nitetrain8601

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) It is known and has been known that the Bulls' main target is Stojakovic. By who? I haven't seen anything about the Bulls looking to obtain Peja, especially with the year he's having this year. The only blurb I heard about him came from his agent in a article from a year ago.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 05:51 AM) I think you need to calm down a little lol. This team wasnt built to win this season.... the point was for guys to get better and have our real playoff run next season when we add 2 impact players in F/A and 2 draft picks and by the way it looks so far possibly a top 3 pick from the Knicks. If we add the likes of Al Harrington and Nazr Mohammed... than draft like Rudy Gay/Adam Morrison plus some big guy with our other pick.... and still suck start getting mad but if you really expected much from this team at the begining of the season you were just being a homer. Well they are going about it the wrong way. With the exception of last night, they've misused Gordon big time and it's really hindering his development to the point in which I wouldn't be suprised if he just left after his contract was up. They try to make him a spot up shooter when his game was nothing like that. They also need to give Deng the ball more so he can create for himself alot more often. The plan you suggest is basically have this year as a throwaway year and wait for FA's to come in. Al Harrington isn't going to help this team as much as people think. Nazr is nothing without Tim Duncan or at least he hasn't proven to be anything without him. As far as Gay or Morrison, where do you plan on putting them? Both are pure SF's. We already have 2. LaMarcus Aldridge is the guy we need to go after. He draws alot of comparisons to Jermaine O'Neal and worst case scenario's have him as Channing Frye. He plays defense unlike Frye, however. This draft class is not weak. It's not the strongest of the decade, but I'd say it's 2nd strongest. People call it weak because the lack of "star" power which is the wrong way to evaluate a draft class.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:10 AM) That was hilarious. I could maybe understand the star in the endzone, but not in the middle of the field. I was glad he was knocked on his ass when he tried it. If I were a Cowboys player, I personally would've knocked him on the ass for disrespecting my team's logo. I love endzone celebrations, but disrespecting a team's logo is out of the question. Would you like it if TO ran to midfield at Soldier Field after he scored a TD? I bet not because he would be disrespecting the "C".

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 11:39 AM) Uuuum, what makes you say that? Some team in Indy.

Good read. I would love to be able to host the NCAA Final Four. Plus they plan on having this stuff built around the UIC campus. That would be fantastic since I spend most of my day there anyway.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 02:52 AM) Agreed. Although I don't see the O's dealing Bedard in any deal with the Cubs (imo). In offer 2, the Cubs are giving up Prior and Hill for arguably the best SS in the game, a #3 pitcher, and a top OF prospect. Prior isn't worth that much. Hill only has his curve as of now(even Cub fans admit this). 2 is a bad deal for the O's.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 11:58 PM) back when TO did the sharpee and played with pom poms... that was great... hell dancing on the star against the cowboys was great too.... but yeah this season he was more annoying than anything else.... and Im not even a big D-Mac fan. The dancing on the star was not great.

QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 12:01 AM) Thats just Jon's attitude about attitude... he tries to be calm and looks like he doesnt care about anything. Although from what I hear from people close to him is that he really does care just doesnt know how to show it or something like that. Yep. I heard about that too. It's a good and bad thing because opponent's don't see you sweat, but you get people on your case.

QUOTE(robinventura23 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 09:34 PM) This was most intense game I'd ever been to. My nerves were shot. In the end, it was also the most exciting. Tell me about it. As soon as Crede hit that double I was sooooooo relieved.

QUOTE(danman31 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 09:33 PM) Simply put they aren't as good as last year. No Curry and no Davis is too much to overcome. Sweetney is solid, but he's not tall enough to play center in this league. Bingo. Basically, we need 3 of our guys to be hot each night to win. When those 3 guys are forced to be perimeter players, that's a huge problem.

QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 07:08 PM) Not to far, but we are still a playoff team, and we aren't a pushover I disagree. Our record for once says we are better than we are. Any team with a big man will kill us. I don't see us being a playoff team and I do think on most nights we are pushovers. 2 things we are missing: A big man worth a damn. Eddy actually was this, but people were pissed because they thought he wasn't reaching his ceiling. That's a whole 'nother debate. Defensive intsensity. Nocioni isn't playing like the bad boy he once was last year. Everyone on the team seems pussied out. You don't see any guys on the team really proud to play defense.

Flaherty will reverse the Damon Curse!!!

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 07:40 PM) Sorry, I guess the two Cubs' offers for Tejada are supposedly: Offer 1: Angel Guzman, Rich Hill, Corey Patterson, and Brian Dopirak for Miguel Tejada Offer 2: Mark Prior and Rich Hill for Miguel Tejada, Erik Bedard, and an unnamed top outfield prospect (possibly Nick Markakis) 1st one looks about even, but the Orioles want a marquee name to replace Tejada. Offer 2 is a pipedream for the Cubs. I guess Jim Hendry isn't done trying to rip off teams.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 04:18 PM) Well we are getting to the point were we are the devil also. Our payroll this year is going to be anywhere from 85-90 million(approximately). Dont get me wrong we are not the yanks, but do you think that Minny would like to have Thome vs White. We are a big market, and finally with some revenue changes are becoming a big market type club. So before we all get upset, remember how happy you were looking at the WS Championship DVD and what we had last year, and our possible monster team we have this year. My personal belief is that its how the team is managed. Some teams compete with prospects like Minny, the Indians, and the A's. Other teams use prospects to obtain talent like the Sox. Others just pay through the noise to get what they want the BoSox and the Yanks. But make no mistake, we are now in the upper bracket of overall salary. I am sure that the Indians/Twins/KC fans think we are the NY of the midwest. Exactly. The major problem with the bad teams(KC and such) is the fact that they don't have good management. They usually have no logic in what they want to do. Milwaukee used to be one of those teams, but Doug Melvin seems to know what he wants to do and how to go about it. Naturally there are big market teams who have more flexibility because of more revenue. We're finally one of those teams.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 03:37 PM) Kiss baseball away for at least 2 years if a Salary cap is thought of. Let me emphasize this even more. THE PLAYERS ASSOCIATION WOULD STRIKE. SO JUST LIKE IN 94. SEE YOU IN 2008 OR 2009 FOR BASEBALL. Are we still the same type of team, or are we at 17k a game again. I hate the money they are making, but be careful what you ask for. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who wouldn't like that.

