qwerty

Lucci has won a daytime emmy in her career. It's a a common misperception that she never has due to all of her nominations. Btw, it's pretty annoying that the spell check doesn't acknowledge the fact that misperception is a word. Too many of these awards are locks to have the same people nominated... the same people winning... year in, year out. I'm don't read the nonsense that takes place in the filibuster, so those awards are meaningless to me. The following three clearly change yearly. Other than those, i'm pretty sure i could predict 9 of the following 12 winners correctly.

By this time tomorrow i will have completed what i consider the top 250 list on imdb. I only have a couple anime films left... for the record i shall not be watching nausicaä of the valley of the wind (number 250), as it just got added to the list very recently, and can be knocked off at any given moment. I will also not be watching the movie that sits at number 245. That movie would be three colors: red, which is the last part of the three colors trilogy by krzysztof kieslowski. Three colors: red also recently got added to the list, and it will be falling off any given day, so i won't be watching it. From 245 until 250 the movies fluctuates so often on the list... so i'm not gonna suddenly watch a film that just squeaked on, for it to be back off any day/week in the near future.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jan 23, 2011 -> 07:35 PM) How can a watch literally be a Ferrari? He did not imply that. For someone that likes correcting people as much as yourself... you should have been positive of what you read. Comprehension is vital.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 22, 2011 -> 05:02 AM) Over the past 4 years, Vernon Wells has put up a WAR of 1.5, 1.5, 0, and 4. That is 7 WAR over a 4 year period. Over the same time frame, Mike Napoli has put up WARs of 1.5, 2.7, 2.7, and 2.8. That's 9.7 WAR over a 4 year period, and that is in 1,000 fewer plate appearances. I think I've said enough. Ya right. You can never talk enough...

