BobDylan

I agree 100%. That's not the way to do it. That's never been the way to do it. Arizona found that out the hard way when they acquired Sexson, and what I see in this deal is Arizona trying to rape us the same way they got raped by the Brewers. People don't like giving up prospects, but prospects aren't contributing to your ball club, while underachieving players like Garland are. Though underachieving, players like Jon are more valuable than an Anderson or a Sweeney at this point in time. We don't have the payroll the Yankees do, but they developed their farm and dealt them for players they needed for years. Now they don't have a farm and they just buy, but we still have the depth to trade prospects away, especially given we have our future 'locked in' at many positions. Crede, Uribe, Harris, Rowand, Borchard, Garland, Buehrle, Lee. It's tough to give up guys like Anderson and/or Sweeney for a 41 year old pitcher, but it could be worth it. I remember hearing an interview on the radio with a former GM (don't remember who) a few days ago; he was saying the way to do it is to trade prospects for bonafied players and crush the competittion in the overseas and latino market to make up for the lost prospects. Is it me or are the White Sox a big puller for the latino market now that they have Ozzie and are loaded with Latino talent? IMO, adios prospects.

I wouldn't trade Garland. Rauch, Diaz, Honel, whoever, yes. Jon is still only 24 (?) and has more experience than some pitchers that are 27 and 28. Granted, he hasn't taken than experience and gained much knowledge from it, but I'm still under the impression that Garland can still be a very good top rotation starter. He hasn't shown any injury problems, and he's shown he has the ability to get outs. Garland should be untouchable, IMO. Also, didn't it take Sheets awile to find his groove?

Heh, they won't go anywhere until this left coast trip is over.

I think he gave me permission to put them on WSC, so soon enough I'll stop being lazy and get them up on WSC.

What is 'Member No.'?

Which is sick.

It's not the Yankees problem, it's MLB's problem.

I would say, "Randy, if you want to be with a bunch of money hungry assholes go to the Yankees. If you want to be apreciated by the entire organization and fan base, come to the White Sox." I wouldn't let him reply though. I'd hang up and let him think about it.

Extreme exaggeration? Come on. Maybe you need glasses, Garland threw several strikes that were called for balls. And pout and let it get in his head? He's not Carlos Zambrano, he waited until after the game to say anything to the umpire. I wouldn't say that is pouty and letting it get to his head. And complaining to the ump does do stuff. If the ump calls Garland again, he'll either screw him more, or realize he squeezed him last time out. And ff arguing with the ump didn't work, you'd never see it. I won't trust you on that one.

He was. There were several instances in which they showed him on TV. Maybe not in the dugout, but in other places.

You're missing the point. He walked batters not because he pitched like a woman, but because the ump screwed him. The calls against him were ridiculous. They weren't close balls going against Jon, they were balls where the entire baseball was over the white part of the plate. Harden got calls, Jon didn't. That's not how it's done, and Jon should be complaining.

How does that work?

Do TV's even have an SAP button anymore? None of my TV's do, and they are all somewhat modern.

The Tigers did not single handedly cost the Sox a playoff spot last season. I'd say losing to the Division Champs down the stretch did. That article lost every ounce of creditability with me in that statement. My thoughts on the whole Tigers situation is that when the Sox need to take a team seriously, they beat them. They know what Detroit did last year, and they know how much better they are this year. They also know they need to be taken seriously. I'm not worried.

American Idol sucks, singing isn't a talent anymore and f*** Simon.

Most of the web gems they picked weren't even tough plays. The Hollandsworth play wasn't hard, just the afteraffects made it look that way. People think if you slam into a wall, it's a hard play. It is not. Here is my proof: I'm sure most of you remember the recent Derek Jeter play when he caught the foul ball, slammed into the seats and came out bloody. Well, he was on PTI and they were asking him which play was better, that play, or the relay play he made against Oakland in the playoffs. He said something along the lines of: The play I hurt my face on wasn't that tough, I just slammed into the seats after the play. It's really all just a matter of if you don't know the wall is there, or that you are willing to take a beating to catch a ball.

Lance better win it, or else.

What are you talking about? The system is making examples of celebrities these days and I won't mention Kobe is getting tried in Colorado of all places. He's screwed, haha, no pun intended.

I wanted him on the Bulls. Kobe is a bastard, and his case isn't looking good from his vantage. Hold on to the soap Kobe, hold on to the soap.

I'll take him if Thomas is out for the year, otherwise no.

:fyou Lawton.

I like the atmosphere, hate that we pay full price.

I say Anderson. I can't go against what was said about him this ST. That was downright impressive.

That was only after their first typo of GIAMBI.

Another thing is that the game is different now than it was then. Showboating is accepted now, where as if you showed up the pitcher years back, you'd get a buzzer in the ribs or up near the head. I remember Hawk telling a story one time about how he hit a garbage pitch out of the park, and he got plunked later in the game. Furthermore, he saw the pitcher at dinner the same evening, and the pitcher had a few select words for Hawk. Do hitters get plunked for hopping, staring and flipping? No. Hence more do it.