This one could get ugly and in a hurry tonight.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 03:13 PM) Freddy is fully aware of the money he lost not going through free agency. I really doubt he'll give the White Sox a break his next contract. Exactly my point. These players are going to keep on getting whatever they can until the market bursts and there is a strike. If I'm Garland, I'm looking over to Burnett and saying, I've accomplished more in my career, why can't I get more money?

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 02:55 PM) To put the price we'd have to end up paying for Garland in prospective (either signing and extension now or after the season), Ben Sheets and Johan Santana both signed for 4 years and 40 mil before last season. We offered Jon $24 mil over 3 years, and he obviously wasn't happy with that offer. Those guys are both light-years better than Jon, and if that's what it'll take to keep him I'd rather deal him for some cheap young talent and move on. I seriously doubt that Jon is ever going to be worth that kind of money. Buehrle is an entirely different story, and so are Freddy and Jose if they pitch well again this year. I'm more than happy with those 3 leading the rotation and filling it out with Javier and B-Mac, assuming we can work out deals for the first 3 when it is necessary. See post above me Garland's priority is cash right now and I won't knock him for it because I would probably be the same as 90% of the world would be. Let me ask you this, when Freddy becomes a FA, how much do you think he'll receive? Keep in mind, not warrant, receive.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:53 PM) The White Sox have known for quite a while what Garland was in line for in arbitration, and tried to sign him to a under market 3 year contract , still worth approx. $8 million for 2006, which is probably the max he will earn in arbitration. I can't see where keeping him and losing in arbitration would be blowing up the budget, keep in mind the Vazquez trade only added a million or 2 to the payroll for 2006. The good news for me is Texas and the Dodgers both have said KW is asking for too much. I don't want him to settle for some B or C prospects that turn out to be of the ilk of Adkins, Diaz, Harris etc. Garland is a huge chip, depending on whether the Cubs are serious about possibly trading Prior, and Beane being serious about keeping Zito, he has to be the most attractive non free agent pitcher available. KW cannot settle. He has to stick to his guns and get quality or hold onto him and take the draft picks. Damn Skippy!

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:48 PM) Addendum to breaking news, they don't do it this way. Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow. I think they would. At first they would be losing money, but from all the revenue they will be receiving from attendance alone, they'll end up finishing on the plus side regardless.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:24 PM) KW probably wants to get some young cheap talent that will help with our budget for not only this year but for the next few. We have a lot of players that are coming into their payday years, and this will get ugly soon unless some cheaper players come in to the fold. Outside of VAfan everyone pretty much agrees on this principle. Now from a competition standpoint who do you want to trade with. Do you want to make the Angels better or the Yankees or the Red Sox you know one of these teams you wish to rip off. No you probably want to target a team that is in the NL so the risk of facing a good pitcher like Garland is limited. So that limits you to the NL. Now who has the prospects or the talent to give up. Some teams dont have what we want, some teams are not a good match. The minute you start to limit your tradling partners is the minute you pretty much limit your return. We make a deal now we can get some young talent. Yes you could bluff the entire baseball group and maybe somehow land the big score at the deadline for a desperate team. However that is too risky, and the "backup plan" of well we will get picks is laughable. People are crapping all over se they havent performed well in their september callup or their rookie season, but they are ready to take chances on completely unknown talent that may require a singing bonus. How is Joe Borchard doing everyone, was he worth our signing bonus or the first round pick. Because that is a possibliity when you go to draft picks. Take more mature proven talent that at least has their feet wet in some levels of the minors. At least most of the lemons have been taken out by this point. Why are draft picks laughable? Yes, Borchard didn't do as well, but at least you pick the guys you want with potential 1st and 2nd round picks from a team. You get to decide what position players you get or pitchers. You could develop them the way you want to develop them. That's not a shabby fallback plan at all. You also have to consider the WBC and the fact that someone's probably going to breakdown in the rotation. That's why I would keepp 6 until the trade deadline. If teams call our bluff, so be it. We still get a couple of good picks. And before anyone goes on further, yes I know we need to shed cash before the season starts, but I don't see that happening.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:22 PM) Is anyone else worried about KW not getting enough value back for Garland? It's not often that he's the one trading away the proven player for prospects, etc. Usually it's the other way around. In terms of what the fans want, I have a feeling that most will be dissapointed. Billingsly and Guzman? 2 of their top 3 prospects we're talking about there. Honestly, people are overvaluing Garland there. I would be content with Brazobahn and Broxton and maybe cash or a lower level prospect.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:13 PM) What do you do about the budget situation, that has to factor in. Ask for cash in the deal.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:53 PM) Agreed here. I actually liked TO until he decided to just be a complete moron and attack Mcnabb. Add me to that list. What happened to these WR's? Did they actually hire Cedric the Entertainer as their Touchdown Boogey Coordinator? Anyway, I can't wait to see what he does. I love Chad Johnson. I hope they don't suspend him though. It's not like he's flipping off the other team. He's doing it to entertain the fans.

Ruutu is a nice player, but damn, I don't even think him coming back at 100% would help the Hawks right now.