BobDylan

I made out with a girl twice my age with a moustache. You?

QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Dec 22, 2007 -> 09:39 PM) My 8 year old son wants a Wii. Is he too young? Would he be satisfied with just getting a PS2? He only has a Nintendo DS right now, but I'm considering a Wii. Do the kid a favor, buy him a PS3. It'll hit full stride later this year. Though, the system is probably too much for the youngin's. But might as well start them off right!

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 21, 2007 -> 12:43 PM) I want it badly. It's ridiculous fun.

Anyone playing Unreal Tournament III for PS3?

I really don't get the Steve Stone love fest here. He's like listening to a dictionary talk and I don't think he's so smart that every time I listen to him, I'll learn something new. I couldn't stand listening to him when he was with the Cubs, though, that could be in part to his partner Chip. I'd rather listen to Blackjack. The intelligence of the announcer is worthless to me (for the most part), I'd rather be entertained by an announcer.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Dec 20, 2007 -> 08:21 AM) Prior does NOT want multiple years. He wants one year. He doesn't even want an option. Oh, now it makes sense.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Dec 20, 2007 -> 08:05 AM) Unfortunately, because Prior wants multiple years with guarenteed money, the Sox are not going to be in the race. He still is a valuable pitching commodity because he was one of the five best pitchers in baseball only three years ago. And he is only 27, someone will bid $3+ million on the guy--and it won't be the Sox. 3+ million? Do you mean 30+? Because for 3/year, that's quite a risk worth taking.

If anyone had any doubts about Frank being a Hall of Famer, the Mitchell Report should quell those doubts. The man was once the class among hitters in the American League. And he did it with what he was born with.

But http://www.firekenwilliams.com/ still seems to be up for grabs!

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 08:06 PM) How many times have the Yankees been to the playoffs in a row. Pitching and Defense might win you championships, but a violent and overwhelming offense seems to do the trick to get you to the playoffs. You cant win the WS if you dont get in. I don't understand your point. Are you saying we should acquire more sluggers? I'd personally rather stack my pitching staff than my batting lineup. Not to mention, both Detroit and NY have good lead-off hitters. The Sox line-up can contend with the best, given their one-two punch is getting on base. The past two years, they haven't.

QUOTE(greg775 @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 06:14 PM) Why was the reaction on here a joke? Detroit has one of the most fearsome lineups on paper in a long time. You say we aren't going to win next year anyway? Uh ... it was KW's job to tinker and make sure we do win. Any team with Thome, Konerko, Dye, Mark B and Vasquez with Bob Jenks has a nucleus. These are veteran players. Why shouldn't we expect our GM to do his job?? The reaction on here was fine. *cough* Yankees *cough* A long time is an overstatement. And besides, pitching and defense wins it for you in the playoffs, not offense.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 10:51 AM) K, that's a bullpen arm and a 200 inning starter for 2009 gone for a 2Bman whose entire offensive game depends upon his average. If he hits .270, he's a bad player. That's a really dumb trade. Considering his career average is .293, it's a risk worth listening to. Look at it this way, we have Cabrera for one year--and at a pretty hefty price in Jon Garland. A second in the order hitter doesn't quite give you full value unless you put a good lead-off hitter in front of him. We saw that with Iguchi and Podsednik. Crede most likely isn't going to be back next season, and if KW is in this "going for it all" mentality, why not pick up Figgins even if you have to overpay? If it doesn't work out, you ship out the Konerko's, Thome's and Cabrera's at the break and probably land a few pieces back that are better than Broadway and Egbert. I mean, are Broadway and Egbert really so good that we have to forfeit a legitimate lead-off hitter?

