SoxAce

QUOTE (Reddy @ Mar 4, 2010 -> 04:15 PM) isn't he like 5'11"? Might be shorter than that supposedly... maybe he meant by weight.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 03:57 PM) Anyone want to post a couple of the ab excerises for this program? I do some hard ab excersises at my local gym, but am curious what these consists of... I see no one is gonna touch your question. (or mine prior)

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Mar 4, 2010 -> 03:34 PM) So like 3 6 minute games and a 27 minute one when fans and JN were both demanding more minutes. Wasn't Friday's game an OT one? Somethin like that. I still feel VDN f***ed up on that decision. Noah was better off being rested those games (might have been back in about a week or so from now if that happened), or you play him 5-10 minutes, than up it to about 5 more to see how he feels. Not play him 6 minutes twice then 25+ minutes. That was just a poor decision once again. (though Vinny is used to that) Not only costing Noah time to heal up, but s***.. his stats dramatically dropped. (I know Noah doesn't care about personal stats, more-so winning, which is why I have more respect for him than Deng, but it probably lost him the most improved player award)

I'll miss this one, but I look forward to reading this thread later with the updates and such.

Justin Upton contract extension is official now... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4962429 6 years, 51.25 million.. only 22 years old.. and already a monster.

QUOTE (CyAcosta41 @ Mar 4, 2010 -> 12:12 AM) This is where I differ. I don't believe it's the same thing at all. In the past, if you wanted to rest a regular like CQ, PK, or JD, the only way to get him that rest was by sitting him. Why? Because you had the prototype "DH is all I can do" type monopolizing the AB's coming out of the DH slot. So, as a consequence, two things happened, both of them bad: (1) there was a pronounced tendency to not rest these guys because of the fear of the steep drop-off when you did (resulting in tired fading players in the dog days of the season); and (2) when reality set in and it was recognized that you had to rest these guys, I think this is when we started seeing the beginnings of that dreaded "Sunday lineup" (the mindset seeming to be: let's rest the lot of them ... sure, we're likely to lose today ... but live to fight another day). That was then (the old approach), this is now. In theory, now you can "rest" CQ, PK, Pierre, and even AJ (easier still if Retherford could become the 3rd string catcher/utility guy) without losing his bat altogether. Simply give each of these guys a day here or there at DH, or if they're really dragging a day off entirely followed by a block of days at DH. All AB's over the course of the season are not the same. If you implement "rest" intelligently (and to major league hitters, DH-ing for a few games is most definitely "rest"), you can have a more sensible way of giving a player say 600-700 plate appearances than another way of giving him the same number of plate appearances. I think that's all this new theory is really about -- using flexibility to maximize the chances of overall lineup maximum performance. Let's be smarter about the 600 AB's for our most important guys; let's keep our bench uniformly sharp so we maximize their talents and have them ready as can be for the stretch and post-season; let's not give away games by the Sunday lineup. I recognize that many of us might not like the talent level of our bench (I happen to think it's league average at worst, but with a chance of being significantly better -- can you hear me Andruw Jones?); lots of us might think that Ozzie might not have the managerial abilities or discipline to implement this new philosophy. I also believe Sox fans as a whole are traditionally very aware of the limitations of our players (starters and bench), but don't spend nearly as much time analyzing the rosters of other elite teams (and you'll find true "dog" players on every team's bench -- far inferior, in my mind, to the much better than we usually have bench now). But, that aside, I have no doubt whatsoever that this is their plan. In the end, we arguably give some of our aging or injury-starters the best chance to put up strong numbers. Yes, when we pull them out of a defensive position and into the DH slot we're going to give AB's to players like Jones and Kotsay. But that was going to happen anyway. At least now, on those games we have a better DH in Quentin, Konerko, and occasionally Pierre, then we would have had for 2010-model Jim Thome. If we go with this approach all year, I think the overall numbers produced by the six or seven headed monster slotting in as our DH will be very strong. And that doesn't even factor in the benefit provided by sliding these guys over to DH now and then, giving them the chance for real, intelligent, and meaningful rest, and staying out of this Sunday lineup mentality. I'm repeating myself and am not trying to convince anybody that this will work. Reasonable minds can differ. Like Rongey, I think we're likely a better offensive team than most people think. Sure, we need guys like Rios and Q to return to form. I don't think this is a real leap of faith. But, I think we're better than people think even with realistic projections for a guy like Andruw Jones. And if Jones somehow channels the ghosts of Oscar Gamble, Eric Soderholm, and Ellis Burks, then we'll have something special offensively to pair with what SHOULD BE (I remember a year like 1984 too vividly to be too confident of pitching projections) a truly special pitching staff. I'm pumped for this year. I have no problem rooting for this team, this configuration, these guys. Go Sox. Another insightful poster. You'll fit it quite well here at soxtalk. :cheers

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 02:49 PM) Well, I know how good of a poster you are here, I'd be glad to have you as a member of any league that I'm a part of. Stop trying to butter me up Jeremy. It's kinda working....