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 05:06 PM) I am just suprised you think he can go from Starter to reliever to starter, and succeed and improve at each step, while setting himself up for a starting job immediately upon return to rotation. I think he will have a MUCH better 2012 season in the rotation if the previous year as a starter learning how to control his pace, velocity, endurance, and build his stamina than he would going into the 2012 as a starter if the previous year he spent sitting in the bullpen throwing pitching 3-4 innings a week in stressful situations where he is throwing as hard as he can and not building up any sort of stamina and endurance. The chances he succeeds in 2012 as a starter are much higher, in my opinion, if he spends his 2011 working on that role. The sox need him now and next season. It's really that simple. Hopefully someone will be able to grasp that. They need sale in whatever role suits them best to win. Pacing? Learning the proper velocities to sit at? Both come with the role the pitcher is in... and come rather easily if the player is talented... hell they don't even have to be all that talented is they are willing to listen and follow orders. Stressful situations? You mean like coming in with runners on second and third with no one out in a tie game? Yes, nothing of value can be taken away from something like that. That is another story entirely though. The sox will not be looking for cy young caliber numbers out of sale is 2012. They will be looking for back of the rotation type numbers, and anything else is a bonus. QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 05:16 PM) 2 extremely good seasons? 2009, I would say was easily his best season as a reliever. Extremely good? Ehh, I'll accept that. His 2007 would be his 2nd best season, and I really don't think it was all that memorable. I would say it was a good year, but nothing I would consider "extremely good". 4.35 BB/9, 1.91 K/BB. His opponent AVG was really good, his WHIP was pretty good, and his k/9 was pretty good, but overall I would say it was nothing more than just a good year. His 2006 was pretty much average, and his 2008 was certainly below average. He put up a 2.8 WAR over 4 seasons in the bullpen. That's essentially 0.7 WAR per season. Bobby Jenks put up a WAR of double that last season, and a lot of people couldn't stand him. Again, I think CJ was a pretty decent reliever over his career, but him moving to the rotation did not create a big hole in their pen, even though he was coming off his best season in relief. Great is better than good. Great is better than extremely good. I think my term summed up his season (s) pretty well. I did not claim greatness. WAR is rarely a good tool to use when it comes to relievers unless they are full blown set-up men/closer. Even then, the best of pitchers out of the pen can only post a WAR so high. Wilson only totaled 50 saves in a three year time span... hardly would i consider those closer type numbers. Nearly half of those came in one season alone. Wilson was not a full time closer during his entire tenure in the pen... nor was he close to it. WAR has a hard time distinguishing true value of bullpen pitchers. There is a reason why you almost never see someone reference a relievers WAR. Btw, wilson has a career 4.10 bb/9 and a 1.95 k/bb... pretty darn similar to those 2007 numbers... Wilson walks a bunch of batters, and most likely always will, if he works around that to be a better than league average pitcher, a good pitcher i would say, well i don't see how he can get faulted for it.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 04:33 PM) Exactly, thing should be taken slowly with him, and this is done by letting him stretch out in Peavy's spot and then AAA for a year and not rushing him into multiple roles. Sale in the bullpen makes our 2011 team better, but it also makes our 2012 team worse, a 2012 team that is losing a lefty starting pitcher. I'd rather insert Sale into the rotation next year taking Buehrle's spot with some confidence in him, not throwing him into the 2012 season taking Buehrle's spot and thinking "Gee, I hope he is able to make the switch back to starting and give us 180+ innings". We need a starter more in 2012 than we need another reliever in 2011. I just can't fathom how it makes the sox worse in 2012. With the money they have freed up by buehrle and jackson becoming free agents they will sign a starter. Likely a pretty good one at that. One of buehrle/jackson could very well be back instead even. Either way, the sox will then have four starters... and sale's role will be limited to the 150ish range as the fourth or fifth starter. Benefit the sox this season and next? Or let him sit in the minors, not helping the sox, just so that he could potentially throw 50 more innings in 2012? It just doesn't make sense to me.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 04:27 PM) I wouldn't really say that CJ Wilson was a good reliever. He was decent, and could have been a reliever for a while, but I wouldn't say he was good. K/9 was his only real good stat as a reliever outside of his 2007 and 2009 ERA. I should not have said "never", but rarely does a good reliever change into a starter. Failed relievers try to, decent relievers who aren't that important to the bullpen try to, but ones who are vital to a team's pen I don't recall making the switch to start unless they were the long man/mop up man on the team. Wilson's rookie year was horrible... which tends to happen to rookies. I was not even considering his rookie season. You can if you like, i will choose not to. Wilson then went on to have two extremely good seasons, one better than average (good) and horrible one mixed in. I would say he had been good during that time span. He was better than decent, average, mediocre, etc to say the least. Sure sale might be ''vital'' to the teams success this season in the pen. But there is a big picture to look, and the sox are not suddenly gonna get suckered into making him a reliever long term, if they have other plans to begin with, which i'm guessing they do. Everyone is getting worked up over nothing in my opinion.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 02:56 PM) I would rather have Chris starting in Charlotte than in our bullpen for 2011. Maybe that isn't "All in", but it is the smartest course of action for the franchise, IMO. The thing is, if he does fail as a starter, he can much more easily move back to the pen, versus the other way. Please, i would love to know how weakening our current team is the smartest course of action for the franchise. Sale will be able to overcome failure, if he does indeed end up failing in the pen this season. Trust me. Are you worried that he will not be stretched out enough to be a valuable asset in the rotation... unless he is ''stretching'' out all season in the minors? Is there some sort of belief that after starting his whole life he will suddenly forget how? Will he be brainwashed by the bullpen and never want to go back? Seriously, what is it? What type of statement would that make to sale, sending him down in favor of some scrub, when he is clearly more talented... and there is a role just waiting for him in the now. Seems to show a lack of confidence to me. Next year does not matter, nor do four down the road. Right now matters. The sox have already looked a couple years down the road... and this route is the best course of action.... for now... and then. Sale has youth on our side. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 02:56 PM) Because if he spends this entire year in the pen and pitches 50-75 innings, there is zero reason to think his arm will be ready to handle 125 innings next year, let alone 200. That would be a serious strain on his arm. If you want him in the pen this year and back in the rotation next year, then you need to plan for him to only pitch 1/2 of a season. If you get mmore than that you're sorta lucky, but you're also risking serious long term injury. Zero reason? No reason to talk in absolutes. It has happened plenty of times... therefore negating the zero reason. I'm not even talking about a pitcher who pitched a certain amount of innings this year, and you want him to pitch a specific amount next season. I know what you preach, and i know it well. How about all the cases of pitchers missing a year(s) due to all sorts of injuries... tommy john will do since they have seemed to gotten extremely good at doing them. Pitchers will miss a year... and come back to throw 150...200. How on earth is such a thing possible? Seems to me like they would have to build a ton of endurance up, no? Everyone responds to a particular workload differently... and mostly it matters how that individual and the team go about reaching their goal. Don't set goals that are unrealistic, don't rush things if they are going worse than planned, stick to initial plan. Zero reason to believe someone could go from pen to starter? C.j. wilson says otherwise as recent as last season. He even threw over 200 innings, something which sale wouldn't be relied on to do. 55.9 inning average to 204 seems like a pretty drastic jump to me. Sale would be the 5th starter... looking to pull in roughly 150 innings. I could see if we were talking about a 33 year old suddenly looking to make the switch... but sale is young, very young. Things should be taken slowly with him... all around. QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 03:23 PM) Yep. Starters who fail turn into relievers. Relievers who are good never turn back into starters. So put him on a path that will, and pardon my song lyrics but "Shoot for the stars so if you fall you land on a cloud" Stars = rotation, cloud = bullpen. I can give you plenty of examples over the years... but since he was seemingly such a good story last year, c.j. wilson fits here again.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Jan 10, 2011 -> 02:36 AM) Well obviously he would be more valuable as a starter, but not if he fails at being a starter, then he is useless, and that's what I mean. If his "worst case scenerio" is a very good reliever, then I don't see how anyone can be mad about that. But like I said, failing to use him as a starter before he ever gets the chance to fail is extremely reckless. Come on, the guy is not gonna get irrevocably traumatized because he spends part of one season, his first full season, in the bullpen. You sure have a funny definition of the word reckless.

