CWSGuy406

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:51 PM) The NFL started giving drug suspensions about a decade ago. They were way quicker to do something than MLB, and MLB, between the anti-trust, and the commish's powers to act in the best interest of the game, they have been a complete failure in this aspect. The NFL even had to have this happen during labor negotiations, which MLB didn't. This doesn't seem to jive with what I've always thought. That's not to say you're wrong, mind you, but I don't remember the NFL being a whole helluva lot more stern than MLB during the 90s.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:10 PM) And I, for what it's worth, would add that the NFL does not have integrity any more than baseball does. But I ask: you think football is classy? I was gonna say... it's not like football acted any quicker than baseball did with regards to enforcing these steroid policies. I'd just say that the NFL has a better marketing or legal team. It goes back to what I said in another thread -- guys like Raffy Palmeiro and Gary Matthews Jr are absolutely villified any and everytime their name comes up in the media -- "If you remember __ months ago GMJ was cited for steroid allegations." Yet in the NFL you have Shawn Merriman, for one -- I don't remember the last time I heard the fact that he got caught. No, no... hell, he's the star of that Nike (?) commercial.

QUOTE(SoxFanForever @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 07:24 PM) I wonder if he is referring to Hellgate: London? Yes, that's what I'm talking about. Is that not D3? If so, then I apologize for getting people's hopes up. My friend told me a new D3 was coming out and I just posted it on here on a whim. My apologies. Is Hellgate: London not D3?

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:41 AM) I love BA, but if Anderson even has a shot at the CF job this year, this team is f***ed. Best case scenario is Anderson has a great April and May in AAA, brings up that value, and go from there. If it turns out that the Sox fail to land either Fukodome or Rowand -- and if they choose to ignore Mike Cameron -- I'd just go with an Anderson/Owens platoon in CF next year. That's better than trading Gio for Dejesus or Crisp, so...

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 01:41 AM) Enjoy Griese and his dump off passes. What happened? In any case, I'm very supportive of Griese and his dump-off passes as I have Adrian Peterson (not Purple Jesus) going for me in fantasy. In fact I hope Peterson is his leading receiver tonight.

QUOTE(2nd_city_saint787 @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 07:23 AM) isnt pablo rather young??? If 33 is young then sure, he fits the bill.

Why didn't anyone mention that there is a Diablo 3 coming out?

Zyuzin is starting to get on my nerves quite a bit, BTW. He holds onto the puck too long, he's not particularly effective on the PP or in his own zone. When this team gets fully healthy, I hope Byfuglien is the one who's staying on the ice and Zyuzin joins MagJo in the press-box.

Kane had some wonderful chances down the stretch. Khabibulin wasn't very sharp tonight and Luongo was very good. Tough loss there.

Stupid f***ing PPV feed for the Canucks has been crap all night. And now I'm stuck with radio.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 04:03 AM) I assume you are able to watch tonight. Are the Hawks dominating like it sounds like they are? Sounds like Louie was stolen this game so far. Dominating is too strong a word -- I'd say they've outplayed the Canucks but not dominated. They're doing very well against the Sedin-squared/Naslund line, playing as physical with them as they played with the RTK line when we were up in Vancouver. Luongo has been Luongo -- it's going to be tough getting one by him, and I fear we may not even come up with a point if Vancouver nets one before us (duh). It's a shame that the second goal the Hawks gave up was a real stinker -- I'd feel much better heading into the third with that one-goal cushion.

Havlat hit iron at an almost impossible angle when the Hawks were on the PK. He got a lucky goal on the one that just tied the game, but it was still a smart play. He shot from the wing from a tight angle and it hit the defenseman's skate and went in.

QUOTE(BlackBetsy @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 03:17 AM) 8:45 p.m., from Steve Phillips • The Cubs and Orioles have discussed a Brian Roberts trade. Baltimore would get Rich Hill and Sean Marshall for the second baseman. Geebus. They need to take the 'puter away from Steve Phillips. Rich Hill is easily worth Brian Roberts + a prospect from the Orioles. OPS+ of 112 for Roberts vs. ERA+ of 119 for Rich Hill...plus Rich Hill is controlled for 4 more years. If the Cubs are giving Rich Hill away, the Sox should try to get him. I hope that deal goes down. What would the Cubs' rotation look like after Lilly and Zambrano? Gallagher, Marquis and Dempster?

