BobDylan

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 10:46 AM) I'll never understand the idea of buying MP3's. They might be cheaper in the long run...but you don't get the full package. Best Buy's DL stations kill me. You pay almost the same price of a burn as the real thing, but you get NOTHING with it. CD's are so last century, man.

QUOTE(GASHWOUND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 09:32 PM) http://www.allofmp3.com/ I only use this site to download music since it was mentioned on 'The Screen Savers'(tv shoIw) a year and half ago or so. I've downloaded close to 500 songs so far from it..And you only pay like 2 cents a MB and can choose the quality..reg mp3, ACC, and CD quality.. CD quality charges just a bit more. I love it Good lord that site is amazing.

QUOTE(samclemens @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 07:19 AM) i would prefer to keep cotts and whomever else would have been blocked off for prior. i think hes extremely overrated, and hes never pitched in he american league before. I wouldn't be pleased giving up Cotts, but Prior has good control, a power fastball and a hard snapping breaking pitch. He's not overrated in the slightest, it's simply that the Cubs can't handle a goddamn thing on their plate.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 16, 2006 -> 12:03 PM) who care what it would have cost? I would rather have prior than BMAC any day of the week. Finally some sense. If Prior could stay healthy I could care less if McCarthy turned into a good pitcher...fact is he doesn't have the dominating factor Prior has. But it's all hogwash at this point.

But Bobby Valentine says he's better!

Here's the big picture, Bobby Howry. Last time the White Sox won the World Series: 2005 Last time the Cubs won the World Series: 1908. Talk about how good Cubs pitchers are all you want, Bobby.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 13, 2006 -> 05:06 AM) One of soxtalk's funniest, saves that humor for few threads. Great days posting with the at work crew. Has 20,000+ posts. A 'god' around here. Good poster to boot. One of the many I enjoy reading.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jan 12, 2006 -> 09:23 PM) How old ARE you? 'skool'? 'wud'? 'tousnami '? 'prolly'? Do you ever plan on getting a job beyond McDonalds? I was really hoping I wouldn't be the first to say this of his spelling. Thank you. And for good measure, there is a difference between: there, their and they're.

Action/Adventure - Apocalypse Now Comedy - The Graduate Crime/Gangster - Pulp Fiction Drama - Adaptation Epics/Historical - Spartacus Horror - The Shining Musicals - N/A Science Fiction - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Romance - Annie Hall Foreign - Y Tu Mama Tambien Western - The Wild Bunch Mystery - Barton Fink Sports - Bull Durham