The sox are gonna do whatever they see best suited to help the team win. They will do whatever is best for this season with sale, the one after that, and so on. I feel several times more confident when we have an actual option (sale) when someone is out in the rotation... rather than a never ending revolving door. Sounds familar no? Sucks yes? Let me say before hand the following i believe never occurred because it would have be the wrong way to go about things. Thankfully kenny williams is a smart man to not make such a gaffe. Buehrle was not going anywher, clearly peavy was not gonna get moved, the sox acquired jackson because they have liked him for years. The only two real options we had to move, danks and floyd, would have led to the following... Let's think here hypothetically, jackson, floyd, danks, peavy, and buehrle are all healthy, though one got moved in the off-season. Since danks and floyd were the only realistic options... we will say one of them got moved. Now remember, hypothetically speaking still, the sox did this to start sale and get the most worth out of him. Someone gets hurt... months on end... better yet... season ending... now who steps in to replace one of those starters? It's not as simple as saying '' with the money saved via the starting pitching trade... we picked up a back of the rotation starter as insurance''. That is not a guarantee. Not a ton of money would have been saved if either floyd or danks were moved. Rather minimal actually in the grand scheme of things. So if we went that route... we would need another capable starter, not aaaa caliber pitchers as our insurance policy. This would also mean no sale in the pen, which would then mean we would have most definitely needed to acquire another reliever (i personally still think we need another good one... in our current state) to fill his void. So the five million or so (would be less of course considering we would be getting players in return) would have to be used on two spots (three if you are worried about the lack of pop off the bench) while ultimately losing depth starting pitching wise. Even if it didn't end up being depth, due to them picking up a starter, the skill level would be drastically different, for the worse What sale has to gain by starting this very season is nothing. The sox team, and what best benefits them, this should be the only concern. It's not just my mindset, appears to be kenny's also. They don't have to be greedy and push the issue, take what you can get, while you can get it. I get the vibe that some would rather have sale become nothing at all if he doesn't end up a starter. Would that be disappointing? Yes, most likely unless he became absolutely elite out of the pen. Would i complain that is was the worst pick and choice of all time? No. If you can draft a player in the first round, hell any round, and they end up contributing for the positive on the major league deal, well you struck it rich. I think we are very fortunate having sale as an option to start if an injury occurs, most teams can't just slip in a pitcher like him at will. I'm almost certain sale will be in the rotation by 2012, since there will potentially be two open spots for his taking. Patience is the companion of wisdom.

