young players to see what it takes and do what it takes to WIN at the major league level. I also think more wins means that our young guys have produced and I think them producing makes it more likely that they are legit and that alone should help the Sox next year and over the course of the next few years. And in terms of picks...the best pick in the draft is rarely the #1 overall pick, so to me I know for sure if you win an extra ten games there is probably good reasons for the team winning more (and those things could very well likely carry over) and I don't know that the #1 pick will make a difference (compared with the #4 or #5 pick). The only time I would say different is if we were talking about a guarantee at Lebron James or something along those lines in the NBA (and in that case its the lottery which makes that a crapshoot).

What a good finish.

QUOTE(fathom @ Sep 10, 2007 -> 10:40 PM) Greg....who would you rather have the chance to pick, Cole Hamels or Royce Ring? Geeze...Joe Blanton could have been the Sox. I'd just as well have the additional wins (IIRC the Sox were pretty damn good during the early 2000's even if they missed the playoffs) and that still put them in position to draft Blanton. Sox just made a s***ty draft choice (which has been done). Who'd you rather draft...Matt Bush or Josh Fields??? (Bush was the #1 overall pick that year).