Do what you want. It's your site. I'm just enjoying it. If I could thank you in a proper way, I would.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jan 12, 2006 -> 05:25 PM) Again for the 10th time, I am following along with Ken Williams, I am not pretending I am GM of the team (like you do) and rationalize what's best based on statistics. You still fail to answer why the White Sox would trade cost certain starting pitching for an expensive RF, when they have the RF of the future in the minors, and in addition, why do you think they went out and traded for Javier Vazquez? Go ahead, see if you can string two and two together and figure that out. Maybe you and all the others on your SS Welcome Aboard can put your heads together, play fantasy baseball with your Sabr stats, and come up with an answer. Did you MISS the part where Ken Williams said he'd like to bring McCarthy along slowly, let him gain some bulk, and have an insurance policy in case a starter goes down? Did you MISS the part where Ken Williams said if he moves Contreras, it will be for pitching? Did you MISS the part where the entire cornerstone of your argument about Contreras is based on your personal feelings and projections? And your comparisons of him to Roger Clemons? Did you MISS the part where Vazquez averages 200 innings per year, he is a workhorse, and that's why they traded for him? Yeah, I guess you DID miss all those things. Somehow, it's not surprising to me. Maybe I should respond to the two dozen or so posters who fail to see the logic in your ramblings with a hearty "welcome aboard"? And then go back and bump a bunch of threads? whitesox.com message board is calling you ... loudly. I'm coming in late, but the thought of Vazquez or Contreras as an 'insurance policy' to a struggling Brian Anderson seems quite logical. If Anderson can't play Rowand type defense, it'll show quickly. I think a lot of people on this board can attest to the importance Aaron Rowand's defense had in the White Sox run at the championship. Kenny Williams has said a lot of things. After all, he said Jim Thome was the last move the Sox would make in the off-season. He proved that to be untrue. A sign and trade or a trade and trade is probably illogical in baseball, but a lot of moves Kenny Williams has made didn't quite make sense at first. (Carlos Lee for Podsednik and Vizciano...who really thought KW got market value for Carlos? But it worked out for the best.) VAFan's idea is off the wall, I won't deny that, and though he's playing the role of GM here when he/she is indeed not Kenny Williams, I see plenty of logic behind these ideas, and something I wouldn't be shocked to see KW do. I've learned to not really go by what KW says and just simply let him do what he does. It's impossible for any of us to predict what will actually happen, just as it is for Kenny. But whether he got Vazquez to trade him later or keep him for the duration of his contract makes sense both ways. Say Jim Thome has the year he had last year...Javier Vazquez for Bobby Abreu makes a lot of sense for the White Sox. (Whether it does or doesn't make sense for the Phillies is another question.) Say Thome plays great and Anderson can't play defense worth a lick...why would it be impossible to trade one of these pitchers for a center fielder? Or say Anderson plays great defense and Thome doesn't struggle...keeping the pitchers seems plenty logical in that case. Brian Anderson is an experiment at this point. It'll be an off-season evaluation that tells KW whether or not they need to replace him and whether or not Vazquez or Contreras can be made expendable. It's a rare position Williams is in, but he's in a position where he can make a lot of moves to patch weaknesses on the team regardless.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 10, 2006 -> 07:16 PM) Its a contract...I think players and coaches should live up to them. Put yourself in the shoes of say...Joe Crede. Then imply NFL rules. In turn, Crede could be cut on the spot and not another dime to show for it if he comes out a slouch in 2006. He could also hit .300, hit 30 homers and 100 RBI and not see a penny more. In that case, if you were Joe Crede, wouldn't you hold out and ask for more money? He earned it, didn't he? Or should he just suck it up and take a lesser amount of money because earlier in his career he had only 'potential?' I don't see anything wrong with what Herm Edwards is doing here. It's pretty obvious the Jets front office wasn't up to 'honoring' his contract.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jan 10, 2006 -> 08:18 AM) Bring him on. Everyone knows that ex-Cubs win the World Series soon after leaving. I think you have that theory backwards.

I don't think anyone can rightfully say the theme song to the White Sox's championship run was any better than this song. It's not that bad. Obviously it's one that doesn't go on your iPod, but I can't see how people are puking over it? It's jazz bazed, and I guarantee that somewhere down the line many of you will be drunk in a Chicago bar and that song will come on and you'll all go, "Good times." It's a song about the White Sox for heaven's sake. Not love, life and everything.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 11:38 AM) I sort of agree with you, but Favre is a little different because he directly affects the outcome of every game. Now if you want to talk about past baseball superstars, I completely agree with you. Roger Clemens, Frank Thomas, Wade Boggs, Eddie Murray, etc. All of them played past their primes and still contributed to their respective teams. Well it's one thing if the player is going to affect the progress and the overall winning the team is trying to achieve...but if another team wants to sign him because they think he'll help, I don't see why people complain. How can a player ruin a legacy if he got to the point of achieving one in the first place? Everyone will still remember how great the player once was...but why knock him for getting old, declinding in talent, but playing simply because that's what he loves?

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 04:54 AM) Oh, I see now. Character over talent only applies to the 1st three rounds of the draft because drafting a questionable character player in the 5th round would minimize your risks. Yep, I see exactly how character fits into this equation. I just don't see why any franchise would put a risk into drafting a Marcus Vick instead of a Matt Lienert if they had a top five pick. Now maybe Vick isn't a top five QB even without character issues, but even if he were a 5-25 pick, why would anyone take a QB with blatant character problems over a somewhat lesser talent that doesn't have character issues? I mean, who do you want sailing your ship? Somebody that can crack at any minute, but get you to your destination quickly if he stays steady, or somebody that surely won't snap, but get you there in a little longer time?