If a 22 year old, which sale will be by the time the season starts, can't handle a little bouncing around between the rotation and the bullpen, well then i just don't think he is suited for the major leagues. Think about it, sale has very limited mileage on his arm. If anyone were able to do it, it seems like he would be capable. It's not the most uncommon thing to ease someone into the league this way. A perfect example (though in another league talent wise) would be johan santana. Seems like he did just fine to me. He is not the first, last, or only one to go this route. Also, it would be an entirely different scenario if people were suggesting to start him in the pen, and then flip him to the rotation. Going from starting to relieving... would likely be a welcomed relief (haiamsofunny) to sale... rather than the other way around. Going from the pen to the rotation on the drop of a hat... that's when things get worrisome more so. If sale were to get injured, it would be because of how he throws the baseball, rather than the role he is throwing it in. In regards to santos, regression to the norm is to be expected, and since i consider myself to be a realist, i'll go with logic on this one. Do i want that? Doubtful. I want him to do even better than last season. What you want in life, and what you get, are two different things entirely.

I echo j4l... the lack of power off the bench is bothersome... as is the pen. The pen more so than the lack of power of the bench. Too many question marks for my liking when sale is not in the pen, and even when he is, don't color me impressed. The pen shall be the weak link for the sox this season... but will they be bad enough to keep them out of the playoffs? Entirely possible scenario i believe. For some time now the sox pitch their relievers just about as little as any team in the league. Quite simply we have had some sort of a nice luxury. During that time... we have generally had a pretty potent 1-2-3 at the back end... with talented arms sprinkled in to round out the pen. Now? The best arm the sox have is transitioning to closer. Will is matter to thornton mentally? Maybe... maybe not. Thornton got the ball to jenks in situations i am pretty certain the vast majority can't dream of doing on a consistent basis. Another luxury... one of which is assuredly gone. But then again i would take a stud set-up man over a stud closer any day... remember... the game would never get to the closer otherwise. What i mean by this is i would take an elite set-up man and have a slightly worse closer closing out my games... rather than vice versa. I have always believed the best arm in the pen, which is generally the closer, though not always, is utilized incorrectly. I'm not the only one which thinks this way, it's a way more common thought process than you would think. Thornton... i'm pretty confident in... but you just never know how someone will react moving into the closers role. Sale... he will be far and away will be the biggest asset in the pen... once he gets there that is. Without sale... the pen is downright bleak. Santos... unless if something changes control wise... i think he is closer to the pitcher he was the last two months... rather than the first four. People undervalue just how valuable it is when a player has a limited, or in the case of santos, nearly no scouting report at all against. Crain... no problem here... crain should do just about what he has always done. Pena... which pena are we gonna get? If i were to make a wager, i wouldn't say he lives up to what he is capable of, though i just hope he sniffs it. Ohman... he is what he is... a left handed specialist. If they can try and limit ohman to as few right handed hitters as possible.... we will have finally found someone other than thornton that can get lefties out on a consistent basis. Infante... walking batters at the rate he does is not gonna cut it on a team that is contending... maybe on a bottom feeder sort of team they could throw him out there... but i want nothing to do with him. Infante does still have age on his side to get things figured out. Carter... not major league caliber. Spring training invites? Ick (many more times than not). So currently i think we have a total of about three arms we potentially can rely on, and only two until sale gets in there, with a ton of crap shoot mixed in. Btw, i know people don't want to think about it/believe it... but sale will also go through rough patches... it all comes with time. On the jones front... if jones had hit consistently, even a consistent .230, rather than disappear for months at a time, i think many more here would be looking to bring him back. Hopefully throughout the year someone with a little pop is brought in to help in that regard. As far as a grade goes for the off-season... a b- seems fair enough (j4l)... though i would personally give them a b. If they would have brought someone in with power off the bench i would have bumped them to a b+. If they would have added the bench player, and another plus reliever, i would have then rated the off-season an a. No reason to have low standards.. shoot for the stars... and be disappointed with any less.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jan 5, 2011 -> 12:59 PM) Machete was awesome. I am a big fan... and i think it absolutely kicked the expendables ass. The expendables was one of the biggest let downs in years for me... but then again that is to be expected since i followed it from it's infancy. Seagal's last scene was hilarious to myself and those who i watched it with. We watched that scene a couple times in a row after the initial viewing. Funny stuff. I personally have been on an independent film kick... i have watched over 15 or so in the last week. I just love the feel of an indie film.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 30, 2010 -> 02:05 AM) So I guess I win, no one can solve my question! Reread what i last said. You were slightly incorrect in how you worded it. For the last out there would have to be a runner off of second base. The fielder, second/short would let the ball drop... for whatever reason i couldn't tell you. The dropped ball could hit the runner either on the fly... or it could fall to the ground and bounce/roll and hit the runner... this is barring he were off base. Lastly, the infield fly ball would have to drop in front of the second/short who fields it, otherwise it would not be an out. Only on a infield fly is a runner not out if they were to get hit by a dropped ball and still stood on first.

