CWSGuy406

This thread is a goldmine. Crede at 1B, the Sox getting Crawford for a whole lot of crap, Nick Masset having any trade value whatsoever... Classic Soxtalk.

Damn, man... helluva(n) effort this past period-and-a-half. They're playing their second game in as many nights, half the team is injured and/or battling the flu and they're going up against (arguably) the best goalie in the NHL. I'd love a point here but with ten minutes left, it ain't looking likely.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 25, 2007 -> 11:37 PM) We arent trading the contract. We are paying for someone to take him, and it would cost about as much to sign one of those crappy pitchers to eat innings, so basically its just moving pieces. The better scenario is to keep Jose, or trade him for something of value, and have someone take ALL of the contract. Five million is 25% of Contreras' contract. Losing $15 million over the next two seasons would still be a coup for the Sox. As SS2k mentioned, though, the Sox rarely (if ever) eat money on contracts, so that isn't happening. The trade itself still makes sense even without the money tossed in -- the Mets aren't a team that's strapped for cash, and Contreras might be a decent bet to replace Glavine's innings and average-ness.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Nov 25, 2007 -> 11:30 PM) And we would start who in his place? We are going to have 2 rookies in the rotation already, there is no better option than Jose to eat innings at this point. Well he eats innings, but he does a crappy job doing it. If they can trade Contreras to ANY team who wants to eat his contract, I'd use that money to sweeten the offer to Andruw Jones. Build a great offense -- you add Jones, a real LFer (not Jerry Owens) and Cabrera and you have an above average offense -- and hope your bullpen is good as hell. As far as who would take his spot? Well, Danks and Floyd seem like locks, and then you have Haeger/Broadway/Gio/Egbert competing for the fifth spot. Or you sign someone like Clement, Garcia or Colon. Yeah, I'm not saying going with a back three of rookie and second year pitchers is particularly smart, but risks need to be taken somewhere if Kenny really wants his 2008 team to win 90 games.

How f***ing stupid are some of these teams. My gosh. Devin's a f***ing man, though... man.

...Devin Hester is still fly, though.

Adam Archuleta f***ing blows. Can't cover, can't tackle, takes brutal routes to the ball(carrier). What a suck-ass.

It's a shame that we've basically guaranteed Pablo Ozuna a spot on next year's team -- after all, with Hawk talking the whole year about what a huge blow that was to the Sox, you know the Sox wouldn't dare even think about saying by to "Pabs". Gosh damnit, guaranteeing a bench player of Ozuna's ilk a two year contract -- that move just reeked of incompotence -- when we have Bourgeious (sp) who could do the same exact things Pablo does. But getting on topic, yes, Mackowiak would be a nice bench pickup. I'd love to see them bring back Mackowiak and go with Mack, Bourg, Hall/Lucy and Owens/Anderson. But that ain't happening, so...

A point is fine. f***ing Samsonov had about 15 chances to score tonight. On his one chance where he got it right in the slot, he had time to write a poem about where he wanted to shoot the puck and of course he doesn't even manage to hit the net, 'ripping' (loosely speaking) it wide. Kane and Toews played their best game in a while tonight, although Kane got caught on Edmonton's first goal. I also thought the reffing was rather spotty -- the play where Toews ended up taking a tripping/hooking penalty, he got interfered with twice in a row and... no call. They're going to be battling sickness and injuries again tomorrow night (well, actually tonight), I'm going into the game expecting a loss. In any case they have already pulled in six points on this road trip -- I asked for five. I'll be ecstatic with a victory tomorrow night.

Fantastic, Balta. I typed in "iPod Replacement Battery" into 'Google' and immediately found some sites -- I'm look at this site for now. Thanks a bunch, that will save me a good $150 or a present from my parents.

Ugh, the flu is ravaging this team. Ruutu is out tonight, take a peek at the forwards: Versteeg - Toews - Kane Perreault - Lang - Samsonov Burish - Sharp - Byfuglien Koci - Dowell - Lapointe

Occasionally in this thread you'll see lists about 'Best Games Ever' and I'm surprised to see that some of my favorite games don't end up on these lists. I find it interesting because I think a lot of these lists depend on how the person 'grew up'. For example, if you're anything like me, you grew up with either Sega or Nintendo, not both. I shouldn't say "not both" -- that only applies to the original systems, so Sega Genesis vs Nintendo/Super Nintendo. Around the time of Sega Dreamcast -- which was before Playstation 1 but at the same time of Nintendo 64, right? -- I bought both Dreamcast and the 64 (I'm pretty sure I'm on a correct 'timeline' here, someone can correct me if I'm wrong). Anyways -- I've certainly digressed enough -- here's my list of top games (in no specific order). And my rankings are, generally speaking, based along how long these games held a strong 'enjoyable' sense in my mind. In parenthesis I may clarify or specify a specific part of each game. I'll also try to keep it oldest to newest and please, feel free to list your own and/or critique mine: Sonic 2 NHL '93 (? -- it was the last one with fighting, so '93 or '94) World Series Baseball '95 The Resident Evil Series (oddly enough, I've never played the game that is considered the best in this series -- RE 4 is it?, the one for Gamecube. In my mind the original Resident Evil was the best, followed by Nemesis, Code Veronica and 2) Mario 64 Supersmash Brothers GoldenEye The Wrestling series for Nintendo 64 (No Mercy, WCW/NWO Revenge, etc etc -- all were fantastic) SOCOM 1 and 2 MVP 2005 HALO (Multiplayer only, and only for the first Halo -- I haven't attached myself to 2 and 3) It's a shame -- I'm sure I'm missing out on a ton of games. I left Madden and NCAA off the list, even though those are the games that currently consume most of my gaming time. I want to get into a good multiplayer game online but I haven't found one. Someone mentioned CoD4 online is more of a free-for-all, KILL KILL KILL game while I'd prefer a little more strategy. Maybe that new Tom Clancy game that BobDylan mentioned might be something I'd like...

