Chisoxfn

QUOTE(NUKE @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 12:02 PM) That's why we have charitible organizations. Its comical to me how freekin stupid people in the 3d world are. They keep on popping out children with no way to feed, clothe or educate them and then the bleeding hearts here whine about how horrible it is that children are living in squalor. No sympathy here for the idiots of the world. If you want to assign blame for the plight of these people it isin't because we dont have a global welfare state funded by U.S. taxpayers, its because of stupid people breeding. Its harsh but true. People need to get there heads out of there asses and act responsibly and that happens rarely enough in tihs great country let alone this piss poor 3rd world countries. Seriously, I don't get how dumb you need to be...if you don't have enough food for yourself, don't have more kids. Than again in many of those countries the feeling is if you have all those kids, some will die and others will hopefully make enough money that the family as a whole will end up making enough money to care for each other (the problem is most of the time they all just starve). Its flat out a tough business but I'm a freaking hard ass when it comes to the homeless and less fortunate (especially for those who flat out screwed up as opposed to those that screwed up due to being placed in an impossible situation). For me, I'd rather donate money to cancer research than some homeless bum on the street (because people can't control getting most types of cancer, yet they can get off there asses and get work and yes I realize a lot of homeless people are f'd up in the head but a lot of them are just lazy). I'd also rather give money to animal shelters or animal rights groups than a homeless person. In fact I pretty much never help the homeless or drug addicts because I flat out believe people are capable to an extent of making the right decision and I don't see where helping some dumbass that has thrown his life away is worth it (I'd rather throw my money or support to something where people ended up being placed in a terrible decision through no action of there own).

I think one of them pushing there ego aside and joining on one ticket would be a major threat to a democratic white house.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 11:16 AM) If you have little or no equity, you should not even consider taking on any other debt unless you have other property or something to secure it with (Car vs car loan, etc.). If you get upside down in a mortgage or other secured debt instrument, that can be BIG trouble. In fact, anything above 90% LTV (loan to value) is high-risk. Or if some disaster happens and you get nothing. Its just a scary situation because you are risking a lot (and many people are in this type of bind; especially people getting into interest only loans around this time period that don't have the money or resources to go through an ugly real estate market for a few years because if those people end up having to sell they will take a beating if they bought recently in Cali). I mean I have no idea what the money is for, but if it is to raise money for some sort of luxury item (ie non necessity) I would flat out stay away from it because you could really find yourself in a hole after the fact. Now if it is for something very important (medicine or college or food or whatever it may be) than s*** screw it that is more important. Just my 2 cents as an uptight accountant that is pretty stingy with most things (aside from pissing money away on sports and my nice tv set up).

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 11:32 AM) There was no loss though, right? No because you don't pay for anything. Of course our shop never made enough money to actually get any sort of pay day so they still have my mother fudging money.