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 6, 2006 -> 08:15 PM) If the guy wants to work, I want him to. He deserves to go out when he is ready This is one of the main things I wish people would realize when 'superstars' play well past their prime. (Ahem, Brett Favre.)

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 11:45 PM) I don't know about some people, but Uribe's not exactly fun to watch when he goes into his month long slumps at the plate. I like Uribe, but I can't believe some of the statements I've seen on this site about Uribe vs Tejada. I'm just saying that's my personal preference towards Uribe. Tejada's skills are nice, but I just simply like Juan Uribe whether he's struggling or ripping the ball everywhere. It's obviously not a logical reason, and from a baseball standpoint I'm probably an idiot for having this preference, but alas, I have it anyway.

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 05:59 PM) Players from Japan are better at the fundamentals and could probably beat a team like the Yankees who aren't very fundamentally sound. If you guys really think the Sox would into Japan and crush them you are high. You aren't giving Japan enough credit. Consider the fact that the White Sox roster is filled with players from around the world. Then consider that the Japan league is filled with players only from Japan (maybe not, but judging from the names on their roster, there's nobody from the Dominican on that team). The White Sox might not pound them, as baseball can be a funny game, but you'd almost certainly see the difference in talent between the MLB and the Japan league. Furthremore, when Valentin says the middle of the order power they lack doesn't win series, you can't help but thinking of all those hangers Konerko jacked out of the yard to help the Sox go the distance. Ultimately pitching wins, but you need to score runs first. The Sox middle of the order power did that. Sure it's an interesting article and the computer will likely give Japan a few games just so Bobby V can say, "I told you so" or challenge the Sox even further, but if you know Bobby V correctly, he's just aiming for another shot in the big leagues. Major League Baseball doesn't consider themselves the best because they play mostly in the United States. They consider themselves the best because they recruit players from around the world. Hell, even the White Sox have a player from Japan on their team. Sorry Bobby V, but I don't think the best Japan team would pose a threat to a team in a league that searches the entire world for the best talent.

QUOTE(JoshPR @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 12:10 AM) Mets LineUp Reyes SS Loduca C Beltran CF Delgado 1B Floyd LF Wright 3B Boone 2B Nady RF Franco Matsui Castro ? Glavine Pedro Benson Zambrano ? Wagner Sanchez ? ? The Mets could be contenders given Glavine has a good year. Benson and Zambrano are solid, but not difference makers by any means. However, with a line-up like that, they'll be able to hit over the mediocre starts those pitchers will have--though not many. I guess the bullpen needs some work with only Wagner and Sanchez, but adding Billy Wagner will strengthen most bull pens. The only I don't think he would help are the White Sox, Yankees, and Astros (given that he was closer).

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 2, 2006 -> 11:00 PM) Defensively, I agree. Uribe is fun to watch on the field. But I'd rather watch Tejada bat third and destroy balls than hope that Uribe returns to his 2004 offensive form. I like to see Uribe on one knee. But that's just my personal preference. Homers and liners are great, but I can watch other hitters do that.

QUOTE(palehose23 @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 04:50 PM) I see your point but I am also a journalism major so I think that most professors in our field are just asses. I see grammatical errors in our papers, TV anchors, and talk show host all the time. My pet peeves are Redundunt speech and double negatives. (I.E) Hawk- "Back with the Final totals in a moment." I turn off the TV before the Postgame comes on just because of that. I understand exactly what you are saying.

QUOTE(Chisoxrd5 @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 04:59 PM) Usually my target audience is best described as 'moron'...does that mean I include a comma? It should, yes. And generally your target audience should be thought of as a moron. If it's not, then the understanding you have as a writer is that the audience will understand what is going on in your head. You can never, ever do that. And if you did, you could write a classic book such as The Great Gatsby like this: There once was a guy who liked fancy parties. And he had this thing with a blinking light. Then people died. The end.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 04:58 PM) It's not even a miscue.. it's just a personal pref. Both ways are correct. I guess it depends on the mentality of your target reader if you use the comma or not.. :rolly You're still missing the point. Are you a writer?