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 01:04 AM) He is awful defensively, but is supposedly the second nicest guy in baseball behind Thome. The last two organizations he has b****ed out as he's left. He got pissy for the same reasons in both organizations (LA and 'Zona) -- he was being phased out towards the end of the year for younger, better players. He's still got a little left but damn, this would be a terrible signing for the Sox.

Pretty big game tonight -- we're even with Vancouver with 30 points. Plus, some of them Canucks need to pay for roughing up Wizzer and taking some runs at Kane last game. I'd like to see Koci in the lineup.

Sigh... Next week: Monday - English Tuesday - Theology Wednesday - Accounting Thursday - MicroEcon Friday - Business Stats Bleh.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 10:27 PM) So wouldn't that mean we'd have to come up with a better offer than Chuck James? Doesn't seem like it would be in our best interest to give up something like Gio and another of our few legit prospects. You bring up Hamilton, when in all likelihood it would similarly take Gio + others to land Hamilton. I don't buy for a second that the Reds were asking for Sean Marshall. BS -- I'm reasonably comfortable saying they were either asking for Marshall plus another quality player (Marmol? Gallagher?) or for just Rich Hill.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 09:07 PM) Do you not want the hitter with the highest slugging percentage on your team to have hitters that can get on base in front of them? As currently constructed, what OBP machine would be in front of Thome if we hit him third? Cabrera, of the we-should-be-pleased-with-a-.340-OBP variety? Hopefully we announce a Fukodome signing so we don't have to go any further with this. That solves everything, Fukodome leads off with Cabrera second and everybody (that I can tell) is happy happy.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 08:54 PM) You are serious? Fathom's proposition is no worse than all the people who turn "leadoff hitter" into a position, as if it makes some astronomical difference on how many runs a team will score. I understand it's absurd in the fact that never ever ever ever would Thome lead off, but in reality it wouldn't change a whole lot about our offense. The only thing you'd be assuring is that Thome -- the Sox' best hitter -- gets the most at-bats in that game or, in the hypothetical situation where he lead-off for a whole year, he'd get the most plate appearances. Basically, I think fathom was just trying to make a point about the people thinking we need a "leadoff hitter". Like if we got Andruw Jones or Aaron Rowand, the lineup would still be incomplete because it's missing a "leadoff hitter".

QUOTE(SnB @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 08:25 PM) yeah, i really don't think so. The name on your diploma means a ton, a ton. I'm not intelligent enough to comment on whether this is true, but I'd certainly hope that SnB and Santo are, in fact, correct. I'd feel really crappy and embarrassed to have my parents put me through four years at Marquette if I could get the same outcome by going to Northern. I'd certainly hope that the name means something (not that MU is ivy league or even upper echelon, mind you, but I still think it's pretty well above average)...