Here's a concept, stop abusing these horses and have them run in this races when they really aren't equipped to handle the load at just 3 years old (especially with all the races they run). At least with hunting some people eat what they kill....this is just a big excuse to gamble and is a f***ing joke if you ask me (and don't get me started on rodeo's and the way the Bulls are treated). Yes, I'm a republican than gives a s*** about animal rights.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:14 PM) Helton's far better than most hitting guys the Sawks have, outside of Ortiz, Ramirez. If they were serious, they would have made a real offer. Its not like the BoSox don't have any offense. They didn't need to make this deal, in fact I wasn't a fan of the proposed deal. Hansen hasn't produced but he has a very very good arm and there is no reason to give a guy like that up for a ridiculously overpaid first baseman. The Sox have a middle of the lineup consisting of two of the best in the game (Manny/Ortiz) plus an OBP machine in JD Drew who will have legitimate protection. What the hell do they need Todd Helton for? Red Sox have spent a little laviciously and may not have offered the best contracts in the world but they improved a whole heck of a lot this off-season (and technically they can afford to offer a little more ridiculous contracts since the franchise generates a boatload of revenue). QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:28 PM) From what I can gather, Lowell, Tavarez, and Hansen. Unless Hansen offers some chance to start in the future, that's - at most - a 3Bman who's at the end of his prime, an old, psycho reliever, and a dominant closer at some point in the future (and maybe it's just because I haven't seen Hansen that I don't get the love...I would venture to guess it probably is). Helton will probably be a .900 OPS 1Bman this year still with a .390+ OBP for the next 2 years or so, and by the end of his contract, he'll probably be in the .850 range for OPS with a relatively high OBP all the same. I think that'd be well worth the gamble, seeing as how the Sawks already have a 3Bman out of position at 1B in Youkilis, Tavarez is deadweight, and they have all kinds of pitchers they can use in the bullpen to replace Hansen's presence. Colorado was picking up close to half...I don't know if I would have been able to turn that down. Put it this way, if the Sox had the opportunity to get Hansen (White Sox) I'd be really giddy because of the type of arm he has. But you also have to remember I'm a guy that favors scouting to stats and I know his production has been downright brutal at the minor leagues (still I think the odds are greater of a guy with wicked stuff turning things around and being good than guys with average to below average stuff but great minor league numbers being decent and the guys with wicked stuff always have that potential of being filthy). If I were the Rockies, I'd have been all over it. Helton does them nothing and has an albatross of a deal plus Lowell isn't all that bad (albeit his contract is a bit rough) but he plays 3rd (tougher position to fill than 3rd) and they get two high potential arms). If I'm the Red Sox I see no reason why it is worth giving up all that when you should hold onto those chips to either use at a later date or to fill an actual legitimate lead (because I don't really think getting another masher to play 1st base is much of need).

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:29 PM) Jason, what the hell. Inititially I thought you meant for 1 million we should know he's going to stay healthy.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:05 PM) just trade for ichiro and put the LF concerns behind us. Sometimes I wonder if Figgins isn't the right option now that Pods is down. We know what we could get out of Figgins and while I don't want to see Figgins in center, he could be a backup option if Erstad is hurt and Anderson sucks while at the same time be a primary option for left field (where he would be an above average defensive left fielder) all while at the same time giving the Sox some stability at the top of the order (and yes he is coming off a down year, but this guy is a better hitter than he was in 06 and he is truly one of the best/most lethal base runners in the game. I would not be opposed to offering up the right package to the Angels for Figgins with him playing LF . Let BA/Erstad battle it out for time in CF and if both suck/fail after the first month you can move Figgins to CF and find a LF (either give Fields/Sweeney a quick chance) or make a trade or really shake things up and by this time Pods will be ready and go with a speedy 1/2 part of the lineup and move Guchi to a power spot in the lineup (or even do something like Figgins 9, Pods 1 or vice versa, Guchi 2 which means the 2nd and 3rd times through the lineup you have almost an extra leadoff hitter.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:22 PM) They should know with confidence that, when healthy, he'll be able to play CF. Otherwise, it's a waste of $1 mill. Why, why should we know that with confidence. Yes, the doctors have checked and he is fine as of this moment but they can't predict if it will flare back up or another problem will occur. Honestly, he's getting that type of salary because there is an extent of questionability to him. If there wasn't someone would have given him a bit more money and a guaranteed starters job. QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:24 PM) Why, why should we know that with confidence. Yes, the doctors have checked and he is fine as of this moment but they can't predict if it will flare back up or another problem will occur. Honestly, he's getting that type of salary because there is an extent of questionability to him. If there wasn't someone would have given him a bit more money and a guaranteed starters job. Sorry Wite, I mis-read your post and you were implying we should know when healthy he can play CF and I think when he is healthy there is no reason to suspect he wouldn't be able to play CF (because he still has pretty good speed despite having some lower body injuries that have hampered him) and usually it would be the speed/range that would prevent him from playing CF because he has good instincts (albeit he may struggle early on since he hasn't had too many games in CF over the past 4-5 years).