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 24, 2007 -> 12:01 AM) I still think they should start at about the 45, where you need to get a first down to get a field goal, in OT. But, otherwise, yeah. Is there a well-reasoned argument against college football's OT somewhere on the internet? I'm a fan of the overtime, mainly because it seems aesthetically pleasing, but I'd like to see the point-of-view of those who don't like it...

I wasn't very fond of that play-calling by Arkansas on that last drive. Four plays, three of them draws and only one of the plays goes to McFadden? I liked the formation with McFadden at QB but I want the best player (arguably) in the country with the ball in his hands when the game's on the line.

Absolutely embarrassing. At least we got Linebrink for (what will likely be) two-to-three times Yabuta's price though, right?

iPod question here: It appears my iPod battery has gone to the s***ter. I can barely listen to the thing for 45 minutes without the power completely failing on me. Anyways, I'd rather save myself the hastle of having to buy a whole new iPod and get all the songs onto that iPod, but when I went to Best Buy, I only got a vague answer as to how I could get a new battery in there -- something along the lines of, "we don't do it and neither does Apple but there are some people out there who do do it." Anyone have any experiences with this before? Any recommendations as to where I could get a new battery, or if I should just say "f*** it" and go and get a new 8-GB (which I believe holds 2000 songs, perfect for me).

What a terrible hockey game, but I'll take the win. Talk about a lucky bounce on Sharp's goal. Kudos to a nice night from Khabibulin.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 22, 2007 -> 02:46 AM) There were stories of his selfishness at the Dunk Contest last season, so I can't really say seeing something like this is all that suprising. That's a load of crap. He basically told the truth and old Sam Smith got pissed at him for saying the main reason he was going was for the money. I'd bet 90% of the guys are thinking the same thing, TT just had the balls to say it.

Since they haven't been posted (here) yet: Year K/9 ------------ 2004 8.89 2005 8.55 2006 8.09 2007 6.40 Got those from BTF and SSS. I'll read them and weep gently tonight.

This has been one boring hockey game. No flow at all, lots of choppy play. Hawks haven't had very many good chances. If they get a point playing with this makeshift fourth line and crap third line, I'll be reasonably happy. The Iginla goal was terrible defense by Keith, BTW.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Nov 23, 2007 -> 02:39 AM) Completely understand, but then why complain that we missed out on Hunter when it was said it would have been too much money(not saying you yourself did that, hypothetical) I just don't see the logic in ripping Williams for something he shouldn't have done Well -- speaking from a personal standpoint -- this is tough to comment on, but... Kenny is putting up this, "We need to win in 2008!" face, despite the fact that everything is pointing against the Sox doing so. I know some might say, "Look at 2005 -- we came out of nowhere then, so we could do it this year too!" but the division wasn't nearly as good then as it is now. With that in mind, for every one of these CFers that Kenny misses out on, the chances become greater that we'll see Jerry Owens on April 1st. And if that happens, this organization becomes more of a joke than it already is, as there's no way anyone could say with a straight face that this team is going to compete with Jerry Owens playing every day. So I may have sidetracked a bit here, but that's how I'm thinking about it. Speaking about 2008 only, losing Hunter hurts. That leaves Jones as the only guy who's likely to do similar things to Hunter in 2008 (and even that's debateable). Yes -- I wouldn't want the Sox to be burdened with Hunter for 5/$90, butwith the "win in 2008!" mantra in mind, losing Hunter hurts.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Nov 23, 2007 -> 02:30 AM) It's funny to, if Williams gave Hunter that deal, while many would be happy to add Hunter, others would be up in arms with the money given to him. However those seem to be the same people pissed we missed out on him.... Because there's a huge difference between the Angels adding Hunter and the Sox adding Hunter. The wins that Hunter is adding to the Angels are more important than the wins that Hunter is adding to the Sox. If the Sox signed him, he takes them from being a 80-81 win team to an 83-84 win team. The wins he adds to the Angels, on the other hand, take them from being the second best team in the AL (record wise) to being right up there with Boston. Both teams are in completely different situations and as such, the hypothetical 'same' contracts can't be viewed in the same light.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Nov 22, 2007 -> 11:04 PM) Give them some young pitching and throw in Jerry Owens. Haha, hilarious. You forgot to include "the much sought after" Jerry Owens, cause everyone knows (a) the Rays need outfielders and ( B ) Owens is wanted by other teams.

Stealing Juan Rivera from the Angels makes so much freaking sense right now. Rivera or Luke Scott would be fantastic pick-ups by the Sox. Sigh... why couldn't the Sox offer to eat a couple million on Garland's contract in exchange for Rivera?

Sigh... They get their reliever for less than seven million, meanwhile the Sox dole out $20 million for a reliever whose K-rate is plunging. But I'm going to hear all through the winter that "The Sox have money, so who cares? GREAT DEAL KENNETH!!!!!". Ugh.