Chisoxfn

I can't say I know a lot about the religion, but I knew one lady who was a jehova witness and all I can say is that it really sounds like a cult to me. She would tell me a little bit about it and she had a child who was raised into it. In fact, we had a Happy Birthday thing for her kid and she got so pissed at us for saying it that she went nuts (I worked with her and she'd bring her kid in so everyone at the office was familiar with her and we got a cake for her little girl on her bday). I also have my opinion that its the dumbest religion I've ever heard of. They can't celebrate anything and it seems like all they do is complain about stuff. I'd be worried, but thats coming from someone thats agnostic. And I should say I only knew this one lady who we worked with and we just all felt so bad for her daughter cause her mom was nutsy and the daughter was nice and smart.

Bears @ Pitt will be by far the most difficult game the Bears play during the regular season (including upcoming games). Pittsburgh (despite a little above avg record) is one of the best teams in the NFC and Big Ben should have his timing back. Its going to be a hell of a challenge for Chicago.

QUOTE(DonkeyKongerko @ Dec 5, 2005 -> 08:18 AM) Get a Thinkpad if you feel like spending a little extra. Otherwise you'd be best off getting the aforementioned Dells in the Inspiron series. Get a Latitude maybe if you want something a little less bulky. Dual core notebooks are supposedly on the way. I'm not sure of the price range or release date, but the performance tests have been very impressive. I say hold off for a bit because the performance gains should be huge (basically two processors in your laptop for close to the price of one). http://www.notebookreview.com is a good site for finding reviews and the latest coupons for any notebooks. Plus they are supposedly very close to releasing laptops with batteries that last 8-10 hr's (due to the dual processors that they will be shifting to).

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Dec 4, 2005 -> 07:27 PM) yea, im thinking of going dell, although there were some nice deals on HP's in todays best buy catalog. thanks guys, keep it coming. Also, check out www.gotapex.com They'll usually post all the Dell computer deals and coupons. Oftne times you can find a really good deal. When I bought mine two years ago I ended up saving big bucks on an inspiron.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Dec 4, 2005 -> 06:41 PM) I am looking into buying a nice laptop as I will be needing it for college next year, and have the funds at the moment. I've been searching and doing some minor research on my own, but i figured i might be able to get some help here. $1000-1500$ price range, preferably less, but if its a really good one I wouldn't mind. I want wireless internet I feel aswell. What do you guys suggest? Dell and get a gig of ram if you can (the more ram the better). Aside from that the mobile pentium is really nice, but if your not gonna really care about how heavy or thin it is, often times you can find better, more powerful machines for a little less money than those that are super thin. Just depends on your preference. Definately get a DVD player/burner in there and opt for a nice monitor. Depending on the useage you may be interested in spluring for an extra battery (some of them don't last long so if for osme reason you plan on using them often without having access to a plug its nice to have 2). They should pretty much all come with wireless, but if they don't make sure you get it (definately super super nice). Oh and with Dell take advantage of the warranty. Laptops fail more than desktops since everything is more compressed and fragile. Because of that its nice to know if something goes wrong they'll replace it.

Strange thing I notice...but hot girls wearing short skirts in the cold, yet they wear those warm furry boots. I just don't get it (not complaining cause it looks hot) but if your cold why not wear something thats going to keep you warm.

Odd twist...but I have came up with a theory that you either drool or snore when you sleep. If you snore, than you don't drool and if you drool than you don't snore. Don't ask me how I came up with it, its just one of the stupid things I thought of one day when I realized I always drool and have never snored in my life.

QUOTE(SnB @ Dec 5, 2005 -> 01:24 PM) i've never had anything bigger than a twin bed. I don't know what i'd do if i actually had a decent sized bed, probably cry. I can't sleep on a twin bed. Its so hard. I have a full at my dads and a queen at my moms and it took me a while to adjust to the full. I roll around too much when I sleep.

Lets see, trade Garland for Vazquez albatross of a contract? Ya, that makes sense. I'd rather see the Sox take Garland and offer him 10 million a year long term (and no I don't think that would be wise either) but it would be smarter than dealing Garland for Vazquez.

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Dec 5, 2005 -> 07:49 AM) A note about LoDuca..He is a first half player, who declines after some time. Marlins are doing this becuase of the lack of fan support, they realize that this is not the year, and with the weak FA market they can rob teams of their prospects. I think its a great move, Willis and Cabrea are young enough to where they can build around and stil compete in 2 years. He is also incredibly over-rated by a lot of people (and under-rated by myself).