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:20 PM) He's been hurt, so an Angels fan or not shouldn't be able to answer this with a definite answer. In my opinion, the White Sox will have to wait until Spring Training to see how far he's come along to see if he'll be able to play some center field. R&W it may be uncool thing for me to do (since your a wanted man around these parts) but we tend to agree a whole heck of a lot.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 02:18 PM) I was talking Fields/LF and Erstad/CF, mainly. I know you watch LAA a lot, but is Erstad any better than average anymore? Considering last year was the only time he's been out there recently it truly is impossible to say since he was hurt last year. I really think you have to throw out last years season from the perspective of his actual production (because if he is hurt he will not play, period, end of story and if he is actually healthy he's a different player). That is why I continue to insinuate that I can't imagine a healthy Erstad being any less than major league average defensively in CF and that is an upgrade over what Mack was out there (and obviously a downgrade to Anderson defensively, however, Erstad could very well be a bit better than league average which would close that gap between Anderson and Erstad a bit but by no means will Erstad be as good as Anderson was defensively).

QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 08:47 AM) OK, what if you don't have any equity (or very little)? Are there any options? Probably not. You could maybe go to a bank and try to get a line of credit or loan, but you won't get a home equity line or a 2nd if your house hasn't appreciated since you purchased it or if you don't have any equity (at least I can't see any reason why a bank would do that since they would not have any collateral).

We used to have a Soxtalk store and I guess it was alright. We didn't sell much stuff though.

Stewart is a right handed outfielder and if he doesn't get a contract from anyone else I don't see where the harm is in giving him a minimum deal and have him come in (in case Pods stinks) because while Stewart is god awful defensively in LF (so was Pods) he could be a decent bat to have off the bench (that said it seems we'd have one too many veteran bats on the bench if we did pick him up).

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 10:05 AM) You know I was trying to make the point that Fields bat isn't that close to Crede's right now, as the article claimed it to be. I figured that, but I saw the whole should be a starter in 06 and I was surprised. The rest of those comments weren't at all directed at you Tony but I try to bring up the point that people that claim that such and such rookie is for sure going to be better than such and such are usually pretty pointless (unless the person they are replacing is a rookie that was absolutely terrible). For example, I'd feel confident that Ryan Sweeney would outhit BA's line of last year. But for some people (such as ESPN) to claim that Fields would outhit Crede is flat out nuts. Maybe in time he would, but why not keep Joe, get Josh ab's at both 3rd and LF (if he is on the major league roster I want him to get at least 300 Ab's) and get him acclimated so that in a year from now (if we do decide to part with Joe this off-season, which would be the time to move him, imo) and than we can move him with a better idea of what we have in Josh (as well as Josh having a better idea of what the major leagues are all about). At the same time I think another year in AAA would be very beneficial for Josh because I think he has things to work on with his swing (ie shortening it up).