What advice was this?

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Dec 22, 2010 -> 03:18 PM) Lol, no way. Really? Ok here is another..... Explain the scenario in which a ball is hit, and 3 outs are recorded without the defense ever touching the ball, or the ball touching the ground. The ball theoretically does not have to touch the ground... though on the flip side it very well could.

QUOTE (IamtheHBOMB @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 08:35 PM) What's your favorite Oldman role? When he portrays real life people i tend to find him at his best in a way... up to this point oldman has portrayed joe orton, lee harvey oswald, sid vicious, ludwig van beethoven. Beethoven being his finest in my opinion. It's one thing to portray a random fictional character, but it's something entirely else to become one with who you are imitating. Nevertheless, that is another subject in it's own right. Some of his non biopics that i am fond of would be the following... Jackie flannery... state of grace. Stansfield in léon. Drexl spivey... true romance, only one scene, yet memorable. Mason verger... hannibal Rosencrantz & guildenstern are dead... i seriously love that opening scene kalapse. Interstate 60 as i just stated earlier. Beat the devil... and he just so happens to be the devil. Beat the devil is just a short for those who care. Though talk about a weird little cast? =============================================================================== Dracula as dracula... and he/the movie have been bagged on for a reason beyond me. Apparently no one remembers any of the hammer film productions dracula films. Even the great christopher lee had some less than memorable appearances as dracula. Trust me, this is me being nice. If i had to put in order the best portrayals of dracula it would be lugosi's 1931 dracula, christopher lee's 1958 horror of dracula, and then oldman's 1992 dracula. The funny thing is though, wizard magazine does not agree. They believe the best depiction is from the monster squad. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093560/trivia?tr0965917 ============================================================================== Dislike? I hate his zorg. Just look at the silly bastard. I feel like caulfield, no real tangents, but i just feel dirty for some reason.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 07:38 PM) I'd never heard of it until just now. Looks interesting with a bizarre cast, I'm a HUGE Gary Oldman fan and yet I don't even remember seeing that movie on his IMDB filmography. The cover art is terrible, makes it look like a lame ass road comedy but from the description this does not appear to be the case. Funny that James Marsden starred in it, he was also in Sex Drive which IMO is a lame ass road comedy. Have you seen this movie? Yes, and it's extremely entertaining, as far as i'm concerned. You won't be able to get enough of oldman. This is a whole different world in comparison to why you have grown to like him. He is as close to rosencrantz in this film as i have ever seen out of him... yet so far away still. Simply put, he puts a smile on my face whenever he is on the screen. Give it a shot... unless you want to miss out on something every ''huge'' oldman fan should see. Seriously, i want feedback.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Dec 21, 2010 -> 07:25 PM) I figured it would be brutal but holy crap the early returns have it on pace for a Razzie nom. It's at 9% on Rotten Tomatoes right now. What do you think of interstate 60: episodes of the road?