Trading Garland is stupid unless they get a good starter in return that is signed for a couple more years. No one is going to do that, therefor I'll keep Jon.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 5, 2005 -> 12:28 PM) Your right on that. However, only Sox fans, or real hardcore fans are going to know what a Brian Anderson brings to the table with the glove. When the guy watching in Idaho sees the Sox lost Aaron Rowand, and Harold and Kruk make a big deal about his D being lost, that guy is going to beleive the stooges. O well, thats how it works sometimes. I expect Brian Anderson to make a name for himself this season anyway, so hopfully we wont have to worry about it. plus think of it. How hard would it be for the analysts to watch a whole bunch of every team. They have to focus on certain teams more so than others. Its not like in football. When a set of announcers is going to announce the Bears or someone else, they have a full week and are able to watch quite a bit of film (if they want) to catch up and be pretty well prepared to talk about a team. Its just a lot harder in baseball, you have so many games played everyday and so many teams.

UCLA Blows

I wonder why no one has made a push at Washburn. He's a lefty whose not very hold. He's puts in his innings and had a 3.20 ERA last year (albeit not a record to brag about). He may be the one guy thats a little under-valued at this point of FA (that or he's asking for a ridiculous contract).

How crazy would it be if USC lost tonight? I'm assuming PSU would get into the national championship game against Texas but just think about how out of whack the whole picture would be. All of a sudden the Pac 10 gets two teams (or I'd assume two of USC, UCLA, and Oregon would get in) while the Big 10 or ND would get hosed out of one game and there would be at least a few teams that could make claims of being worthy to play in the national championship game (I'm biased though cause I have my belief that there are at least a few teams better than PSU).

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 3, 2005 -> 11:45 AM) Didn't you predict UCLA to finish outside the top 25 a few weeks ago? Twas the same person I like making ridiculious predictions. Damn Texas is freaking romping CU. I wonder if this would have been more fun for Heads than the prior week. Damn Texas looks good. I'm starting to think they will win it all. Still USC has an amazing offense. If USC wins tonight I think we will be in store for the best national championship game since the OSU/Miami game (where everyone in the world wrote off OSU only to see them beat the so called greatest team in college FB history).

Prediction: Long of the Year...take the points and UCLA (21 point underdogs). Final Score: UCLA 49 USC 46 I expect a total shootout and a close game. I'm picking UCLA because I'm biased. UCLA has a dynomite offense, USC has no defense. UCLA has no defense and will not be able to stop USC's offense. Turnovers will be the difference and if UCLA wins it will be because USC lost the football (uncharacteristic of them). In all honesty I think USC will win (but I'll make my prediction of UCLA anyway) but its going to be close and it will be a fun game to watch (total shootout).