Man I need to either get money to get this program (though I could have gotten it months ago, before I lost my job) or I need some exercises on there that is good for me to do now.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 03:29 AM) Why's that? I don't know...

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 02:20 PM) You're a flamer. And your a lame-er.

I'm a Levi's guy too, but I do rock out Inner City Energy (or generic jeans) as well. And I love soxbadger. That is all.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 12:54 PM) Everyone was thrilled with the Olsen pick at the time though. It sucks that he hasnt turned out, but I know a whole bunch of us thought he was going to be a star and the pick was regarded to be pretty good at the time. Picks like that and Benson I dont pin on Angelo as much as I do the player. But dont get me wrong, Angelo has f***ed up a bunch of drafts He was regarded as a top 15 pick, who the Bears got very lucky in nabbing since he dropped, and other teams pretty much had good TE (or they had more glaring needs at other areas). It was a steal at the time, and still love the pick till this day.

QUOTE (Ranger @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 03:09 AM) You should want the guy that's the best option for them right now. Hudson could very well be the future, but for now, 2010 is what matters when they decide on starter number 5. Too early to dismiss him. Hell for all you or I know, Hudson could be the best guy right now as well. You can't dismiss that. Freddy pitched decent his 9 starts (4.34 era) but who knows how that will translate this season. I am a spect lover, so I do have a bit of a weak side for prospects, and I'm pretty high on Daniel. And c'mon, unless Cabrera had a 1 era (or basically pitched very, very well) and guys like Dolsi, Santos, Hudson, etc.. etc.. had like 8 era, there was no way Cabrera was making this team anyway. This isn't a Nick Masset situation here.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 01:54 AM) He was talking about projected range and such. If we're talking about the future, Mitchell has much better tools to be the better outfielder. He's just much more athletic and his range should be greater than Danks'. We'll see if it translates. Just because your fast and athletic, doesn't mean you have the instinct to excel at a position especially as important as CF. I'm rooting for him though.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Mar 3, 2010 -> 01:24 AM) Yes and yes. Mitchell's better though. I'd bet my left nut, as of right now (not to mention from watching both in college, though Mitchell was a RF and I saw Danks alittle bit in high school from scout tapes), Danks is the much better CF. Mitchell is still raw there defensively. Not saying he could potentially be better (he does have much better speed), but Danks is the much better defensive CF right now. They both have the projected range that could make them good CF's (jump, ability) etc.. to answer the other posters question BTW. We'll be extremely lucky if one, yet alone both ever make it. It'll be fun watching Mitchell develop there though.

QUOTE (3E8 @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 11:27 PM) This may not be up long Outstanding.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 1, 2010 -> 08:08 PM) I'm going to start assigning people to leagues tomorrow, so if you haven't signed up, do so tonight! I think I'm probably gonna not sign up.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 07:46 PM) running hurts my lungggggggs Quit smoking f@gs then. I see that word is a filter even though it doesn't always mean what it means.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 04:46 PM) I am not saying it can't help, I am saying for many people it doesn't matter, but they sure think it does. Like the high socks. Some people think thats cool and sexy..

QUOTE (Reddy @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 09:15 PM) you're right except for the stomach. You can have nice tone everywhere else and still have a little bit of a barrell Thats a bit of my problem right now (can see the definition back of the 6 pack I once had though), though I got some fat around the tricep area. I am seeing results though, I'll probably look into getting alittle bulk later, but right I'm just looing for more tone all around.

Kane so far with 2 points. Continuing his hot streak.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 03:40 PM) I can't help but to think that's a HUGE mistake. The entire staff will be gone in a season, so you're going to trade Olsen for a 2nd because Mike freakin' Martz wants a 300 points tight end. I have to agree with this. I'd rather have Olsen's development as far as blocking take a step back and have him as a WR occasinal TE set, than to trade him, and get older. I'd rather trade Hester if I had to choose, but I'm sure this org. won't do that.

Looks like Cow-hide is the only one who has updated his status.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 02:13 PM) The other 1% of you know someone IN the department, and have some sort of idea how it actually works so what I said doesn't apply to you in that case. Yay! I feel special! I know more than some about law enforcment (hell I'm basically a rent-a-cop right now. Grew up hating cops, and now its a possibility I'm becomming one.) But there's alot of "bulls***" (I'll say nicely) in closed doors that makes me question whether to pursue it also. I'm not gonna change this thread though from the vehicles standpoint.

QUOTE (Cali @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 01:39 PM) So who are everyone's nominees for the annual ANDERSON-FIELDS AWARD? It's for the position player who hits around .500 in Spring but it doesn't translate to the regular season. Named after the 2 former Sox players who did it year in and year out. Also there is the DANNY WRIGHT AWARD, for the pitcher who's mechanics looks clean and pitches awesome, followed by forgetting about all of that come April. And finally the PABLO OZUNA AWARD, for the player that comes out of nowhere, hit's .500, makes the teams and actually contributes to the big league team... :lolhitting This really should be a thread..