Alien Parasites http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu9bqt2OgFM How do you embed the video?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 6, 2007 -> 09:48 PM) yes, because OBP does two things: It allows for the guys behind you to create more runs, and it means you're not making out making innings last longer, giving out more RBI opportunities and making the pitcher work longer and harder. Pretty simple to understand. Thanks for the demeaning comment at the end. If a hitter is driving in 120 runs, he's generally getting on base when it counts. I don't know many players with 120 sac fly's or 120 sac bunts or 120 solo home runs and the like. OBP isn't everthing and I don't quite understand the love fest people here have with it. After all, Batista crossed the plate 96 times in 2000 and 76 in 2004 with much worse protection around him. There also comes a time when it hurts your team when one of your best power hitters is taking walks instead of driving in runs. And, just for the hell of it, the 2005 World Series Champion White Sox, their team OBP was only .322. Not very high. In 2007, it was .318...only 4 points lower. In 2006, it was .346. Get off your OBP hill. The stat isn't the end all be all for hitters.

f*** FINALS

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 09:15 PM) His post said "28 HR and 117 RBI's is a pretty good season at the plate any way you slice it" and I think Tony Batista's two season say otherwise. So, if we were to acquire a player who was guaranteed to hit 30+ HR and have 120+ RBI, you wouldn't take him because of a low BA and OBP? God forbid if the GM actually took into account that the hitter is more beneficial to driving in runs rather than scoring them and surrounding him with high OBP guys.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 5, 2007 -> 06:37 PM) I'm sorry, which "monster" season are you reffering to? The one where he had a .286 BA and .311 OBP? the guy is a complete hack in the field and a free swinger. He also had some attitude issues as well. 28 HR and 117 RBI's is a pretty good season at the plate any way you slice it. I'm not saying I want the guy here, but c'mon, give credit where credit is due.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Nov 30, 2007 -> 07:03 PM) Also Shadows, with your logic, you must think the 72-10 Bulls team was the best of all time right? They are.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Nov 30, 2007 -> 03:05 PM) I don't need to back anything up.. its all there in front of you the best TEAM of all time is the only one that went undefeated.. TEAM is the key word here, it doesn't matter if the 85 Bears individually had better players.. The 72' Dolphins TEAM went undefeated.. The 72' Dolphins don't make their own schedule, they don't decided to play 14 regular games, they don't have control over time -- sorry years pass and 85 came around nothing they could have done about it thats just life.. The greatest TEAM of all time went undefeated.. don't try to tell me teams haven't had the same luxury of getting an easy schedule.. last time I checked football was played before 72' What are you talking about? Do you even know?

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 10:45 PM) If you can throw out one missed field goal, the 98 Vikings were pretty amazing too Offensively they were great. Defensively, they left a lot to be desired.

QUOTE(Shadows @ Nov 11, 2007 -> 03:43 PM) Thats the only argument needed Last time I checked 0 losses is better than 1 loss.. K. Sweet. Not really. Your argument is non-sensical and subjective. The teams played in different years, they played different teams and the teams had different season lengths. If the '85 Bears played the '72 Dolphins schedule, they probably would have run off 14 in a row too. I'm not trying to take anything away from that Dolphins team, but there are a lot of factors involved that you're ignoring just because you want to ignore them. Your argument is like that of a child--you have one decent point and nothing to back it up.

QUOTE(Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 30, 2007 -> 11:55 AM) First try: You type 474 characters per minute You have 75 correct words and you have 6 wrong words First try: You type 442 characters per minute You have 76 correct words and you have 2 wrong words Second try: You type 490 characters per minute You have 88 correct words and you have 6 wrong words

QUOTE(Sonik22 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 02:40 PM) You do know there are gametypes besides Deathmatch right? Headquarters and Search and Destroy are really fun. Search and destroy is a lot like counter strike. Yes, but all the game types seem death match oriented. The maps aren't very condusive--nor are the gametypes, to any type of developed strategy.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 05:30 PM) Yeah Billy Beane is obviously going to want a lot here and I imagine we'd probably have to give up a package of DLS, Gio and Carter. Call me stupid, but who is DLS?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Nov 23, 2007 -> 08:00 PM) I agree completely as I didn't buy into the Fargo hype either. The ending kinda reminds me of the same thing and the audience reaction (it was packed) felt kind of the same way. It's the first movie that creeped me out in a long time however. American Gangster is still at the top of my list for 2007. I guess some people like the abstract and some don't. No Country for Old Men was obviously going the abstract route. If the audience had payed attention to the dialogue and not just the action, they wouldn't have given it a, "What the hell?" reaction at the end. I saw the movie twice, in two different types of theatres. One was a mainstream theatre where you don't see the film buffs often, and the crowd gave that sort of reaction. I also saw it at an indie type theatre and they applauded the ending. The dialogue in the two final scenes was fairly obvious in showing that the movie was about to end.