Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Springfield SoxFan @ Jun 20, 2010 -> 05:31 PM) It is pretty amazing to read all of these draft stories and it would be nice to hear what actually went down, because if he his agent told the Royals who would not sign for the 4th overall slot, that agent should be fired, but oh well. It's great to have him and let's see how he does this summer. Some teams were thinking it was going to take 4M to sign him. It was odd that he went to the Sox since it didn't sound like Sale had really talked or heard much from the Sox at all.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 20, 2010 -> 12:27 PM) Loney wouldn't require Gavin. We shouldn't have to get rid of any big pieces for this bat we're trying to get. I don't think the Sox should trade the one young starter we have that is under contract. Wouldn't make much sense. I like Loney a lot though, but I wouldn't give up Floyd for him. However, Loney isn't exactly a middle of the order run producer. I think he hasn't reached his ceiling yet though. Loney is kind of the modern day Mark Grace (good defense, nice average, little power). Dodgers could use pitching though and they don't have the ability to take on salary. I also want to point out that trading for Loney gives you a gold glove caliber 1st baseman, who could also play a mediocre left, but quite frankly, the Sox have Konerko right now and Viciedo long-term seems to be our fit at 1st. Sure there is the DH spot ,but I don't like the idea of spending a lot of prospects or top notch talent on who wouldn't be able to play in an NL park (because I tend to think Paulie is the better offensive of the two players at this current point in time, due to his additional power). Loney's power numbers would increase a bit by moving to the cell though. Berkman would be a solid get. But I wouldn't give up major pieces to get him. If I were going to buy a Dodger, I'd look at Matt Kemp. Not that we would get him, but I'd consider moving Floyd for Kemp. Not sure if the Dodgers or Sox would do that and I'm probably the worse person to determine the value of Floyd, since I think when he's on, he's the best pitcher we got, well maybe 2nd best, Peavy is pretty nasty too.

Should be a good matchup. Kick some ass Danks!!!

I do think these next 3 games will tell us a whole lot more though. These are going to be games against a really strong and hot Atlanta Braves team. I say bring it on, if we are gonna be a playoff team, we need to beat teams like this and take series. Lets grab a minimum of 2 out of 3 Good Guys!!!

At the end of the day, I'm always in. Beckham has hit the ball harder, although Sunday he didn't. Quentin seems to be making strides and our pitching is improving. Offensively I have some doubts but this team can do it. The problem is the 2nd half schedule is tough.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jun 20, 2010 -> 08:59 PM) He smoked the dp ball as well. Ya he did. His first 3 AB's, the end result was a crushed ball opposite field. One of the things I really like about Dayan and why I think he has the ability to be an elite offensive player is his ability to use all fields. The one thing that might get in the way is his plate discipline though. Personally I don't know if he's ready, but the guy has elite batspeed and massive power. He still needs to work on improving when to pull the ball vs when to hit opposite field. Sometimes he gets stuck in oppo mode and that actually hinders his power, but Dayan is a guy that a lot of guys will like if he pans out because he has the ability to use all fields and hit it out to all fields.

If he's going to pitch, I assume that means this has more to do with general soreness and a little fluid associated with a non serious injury.

QUOTE (SHIPPS @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 01:29 PM) Thats like me asking myself "Does it matter that I lost my job this year?".....I have made a good percentage of profit on my lemonade stand. Did you really lose your job?

I've only seen the pilot episode of this show, but it looks quite promising. I'm gonna be downloading it somehow, assuming I can find it, but I recommend it for anyone willing to try a British Comedy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Inbetweeners

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 01:34 PM) If they outscore us by 2 we'd have the same amount of goals so we'd draw lots, he's right. Duh, I'm an idiot.

QUOTE (docsox24 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 12:05 PM) Agreed, great write up. I disagree about his defense but hey we all have our opinions and I sure hope JPN is right! While I haven't seen him play nearly as much I get my info from some very reliable sources. I have been told his only plus attribute is his arm and everything else is below average. I think they have to give him a lot of PT or it would be a waste to let him rot on the bench. The thing I am most concerned about is the K/BB ratio. His reaction time, etc is all slow at 3B. He has a very very strong arm. Quite frankly Viciedo profiles much more as a left fielder than a 3rd baseman. He does have relatively soft hands though.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 01:30 PM) If USA beats Algeria, US advances. IF USA ties Algeria: & England beats Slovenia, US is out & Slovenia beats England, US advances & England ties Slovenia: if England doesn't outscore US by more than 1 goal on Wed., US advances if England outscores US by more than 2 goals on Wed., England advances if England outscores US by exactly 2 goals on Wed., then they draw lots for 2nd place in the group If Algeria beats USA, then US is out Does that sound right? If England ties slovania and the US ties, than it depends on the total number of goals. Right now we have a 2 goal cushion on them, given that we have scored 3 goals to there 1 goal. So if both US and England tie the next game, as long as England doesn't outscore us by 3 or more goals in the final game, we'd advance.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 01:30 PM) Best possible result for us as now we own the tiebreaker over England. Are you sure? Isn't goal differential first so that is still up for grab. But if it goes to 2nd tie-breaker than we are set?

