hammerhead johnson

Now that is what I would call a rack to die for.... I used to think that this phrase only applied to Dolly Parton, but umm, obviously not anymore.

How often can one see a dominant closer before he becomes a dominant closer? Remember, the Cubs had Dennis Eckersley in the mid-eighties & didn't think twice about letting him go. Only a couple of years later, he established himself as the greatest closer in history. In this case, we're talking about what, an 18 year old kid? There is no way in hell that anyone could have seen this coming.

When they said that dudes were making extremely odd posts, your name immediately came to mind.

The positives will always outweigh the negatives for me. There are just way too many quality posters here... You can't eliminate the trolls, but you can contain them. Mods

I recognized this thread from a while back, but I am confused nonetheless.

Yeah, Tarpley came back for one year in 94-95 after a 3 year NBA hiatus, and he was decent. But one season, after three years off? We're talking about building...that seems more like a sorry excuse for a stop-gap maneuver to me. And Popeye Jones has always been decent...there's no question about that. But the guy was never good enough to be a starter. Good bench player. Here's the 94-95 Mavericks in all of their glory: 1994-1995 Dallas Mavericks Where's the beef?

I hear that, but their 4/5 rotation is the worst in the NBA as far as I can tell. Krstic and Collins....ugh. And their bench? Quite possibly the worst in NBA history. Sounds like a hyperbole, but I'm trying to be as conservative as possible. Travis Best Rodney Buford Kaniel Dickens Jerome Moiso Zoran Planinic Brian Scalabrine Jabari Smith Jacque Vaughn It could never, ever, ever be worse than that. There's just no way. And yet, you will hear people talk about this team being a playoff contender. I would very much like to moon those people.

The up and coming team. Not without a 4/5 combo or a bench. In their prime, they might have contended for the 8th seed. But yeah, I was like 13 or 14 years old back when they put that team together, so I didn't know any better. I bought into the hype. Kidd/Jefferson/Carter: Grown men think that's a winning formula. LMAO.

Holy s***, I could have sworn that you were a rookie. So Tex, since only like 15 people sent in nominee lists, I can blame you for keeping me out of the Rookie Of The Year voting in favor of, umm, redandwhite and some dude named tmar? Alrighty then.

This is so depressing.... He was easily on of my favorite actors. Rest in peace, Jerry. You will be missed.

Ayo, how could Man Of Steel be left out of the Rookie Of The Year voting? It's a travesty, I tell ya!

What is up? That clown needs to get off of the airwaves ASAP. I am out.

They're obviously much better than I thought they'd be at this point. But still, everyone of importance on their roster is in the 20-24 age range. A playoff berth would be miraculous, considering. Don't underrate experience, and don't overrate young talent. That's all that I can tell ya.

We play 47% of our games against division opponents, and 3.7% of our games against the Cubs. Our major rival is the best team in our division at the time. Right now, that happens to be the Twins. When we play against the Cubs, there is an added incentive to win because Sox fans hate Cubs Culture. But the games aren't necessarily meaningful in the big picture, as the mathematics displayed up top would suggest. The games are fun, but don't believe any of that "biggest rival" crap. That's the best advice that I could give you, anyway.

Happy Birthday, man!

Right, but i seem to recall you talking s*** about Manning, and his QB rating is 124. So, who gets the credit for Michael Vick's insane winning percentage? Any thoughts on McNabb? Overrated, yes?

Minnesota Kansas City Denver Cincinnati Detroit Indianapolis Jacksonville Atlanta Pittsburgh New England Buffalo Carolina Dallas Seattle Miami Philadelphia

Dude, that movie rocks!

Happy Holidays to everyone here at soxtalk.

Vick is 22-9-1 over the past three seasons -- a winning percentage slightly better than 70%. The Falcons are 3-11 without him over that time span -- a winning percentage slightly better than 20%. Apparently, he can do more than just run. He makes everyone around him so much better that it's not even funny.

Don't get me wrong...Gordon is a terrific scoring option. But that's it. It's an important role, but guys like him are not uncommon in this league. Guys like Chandler are.

So, we have the next Oscar Robertson, but he only has 2 votes. I see that Gordon has a s***load of votes, but all I see is a man with not a whole lot of defensive potential, and a terrible assist/turnover ratio. In 13 games this month, he has 22 assists and 37 turnovers. Check out his Game Log. I know that he's a rookie and all, but come on now. When you have a goaltender like Tyson Chandler, you can not overlook that. When Gordon is getting burnt off the dribble or running into a pick, who's gonna be there to get his back? When Gordon is throwing up some crazy lay-up attempt with two defenders on him, who's gonna be there to grab the offensive rebound? Who's gonna contain the Kevin Garnetts and Tim Duncans of the world? What does it take to win in this league?

I want large middle-aged fat chicks giving me instructions on how to cook, clean, and decorate, not these little hookers who are barely older than I am. Whatever happened to experience and credibility?

That is great news for my fantasy team. Now, if only Kirilenko can get back by mid-to-late January...I'll be back in business.

Chandler, with ease. A big man with Defensive Player Of The Year potential who'll be able to grab you close to 20 rebounds on some nights? And only 2 votes????? Let's see, who's gonna help us win that championship? The Michael Redds and Ray Allens of the world, or the Ben Wallaces and Tim Duncans? What a tough decision it was to vote for Chandler instead of Gordon or Deng.