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2005 -> 11:19 AM) Yes, the Dodgers were ravaged with injuries, but I don't know how you could have expected any less out of the Dodgers with the people they grabbed. Look at their pickups last offseason...JD Drew, Jose Valentin, Jeff Kent, Choi, etc. You don't sign Drew without expecting him to get hurt. You don't sign guys like Valentin and Kent at their ages without taking a big chance on them getting hurt. They basically asked for Gagne to get hurt when they traded away his setup guy in the bullpen last year and were forced to ride his arm on the way to the division. No, I realize that. They were idiots to put themselves in the position they did. I've long said you can't say oh Jd Drew was hurt. He's always hurt. Now Valentin, he's never been what I'd call injury prone and Jeff Kent was pretty much healthy, sans a couple minor injuries, IIRC. My point is the mistake was made when they signed Drew over Beltre (that was McCourt, not Depodesta). Depodesta wanted Beltre but when he missed out they worked out a deal for the other Boras rep in Drew. If they have Beltre at 3rd, they don't need Valentin. They have Izzy at SS (who knew he'd get hurt) and Kent at 2B. They would still need a 1st baseman and an outfielder but those are much easier to find. How was he supposed to know Jayson Werth (who looked like a really good up and comer the prior year) was going to get hurt and not be able to come back (they all expected him ready pretty early). Izzy had shown no problems with injuries, Valentin really hadn't (although they shouldn't have had him), Odalis Perez (ya that was a bad signing, cause he's prone to injuries) but Penny, Weaver, and company held up alright. Point is, look at Pauls moves: Jd Drew - awful, but I blame it on McCourt and knowing what I do about the situation (Beltre/Drew), I know it was McCourt's fault Jayson Werth - damn good acquisition, they gave up nothing for him and he's a guy with 20-30 HR potential and he's already done that at the major league level) Jeff Kent - look at the numbers, can't knock the signing Milton Bradley - not a bad deal, Bradley got hurt, but the guy is a good hitter; Now you can knock his talent and I think if Colletti is smart he'll unload him for whatever he can get. Brady Penny - most slammed deal in LA, but it was a good deal. Penny is/was the best part of that deal and he's still right here in LA. LoDuca will be gone and Mota bellied up in FLA. When you look at it Encarnacion was the best Fla got out of the deal. The Dodgers also got Steve Finley and Choi out of the deal. Shawn Green - cleared up a bad contract and got themselves a pretty damn good Catching prospect (still a wait to be seen). Point is, Depodesta wasn't near as bad as everyone made him out to be. I look at all those moves and I only see one being terrible, the rest weren't bad at all, in fact most were pretty good moves. Now I look at the Angels: Vladdy signing - great signing, I don't think it takes much talent and Stoneman wasn't very involved. It has long been talked about that Alfredo Griffin was the big part of that deal (I guess he coached or somehow knew Vladdy). Plus Vladdy didn't want to play in NY and hates the Dodger organization (although many in the org swear that they had him signed or thought they did). Colon signing - at 1st it looked like a little too much money. He pitched great in his 2nd year but is on the mend now. Still considering the current market a good move. Cabrerra - Money would have been spent better somewhere else. Cabrera is a good defensive SS (make that a great one) but he's a mediocre hitter and was asked to be the Angels 2 hole hitter (for at least part of the year). Eckstein (while I wasn't a big fan) was solid and if they were going to upgrade, Cabrerra wasn't an upgrade (overall). Finley - Terrible signing. The money spent on Finely Cabrerra could have been bettter spent. They could have had Beltran (now I'm not saying that would have been a great move either, but Beltran/Eckstein >>> Finley/Cabrerra Jose Guillen - I didn't like this move, but I understand why it was done. Byrd signing - worked out pretty well, good low-key move Not resigning Glaus - looks like a bad move (not one I will knock though, Glaus is overpaid). Not adding bullpen help - Big mistake Not finding a bat to replace Jose Guillen - Big mistake Giving Anderson that fat long term deal - Mistake (not too much blame though because no one knew Anderson's back would flair up like it did). Stoneman isn't great, he's not as horrid as I make him out to be, but he lacks guts and the willingness to put his rear end out there. Because of that I think he's too conservative of a GM. He's the type where his teams will win, but they won't win it all (I'm sorry, the World Champion Angels were Bavasi's team).

Did they get Benson? The O's are fools. They constantly blow money on a good offense while watching there pitching staff continue to fail. They have some good young pitchers, surround them with 1 or two good veterans and see what the team can do. I guarantee you they will at least play good baseball and win 50 percent of there games. If everyone clicks with a good offense and a good pitching staff theyd' have a shot (although the Yanks and Sox would have to take a step or two back).

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2005 -> 11:07 AM) I guess whether or not that turns out to be a good deal would depend a lot on which Beltre shows up. You find the Beltre from 2004 and its an instantly great deal no matter who they give up. That leaves the question though...where is the Beltre from 2004? Did he only get himself in shape to sign a contract? Did he do something different or stupid last year? Did the change of scenery hurt that much? Did he take some special pills to help him in 2004? Beats the hell out of me, but that was a huge dropoff in performance by him this year. I am of the believe that he struggled the 1st half of the season due to being in a new league. He's not exactly the type of hitter that will adjust himself quickly to an unfamiliar environment/league. In the 2nd half he put up pretty good numbers (well solid numbers) and showed off more of his game. I think he was amongst the league leaders in RBI's in the 2nd half of the season. There is no doubting that park factor was another reason (not much of one though cause the Beltre of 05 wasn't the Beltre of 04). The Dodgers were idiots not to sign him in the 1st place. They were so close financially and didn't need to offer but 5 mill more and it would have been done. Not to mention right after they miss out on Beltre they go out and offer a stupider contract to JD Drew. Beltre has had his injury problems but he plays through him and plays gold glove defense at 3rd (I think he's about as good of a 3rd baseman in all of baseball). It would be a big move to get him back. I don't know if Beltre will ever replicate those 04 numbers (ones I have long dubbed as the greatest single season ever for a 3rd baseman...although I think you could look at Arod as well) but I think he will be a consistent .280, 30-50, 100 RBI guy while putting up gold glove defense. He is more fragile than the typical superstar and will respond well coming back home. Regardless, I think he puts up good numbers (if healthy) wherever he is next year. As fars as I'm concerned neither the Dodgers or Angels have been doing things right the past two years. The Angels made some really foolish moves (got away with them because they had a strong nucleus) and the Dodgers made some (McCourt's fault) and than they were hammered with injuries. Hell, aside from the JD Drew fiasco, I could say that the Dodgers moves were smarter than the Angels the past year and a half or two, the only problem was the Dodgers were absolutely ravaged with injuries in 05.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Nov 30, 2005 -> 06:39 AM) I think coming up with a trade that the Sox could have made for Abreu is pretty much a trick proposition. I dont think the Phils would be entertaining this offer at all without getting Jim Thome moved first. The Sox could get Abreu...it would cost Brian Anderson or Chris Young, Jon Garland or Jose Contreras, and a pitching prospect or two. Of course the Phils (with that offer) would be sending cash back. No I'm not suggesting doing it either, just saying what I think it would cost (ie a lot). I don't know if the Sox could work the deal without giving the Phils a starting pitcher. The only way I could see that happening is if the Sox took Abreu's entire contract and gave up Bmac and Chris Young and sold the Phils on using the cash from Abreu's contract (which they don't have to pick up any portion of) to sign a FA starter like AJ Burnett. Once again, not a trade I'd make if I were the Sox, but I think it would be a smart deal for the Phils. The Sox aren't going to get Abreu, they are done offensively (unless they find a good option for the 2 hole and CF) but if I were the Phils I'd look at a team that was willing to offer some damn good prospects and take on Abreu's contract. Hell, maybe the Dodgers or Angels become sleepers in this whole situation. Both could take on the contract and offer some damn good (near major league ready prospects), which allows the Phils to nab a starter via FA or elsewhere (I don't know if the Phils will risk doing that since there is no guarantee they will get there player via FA).