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 07:59 PM) You sure do like to take everything to the extreme, don't you? Not everyone believes its either a non-factor, or a major factor. Read what I posted. It says "Of all the issues the Sox have, dealing with Boras is just not high on the list". KW was the one who said he wasn't a factor, not me. How is that not clear? KW may have said it wasn't a factor but the proof is in the pudding. You taking what he says at face value is what isn't clear. Slight overexaggeration on my part, yes. I don't really care for backups -- bad organizations churn out backup players with ease, that's not particularly difficult to accomplish. That doesn't say a lot about the Sox farm system. I stand by my statement that the Sox AA and AAA levels are bereft of position-player talent, with a change in wording from "completely" to "mostly". What does changing the scouts have to do with avoiding Boras clients in the draft? You said: "I don't agree the Sox won't get the best talent." And I said that if the best talent at eight happened to be a Boras client, the Sox wouldn't end up with that player because they're not going to deal with Boras. What, just because we changed some scouts means next summer we'll deal with Boras? I'll certainly eat crow if that happens, but that decision doesn't have a whole lot to do with the scouts -- that decision, I'd imagine, is coming from someone above Kenny or Kenny himself. Oh you mean the K/9 he had in all 25 innings with Milwaukee? Really? Pray tell, why didn't you include the 45 innings he pitched in 2007 with San Diego? Me? I'll go with the four-year trend rather than the 25 innings.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 04:52 PM) I have no idea what the bolded above could possibly mean. You lost me there. As for Boras, KW specifically said that isn't a factor, and from what I've seen, he just puts Hahn out there to deal with him. Of all the issues the Sox have, dealing with Boras is just not high on the list. Of course it's a factor. I don't know how you could possibly say that. It was a factor in June -- if it wasn't a factor, we'd have Rick Porcello right now instead of Aaron Poreda. If it wasn't a factor, we'd be talking more about Andruw Jones. It's without a doubt a huge factor. They're cheap in their international signings, too -- what's the biggest bonus we've given to an international signing from Latin America? 500K? For a team that cries poor in the free agent market, the best -- and speaking long-term, most inexpensive yet effective -- way of getting talent is through the draft and through the signings in Latin America. The Sox don't spend on the draft and even worse, they refuse to take advantage of the 'loophole' of getting more picks by offering arbitration to players (see: Riske, David and I'd guess in the next couple months Cabrera, Orlando, as all signs point to the Sox trying to re-up with yet ANOTHER mid-30s player rather than take the two picks that would come from his departure). Did you read what I said? I said in AA and AAA, the Sox are completely bereft of position player talent. And that's true. Who in AA or AAA projects to be a starter? Maybe Ryan Sweeney if he bounces back. Anyone else? I'm not seeing anyone there. Getz projects as a back-up infielder. And please, there's no need to bring up Donny Lucy -- he'll be lucky to cut it as a backup catcher. What? I can't be reading this -- seriously? The Sox didn't get the best talent last June -- there's not a knowledgable scout on this earth who would tell you Porcello is less talented than Poreda. You're right in that I can't be sure that the best available talent at eight will be a Boras client, but I gaurantee you that if he is, we won't be taking that player. Sure it does. Linebrink improves the bullpen of a fourth place team significantly. And he has a no-trade clause -- something the Sox apparently like to hand out like candy nowadays -- so if he's solid for the first year-and-a-half, it'll be tougher to flip him for a similar haul that San Diego got. And it cost us a top 75 pick. Oh yeah, and there's that whole thing about his K-rate dropping each of the past couple seasons.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 06:16 PM) I don't remember what thread(s) it was discussed in about Jason Bay being headed for Cleveland, but... So, maybe still in the Sox' sights?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 04:33 PM) There is plenty to be upset about. But, I agree with your overall point. Some of this THE TEAM IS SCREWED FOR 10 YEARS!!!!!!!!!! crap is pretty laughable. I just hope you don't get run down by the runaway panic-and-doom train because of your post. Who is saying ten years? All I know is... - We're a $100 million dollar payroll team that has a ways to go to leap into SECOND place in the division, much less first place. - We're certainly the cheapest $100 million dollar payroll team. We cut out a great portion of available talent (through the draft, through free agency) only because of Scott Boras. - We have no young position-player talent in AA or AAA. None. We're completely bereft (Godspeed, Ryan Sweeney...). This doesn't look to get a whole lot better when (a) the Sox won't get the BEST AVAILABLE TALENT at eight overall as that player has a pretty good chance of being a Boras client and ( b ) the Sox feel the need to piss away more draft picks through crap-ass signings like Linebrink and maybe even Rowand.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 05:23 AM) Hopefully the therapy keeps the pucker factor to a minimum. What I read somewhere at this isn't really a 'mental problem', per se, but it's more the Paul Konerko syndrome of being waaaaay too hard on yourself when things aren't going your way. He's a guy that presses too hard, if that makes any sense...