QUOTE (3E8 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 11:16 AM) Hawk will give praise to Twins when it is due (Mauer) and sometimes when it is not (Gomez), but he's not the problem. I feel like he wants to beat the Twins more than our players do, which is troubling. When Delmon hit AJ in the face, the person most upset was Hawk (rawlings in his earhole). The team just put their heads down and shook their heads when it happened, then we beaned Young weeks later in a meaningless game after the Twins had all but eliminated us. For what it's worth, i'm very against intentionally hitting a batter in general, especially (in general being key) against the twins. Is hitting a batter intentionally worth a scored run? Several scored runs due to a rally which only happened because of the hbp? It happens far too often to dismiss the possibility. So people want to purposely put the potent twins on base when the sox already have a hard enough time winning games against them? They simply hit too well, and the sox can't beat them as is while giving them a fourth out to work with, seemingly every third inning, of every game. I remember people calling for young to get hit no matter what the situation was that presented itself. Up in the game, down in the game, a tie, it was making me sick. The only way for the sox to prove their point is not as simple as hitting batters, it's as easy as they need to outplay the twins in every aspect of the game, when they face them head to head. Another thing is, i can't believe all the crying and complaining this past season because of how many times the sox got hbp without ''retaliation''. They were second in baseball at getting hbp at 79, behind the brewers who had 81. The sox had the second fewest hbp's pitching with 34, only san diego had fewer with 28. This is a good thing people. Great thing even. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 17, 2010 -> 12:56 PM) Only no one remembers TCQ going out of his way to get up into the knees of the shortstop and roll him during a double play. Quentin was praised in the chat for that. We loved it.

This thread had potential too. What a shame.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Dec 10, 2010 -> 05:55 PM) I seriously expected that to be called RockEm SockEm QUOTE (Stocking @ Dec 11, 2010 -> 02:09 AM) thought the exact same thing. That's because there just might be... unlikely but who knows. http://www.joblo.com/rock-em-sock-em-robot...ttle-real-steel

QUOTE (IamtheHBOMB @ Dec 9, 2010 -> 08:17 AM) I've had this saved on my Netflix queue for months, but it is still unavailable. How were you able to watch it? Torrents can be your friend.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 9, 2010 -> 09:34 AM) The metrics suggest that Upton is the better Cf then Crawford. The fact that the Rays put both of those two guys in their statistically superior defensive postions suggests it as well. Crawford might have been reluctant to play center, but it's not like the Rays alternative was 2008 Ken Griffey JR. What metrics? You practically have nothing to work off in the case of crawford to suggest he would be worse. Crawford has averaged a uzr of 14.525 in left field over the course of his career. Upton has averaged a 4.65 uzr in center for his career. There is absolutely zero chance crawford would take more than a 10 point hit ( yearly) transitioning over to center. That's not the going rate of a hit a player takes transitioning, and especially for the player of his caliber. Crawford very well could outplay upton defensively in center in my opinion, and if you watch the guy field, i don't know how anyone could say he would be worse than upton. This is still a common complaint with many rays fans to this very day, and baseball fans in general.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Dec 9, 2010 -> 09:17 AM) I think that had more to do with BJ Upton being equally athletic and having a better arm then Crawford. That is hardly the case. Crawford has only played 54 games in center in his career with 47 of those being starts. He has managed to moan after just about everyone of those games also. 54 games in center out of 1235? Crawford had 673 games under his belt after the 2006 season... while upton had a grand total of 95 at the same point. He simply just refuses to play center.