CWSGuy406

Chip Carey is still as brilliant as he was when he was with the Cubbies. "A-Rod hits a bomb to left... did he get enough?" He might actually be worse than Joe Buck, if that's even possible.

If Cleveland wins this game, Wedge's gamble to go with Byrd will pay off huge -- it let's Sabathia - Carmona to get (possibly) four starts in the ALCS. If the score holds, BTW, this could have the makings of a classic ALCS. Both teams will be on enough rest so that their ace will pitch twice during the series. Go Tribe.

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 8, 2007 -> 04:28 PM) 2) I feel bad for Benson. I don't think it's fair that he's getting some of the blame for not living up to the hype and failing to at least equal Jones from last year. It's pretty obvious that the o-line is terrible. The guy managed like 70 yards on 28ish carries - all while being hit at or before the line of scrimmage. If you would just look at the stats you'd think it was horrible, but really he did a great job at least getting some positive yards. I'm glad I'm not the only one who's still in this camp. I'm not sure whether Benson can live up to the hype or not, but the blame he's getting this year is quite ridiculous considering the offensive coordinator who's calling the plays and the offensive line ahead of him. Turner calls run plays that are so freaking obvious -- I-formation, tight end motions to the right or left and stays off the LOS. Watch the safeties on those plays -- they just creep in and Benson is having to make plays with nine in the box. As you said, he was getting touched at or behind the LOS on 90% of the plays. This doesn't exclude Benson from all blame, but he hasn't had a whole lot to work with this year.

Kudos to Turner. FANTASTIC PLAY CALL!

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Oct 8, 2007 -> 03:22 AM) And wow, that was a wimpy run by Benson, there was way more than 6 available on that play. See I think this has actually been one of Benson's best games of the year. There's been absolutely nothing there yet, for the most part, it seems like he's gotten positive yardage. I do agree with you that he should've gotten more than six on that carry but talking about the whole game I think Benson's done as good as most others would have.

This is amazing -- are these offensive coordinators trying to out-dumb each other? WTF Turner? Could you make the first two runs any more obvious?

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Oct 8, 2007 -> 03:10 AM) This might be the worst coached half I have ever seen in terms of what Green Bay is doing on offense. I'm right there with you. Did Ron Turner make his way into GB's booth? The thickheadedness of GB's offensive playcaller this half is mind-boggling. It's like he wanted to shove it in the Bears' faith that they couldn't stop GB's pathetic run offense. If teams were intelligent, they'd do what Dallas did -- pass pass pass.

I thought you had to throw the ball past the line of scrimmage when throwing it away? If not, that's a nifty throw-away by Favre.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Oct 8, 2007 -> 03:06 AM) The idea that Griese is a veteran who doesn't make the mistake is such a myth, and is being proven out the last 2 games. He's notorious for making stupid throws as well, and has been his whole career. We don't have a starting QB. We have three number two QBs and a dolt acting as our offensive coordinator.

Griese's not supposed to be the guy with happy feet who does stupid s*** like that. He was unsure the whole way. Absolutely CANNOT have an interception there -- f***.

What a f***ing catch. If Olsen isn't on the field for every play in the redzone from now on, I will question whether Ron Turner has brain.

Here's something I haven't b****ed about yet with Turner's offense: why can't they get the play in to the QB quicker? Every single time, the Bears don't get to the line until there's 8-10 seconds left on the playclock. So if the QB happens to read a blitz that will absolutely blow up the play, he can't audible because there's no time, so he's (a) forced to run the hopeless play or (b ) call a timeout.

They FINALLY ran the reverse. It only took five weeks but they did it. I liked that drive. I saw Hester and Bradley on the field, Olsen too -- how about that? Putting talented players on the field when the players ahead of them aren't performing -- what a novel idea.

Why can't we tackle anymore? I've counted mistackles by Urlacher, Archuleta (about three times), Wale and Manning. Also, that damn inside slant has worked against us the past five years. I don't think I've ever seen one of our corners take a chance and try to pick it.

Coors Light beer commercials make me dumber. Also, nice job Bears defense. Absolutely embarrassing.