So now a US win and we are for sure in right? Am I mistaken? England & USA win, US & England advance. Goal Differential will be the 1st tiebreaker to see who the top dog is. Next one would be goals scored (US currently has a 2 goal advantage on them in this area). England loses, US wins; US advances as the 2 seed; Slovenia earns 1 seed. Everyone in this bracket is still alive. And 3 of the teams still have a shot at the top seed. Won't be an easy game against Algeria, but the US is fully capable of doing this and earning a 1 seed. Lets kick some ass USA!!!!

At least we didn't pull a Chicago Cubs. They certainly went cheap in the 1st round:

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 10:41 AM) Wait the foul was on Edu? WTF that makes the call even worse than I could have imagined. FIFA needs to investigate that official and he definitely should never ref a World Cup or really any other international game again. That is what one article is saying. Again, I don't think anyone knows and I've heard multiple people saying the refs wouldn't tell them what the call is. It is f***ing awful, awful, awful. So deplorable what these refs get away with.

Deplorable

QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Jun 17, 2010 -> 08:47 PM) This might seem like some incredible statement, but I think Obama is a good man. And I think for the most part he's done what he thought is best for the country. Has he got all of these things right? No. Maybe he's even gotten them all wrong. But lets be reasonable. I can support a politician without thinking he's a Messiah. In fact that's what's inherently difficult about supporting a politician. They're going to screw up, and they're going to make decisions I don't like. I think Obama would like to see the American economy and the car companies recover, and the oil spill stop, not only because that's the sane thing to think, but because it's in his best political interests and those of the country. I think he cares more about his re-election, than about spreading the wealth. The idea that Obama let the oil spill so he could, turn this into a environmentalist, or socialist (which one is it) cause is probably as silly as the idea that the Bush administration let the terrorists attack so they could invade middle eastern countries. I trust these people more than that. In addition, aren't GM and Chrysler doing pretty good again? And I'm not going to say this is because Obama and Congress bailed them out (they'll do that on their own). But isn't it safe to at least consider that that was a good decision, and that it might eventually turn into a profit for taxpayers? And what about the stimulus? Didn't pretty much every single country do it? I kind of doubt that every government thought of it as Robin Hood stuff. Good example of groupthink, probably not a good example of all these countries perpetrating some svengalian act of secret socialism. Seriously, after all the villifying of Bush you did. No one becomes the president of the US because they want to f*** up the country.

QUOTE (Chi Town Sox @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 07:21 AM) Does anyone have any good recommendations/findings for possible credit cards to use overseas. Such as 0% APR on purchases for a year, 5% back on hotel or restaurants charges, etc. I have a Capital One currently, which as far as I know is the only credit card that does not charge fees for overseas purchases (as of last year.) But I obviously am paying interest on that as I have had it for awhile...my girlfriend contacted Discover who had actually lied to her and said that hotels would accept the Discover card overseas (this card is 0% APR and 5% back on hotels) and then I check the website and they are not currently used in Europe. Terrific Discover has an affiliated name in Europe that I believe works over there. Might be wrong. Amex isn't used much, but Visa and Mastercard are golden over there.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 10:17 AM) Maybe it was, but here's a link to the offical 2010 World Cup Regulations on FIFA's website. page 47, Article 39.5, it says that the final tiebreaker is drawing lots. Maybe they changed it for all other tournaments? http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/tournament...010inhalt_e.pdf Could be. I'm not an expert on it. The article I had read that I pasted the stuff from indicated that the rules had changed but maybe that was for the qualifying rounds leading into the World Cup.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 09:51 AM) I found this on two different websites: The scenario was changed recently (within the last 4 years or so) and a playoff would be the deciding way if they were still tied.

We had heard a trade was going down with Whisler a day or so ago. It is just a minor move and has no impact on the major league squad.

Tiebreaker Rules: Group tournaments rules In all group tournaments, three points are awarded for a win, one for a draw, and none for a loss. FIFA has set the order of the tie-breakers for teams that finish level on points: 1. goal difference in all group matches 2. greater number of goals scored in all group matches Where teams are still not able to be separated, the following tie-breakers are used: 1. greater number of points obtained in matches between the tied teams 2. goal difference in matches between the tied teams 3. greater number of goals scored in matches between the tied teams Where teams are still equal, then a play-off on neutral ground, with extra time and penalties if necessary will be played if FIFA deems such a play-off able to be fitted within the coordinated international match calendar. If this is not deemed feasible, then the result will be determined by the drawing of lot.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 09:03 AM) Well, Slovenia won 1-0 against Algeria. A win by England against Algeria and a Slovenia - England push would give those 3 teams 5 points. If we win 1-0 against Algeria, we would be tied in goal differential with Slovenia and possibly England, depending on what score they potentially beat Algeria by. What is the next tiebreaker after goal differential? I have absolutely no idea. Basically put, England ties would tend to be bad for us. Anything else and we would control our own destiny with just a win. I honestly have zero idea what the next tiebreaker is. Shots on goal ?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 18, 2010 -> 09:00 AM) They did not call offside. The post-game stats showed us as having 0 offsides called against us. Had to be a foul given. Well the TV called offside. If they called a foul, I dont' know how the f*** it was on because the only contact I saw was the guy bear hugging Bradley.