I think long term...Valido will be the better of the two defensively. I still question whether Valido will hit at higher levels, but he has the abilities. The thing that I like most about him are his smarts. The guy just knows what to do with the baseball on the field. He looks more like a guy the Twins would bring up in years past in the sense that he knows what to do with the ball, is heady on the basepaths and seems to be able to use all fields. He still needs to produce in AA before we start annoiting him a great SS. I think upside wise, he would be a slappy SS with 10-15 HR pop and 30-50 stolen bases (probably closer to 30). I don't know if he'll win a gold glove, but he has the tools to be an above average defensive SS and I don't think he'll ever win the batting title. I could see him producing a .280-310 AVG, 10-15 HR, 30-50 SB with a .360ish OBP. Ie, I could see him turning into a pretty darn good leadoff or 2 hole hitter. That said these are really ridiculous estimates right now because he's simply played in A ball. If he produces like he did this past season in Bham, than I'll stand by those projetcions.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 3, 2005 -> 10:50 AM) Missing out on Konerko didn't hurt too much because they still have Casey Kotchman and Kendry Morales. But they could lose both Paul Byrd and Jarrod Washburn and may be replacing one of them with Hector Carrasco? Brutal. Unless they plan on picking up another starter, than thats the plan (and its an awful one, imo). Carrasco would be a great addition if they just let him relieve. He could come in and spell Donelly, Shields, and Krod. Problem is they have pulled there offer for Paul Bryd (meaning the odds of him going to Cleveland are greater) and they are not going to offer Washburn a contract. They seem content on improving there offense and relying on there rotation. If Escobar and Colon are 100% all season, there is nothing wrong with that, but I don't know if they will be. Colon, Escobar Lackey (when healthy) is not a bad top 3 but than you have Santana (a solid 5th, but the Angels will be asking him to develop into a 4th this year and he has the stuff for it). Than you rely on Weaver, Saunders or Carassco for your 5th spot. That just doesn't seem wise, especially considernig the payroll. The Angels are spending too much money on there hitters (guys like Erstad, Finley and Anderson...all 3 of whom are drastically overpaid). I think Anderson is the worse of all 3 (considering he's signed to a long term deal) and if I could unload him in the Manny Ramirez deal, I'd do it (I don't know if the Red Sox would do that straight up, but I sure as hell would if I were the Angels). As of right now I stick to what I've said for a long time. Bill Stoneman is an idiot of a GM who has no idea what he's doing. He continually gives out bad contracts (Cabrera, Anderson, and Steve Finley) and he is slowly turning the bullpen (which was the big reason they won the series) into something thats mediocre (they need some good arms there and he's done nothing to fix that). I will give him a defense on the Anderson contract because no one knew that he would end up having that arthiritic back problem.

Like I said, I expect 2.7 million fans next year and I could see them getting close to 3 million (if this were to happen, they would have to be playing great baseball from start to finish though). I also think the smaller stadium size hurts them in this quest.

Angels signed Carrasco to a 2 year deal worth 6.1 million. The Angels plan on having him compete for the 5th starters spot. He pitched very well for the Nationals last season. I don't think this would be a bad contract (if the Angels planned on leaving him in the pen) but there is no way in hell this guy is going to be any kind of a starter. They better hope Jared Weaver pitches his butt off in spring training and earns the 5th spot. The Angels also signed Tim Salmon to a minor league contract.