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 08:54 PM) How do we all feel about the assertion that Fields' bat is about as good as Crede's? Longterm wise I wouldn't be surprised if Fields had as good of a bat as Crede. Defensively I don't think Fields will ever be Crede and people should note that I say long term because Josh isn't the type of guy that is just going to come up and hit and hit and hit (there really aren't many of those guys in the minors and the Sox sure as heck don't have any with the potential possibility that I think if Sweeney gets a bit more time he could come up and hold his own average wise/defensively). QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 10:58 PM) Not going to answer for Wite, because I'm sure he has an answer different than mine, since there are many to this question, but if Fields was in fact close to being a .280-.320-.800 type player, than the Sox would have found a spot for him on the 2006 roster. Why, he clearly wasn't ready for it. That isn't to say he isn't capable of being that in the future. From a pure hitting standpoint Fields does have the ability to be better than Crede on different levels but he right now he isn't nowhere near the hitter Joe is (but Joe had plenty of time in the minors as well as plenty of time to develop in the majors). I just laugh at people that think we can trade Joe and replace his production with fields right away (just like I laughed at people saying that Anderson was going to come in and replace Rowand with ease...even though Rowand was vastly over-rated by many and under-rated by a lot less). It doesn't work that way unless you have that very rare minor leaguer (typically would be amongst the top 5 prospects in all of the game) who just is a pure pure hitter. QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 30, 2007 -> 09:13 AM) For anyone that watched the AAA All-Star game last year, or saw the Futures game.....the thing about Josh is he swings hard and misses...quite a bit. However, when he makes contact, it's a rocket quite a bit of the time. He's going to struggle, but I think he'd hit better than BA did in the first half if brought up right now. Its not hard to have a more god awful swing/plate approach than Anderson did. Its why I said he needed a lot more time and was always tougher on him than most when we wrote up our FutureSox evals (because his current swing just didn't translate to major league success). He has cleaned it up a bit but I still think it has a ways to go (Yes if he does get it figured out he has the ability to be a good offensive player but I still think his peak is more in the Torri Hunter range where he'll hit in the lower .270's with some pop, probably a bit less than Hunter, steal some bases and play very good defense and I'd take that. I just think that like Hunter, it may take Anderson a few years to get to that point.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 08:25 PM) I've never understood what people see in her, I think she is absolutely disgusting. She is worse than disgusting. Both Williams sisters are.

By the way Josh, we are going to do the preseason list a little different this year and try to cover more players but only rank the top 10. Let me know if you are up for helping out again

SI had a top 75 prospect list that came out and the following Sox were included on the list: 31) Danks 65) Sweeney 69) Gonzalez HM) Fields Very interesting to see Fields rakned behind two pitchers and Ryan Sweeney. Personally I don't have a problem with that but I know some other scouting groups have Fields as the best prospect in the system (Keith Law and someone at BA, IIRC). Keith Law, ESPN Insider did a top 25 list and an organizational list. Our organization was ranked 16th and this was because the Sox restocked the system with the Garcia/McCarthy deal. 17. Josh Fields, 3B, White Sox Offensively, there's not much of a drop-off (if any) from Joe Crede to Fields right now. For a player with limited baseball experience coming out of school, Fields has advanced very quickly and shown better strike-zone command than you typically see in multisport guys. I think there's quite a bit of growth left here, given his background. 24. John Danks, LHP, White Sox Has some fastball command issues to work out, but he's very close to the majors, more so than any of the pitchers on the honorable-mention list below.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 05:37 PM) So if you were thinking of buying a laptop now, would you go ahead and do it and get one with Vista? Or would you wait for a bit? Or buy one with XP? (you can still do that, can't you?) Well if I wasn't going to wait I would definitely pick one up with Vista (no reason not to). Preferably I think it would be best to wait a short time but even if you didn't I'd go Vista.

Without a doubt (even if he had 5 bad snaps in the super bowl) Mannelly is the best long snapper to ever play the game.

CSUF opens up its baseball season on Friday against Stanford and you can bet your ass I'll be there to root on my Titans!!!

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) Here's the list of all the tv games for the event: Southern Illinois at Butler UNI at Nevada Drexel at Creighton Winthrop at Missouri State Bradley at VCU Holy Cross at Hofstra Appalachian State at Wichita State Kent State at George Mason Old Dominion at Toledo Ohio at New Mexico State Albany at Boise State Cal State Fullerton at Wright State Utah State at Oral Roberts Austin Peay at Akron The top 5 games here are pretty damn good, 6 and 7 are solid games as well. Got some real good matchups this year. YES...FULLERTON MAKES THE LIST!!!! TOO BAD WE GO ON THE ROAD.

Excellent news. This should make him a far more complete and better player and I think he'll be a real asset for us 4 years from now if he plays on the World Cup squad.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 29, 2007 -> 09:44 AM) It's too bad, I was really pulling for that horse and thought he'd make it through after all of this. http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/news/story?id=2747087 I refuse to support this sport.