Are the Bears going to lose by 90 tonight? I think so. Tomorrow is going to suck. At least I have my Blackhawks.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Oct 7, 2007 -> 11:06 PM) That's the spirit! He's not saying anything that's untrue. We're looking at having to catch two teams ahead, both of which 87-95 win teams. We're looking at another team who is anywhere from a 75-85 win team in the Twins. Even if you want to where the black-and-white colored glasses and believe the Sox underachieved this year -- you'd have a hard time convincing me of that, their Pythag was actually 67-95 -- I still can't see how you can peg the current group of guys as better than an 80 win team. That means the Sox have to -- somewhere, somehow -- make up ten wins (to even start talking about contention -- 90 wins didn't get you in this year). Even with free agency and trades, that's a lot of ground to make up. That's not to say anything 29th said w/r/t next season is wrong, just that I can understand where the pessimistic people are coming from. It's hard to be very optimistic about the Sox future.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Oct 6, 2007 -> 10:05 PM) I honestly think that all around Young may only be better because he is superior in the field, although Josh has the potential to be a VERY good LF'er once he learns it. He has a great arm and is very athletic. Offensively I think Josh will continue to be superior to Young. Not to nitpick, but being a very good LFer isn't even close to comparable to being a very good CFer. Being very good in LF is like being the world's tallest midget. UZR isn't a perfect defensive stat but it had the BEST defensive LFer in all of baseball as a below average (minus) defender (if that makes any sense). The average OPS for a LFer is about .800 while for a CFer it's ~.750. So if Young and Fields put up equal OPS' -- which seems pretty reasonable, give or take -- Young's OPS is more valuable. Taking into account baserunning -- not just stolen bases but ability to go from first to third, first to home, second to home etc -- Young becomes much more valuable.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Oct 7, 2007 -> 05:03 PM) One of you hockey experts please tell me the Hawks at least HAVE A CHANCE to make the playoffs this year, even as a #8 seed. That's all I ask, I just want them to make the playoffs in a league where almost everybody makes it. It would take more things to go right but it's certainly possible. Among those... - Toews and Kane have to be pretty good. They don't have to be Crosby/Malkin/Crosby good, but they have to be pretty solid. Toews/Kane/Ruutu may technically be our second line, but with Havlat out, the most talent is on that line. Speaking of the third guy on that line... - Ruutu has to take the next step. I think he's gotta focus more on becoming a goal scorer than a big hitter. Take the hit when it's there, finish your checks, but don't go out of your way to look for a hit. Without Havlat, he has to be the team's best finisher. With Kane and Toews he's going to get the puck whenever he wants it where he wants it (i.e. right on the tape, on three feet behind his skates). He's gotta stay healthy and score goals. - The defense needs to start to progress. I think Johansson, Sopel and Wisniewski should be fairly reliable 4-6 types. I don't like what I've seen so far out of Vandermeer -- he's slow and his physical-ness doesn't make up for his lack of speed. Seabrook needs to keep improving and Keith needs to stop making so many stupid turnovers. He can fly when he has the puck but in his own end he's gotta be a little smarter. - Khabibulin is going to need to have his best year of his Blackhawks career. We've played 125+ minutes of hockey against two very good teams. Unlike past years, we've been able to keep up with these teams -- no longer do I feel like any given night against a good-to-great team will be a loss. We're still out-talented most nights but the discrepency isn't anywhere near as big. We've also played both these games without two top-six forwards (Ruutu/Toews and Havlat/Toews). Maybe I'm overrating Toews but I tend to believe his addition to the lineup will be huge -- it pushes every center down a line save for Lang. That relieves Perrault of some of his scoring duties and let's him play a more defensive role. Only two games but so far, so good.

Cameron would be a perfect fit if he was willing to come back here (I thought there were issues when he was traded and he departed on some not-too-happy terms). He's still average-to-above-average defensively in center and he's not going to get anywhere near as much Hunter, Jones or Rowand. Getting him would leave you with a lot of flexibility for getting a new SS. I'd enjoy a lineup of... SS Furcal CF Cameron DH Thome 1B Konerko RF Dye LF Fields C Pierzynski 3B Crede 2B Richar This team also looks better defensively than last year, with two huge improvements at 3B (full season of Crede) and CF.

Torre makes moves that are as bad as Guillen's sometimes. Obviously he has a better track record but I don't think that's very to Guillen who has (save one season) never had the caliber of players Torre's had. And why make the change? It's not like the players have tuned Guillen out (or, I don't think that's the case). It's not like a whole lot of guys are underperforming, pointing to a "maybe they're unmotivated?" issue.

Here's a better clip of Uehara: From that little clip, it looks like he throws a 'hard' fastball -- middle 90s is what I'd guess. It appears he was starting in this game so, if asked to pitch only one inning, perhaps he could get it up to 95-96. He throws a two seamer that he uses to jam lefties and paint the outside corner to righties. It's got a little bit of run back to the plate -- not like Josh Beckett but still pretty decent. He throws a filthy splitter/forkball that just falls off the table. He also throws a slider, although he only threw it a few times and one of 'em he hung real bad. I wouldn't be interested in him as a starter but I expect the Sox to bring in at least one reliever from the Japanese market -- maybe Uehara is that guy.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Oct 7, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) No one mentioned Young on the open market, we were talking about value. And money has to be taken into consideration when comparing value. With Young you get a player who's going to be dirt cheap for the next five years to go along with all the money that isn't tied up in a post-ARB player, versus Vazquez who you have for the next two (three?) years at $10 million per.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Oct 7, 2007 -> 05:25 AM) as there is far more CF available than quality starting pitchers. If you want to commit $50 million (that's a floor), sure, you can find a CFer with skills akin to Young. But we're not talking about Young on the open market -- Zona's got him for six years at much less than what it will take to sign a free agent for one year.

QUOTE(SEALgep @ Oct 7, 2007 -> 05:08 AM) Who has more value? Vazquez. What? How? How is the next five years of Chris Young better than three years and $30 million locked into an above average but not elite starting pitcher?