nitetrain8601

Rangers blew this game. I have them losing in 5. Yankees are a much better team and Ron Washington must still be on some stuff.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 12:45 PM) This appears to have the stamp of an official announcement from the 2 companies and is therefore not a rumor. Amazing. Too bad the prices are horrid and I already left Verizon. If they put it on Sprint, I'd be more pissed, but I'm happy to have left VZW for an almost $200 cheaper bill.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 9, 2010 -> 12:52 AM) When it rains, it pours. My mom for some reason thought the hard drive needed air...and opened the bag a bit. There was some (not a lot) condensation, but the fact that I had it in a case inside of the bag may have saved it. I get the clicking noise. I'm done with the home-methods. I'll try finding that store in Orland tomorrow. I don't know if you still need it. He didn't give me the name. Just said it's on John Humphrey Dr

I dislike Ohio State and wanted Wisconsin to win the Big Ten this year(since I knew the Illini had no shot). Then this girl I went to high school with who graduated from Wisconsin kept posting that Bucky crap since the beginning of the season. The most awful song of the past 10 years is the original, and the University of Wisconsin somehow was able to do worse. Return of the Quack was so much better.

What happened with Baylor? I thought Scott Drew no longer coached the team and they were actually good last year? Someone wanna fill me in past the whole shooting incident.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 02:24 PM) Noah, IMO, has almost no upside offensively. And he'll be overpaid starting next year. I don't know what's with this franchise and overpaying for role players. This.

Meh, count me in the group who thinks Cora isn't all that great. All in all, I think he ends up like a Jerry Manuel. Will have limited success, seems to know what he's doing, until faced with a little adversity.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Oct 15, 2010 -> 04:33 PM) I'll have to search for the links to some of the draft articles I read. But there were multiple ones stating that while Sale's talent is not in question, his size/delivery could relegate him to the 'pen. And I disagree. A good reliever is not a good investment with your first round pick. You won't convince me otherwise. There are much less expensive ways to find relievers/closers than to burn first round picks. There are usually concerns with every player not take top 3 overall. The only reason he was passed on was delivery concerns, yes, but the reason why everyone loved the pick was his potential and his stuff. They think his projection will reflect that higher of a guy who is normally picked in his slot.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Oct 14, 2010 -> 10:13 AM) The Dodgers rushed him and then gave up on him. The Rays had confidence and Jackson improved tremendously under them, but it made no sense to pay Jackson through the arb system when they had so much top-level pitching coming up the pipeline (an extremely uncommon situation in MLB BTW). The Tigers got him and Jackson continued to get better there as well, but the Tigers were up to their necks in bad contracts and had to cut salary somewhere, so they traded him and Granderson since they couldn't just dump Magglio, Robertson, Bonderman, etc. on anyone. Jackson got better and better until his first half in AZ, and then they went into salary destructo mode and were still able to trade him for a big return after giving up a lot to get him in the first place. I don't think confidence is really the issue here. It's very rare to see the type of young pitching depth the Rays have and had at the time, and then the other two deals were made when ownership mandated a cut in payroll. Saying Jackson was moved because of a lack of confidence is just an assumption, however we know KW was shot down on several Hudson deals because a lot of other evaluators didn't think the ceiling was there. Ceiling was never a question with Jackson. Good valid points which is what I tried to do with my last post, but kinda failed. And again, he was traded for decent pieces, not scrap like so many people want you to believe.

One thing that definitely should be cleared up, Jackson was not dumped several times. He was traded for Danny Baez one year, then traded for Matt Joyce who was a top prospect IIRC, then traded with Curtis Granderson in a deal that netted them Austin Jackson, Phil Coke, Max Scherzer and Daniel Schlereth.

QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 8, 2010 -> 11:23 PM) As lame as this sounds, I wanted The Polar Express to be my first Blu Ray buy but Best Buy didn't have it in stock so I got Iron Man 2. Also switched by Netflix account to Blue Ray. Love how my player has wifi and I can log into Netflix with it. Polar Express on Blu Ray was one of the better looking movies which first came out on Blu Ray, so that's highly suggested. I also suggest Casino Royale and MI3

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Oct 12, 2010 -> 09:44 PM) The last 90 second montage of the carnival scenes confused me..... That's the only thing I didn't get either. It was super duper weird.

QUOTE (kjshoe04 @ Oct 12, 2010 -> 08:28 PM) The only one that is kind of difficult to get assists is The Arrival. Without Pippen it is kind of tough. Pippen actually is hard to play with in the early days. Offensively he's great at everything except shooting. And when I say that, I mean it. He can't shoot to save his life in that game until you get to 95/96. As far as Bioshock 2, I enjoyed it thoroughly and can't wait until Bioshock Infinite.

Danks and CQ do not equal anything you want. It's only a start for top tier players like Votto. Heck, you're better off trying to pick up Alonso.

I propose mods clean up the other threads and place all postings relating to these two in here. I saw in one of them, people are sick of the arguments back and forth. I do agree there was 4 or 5 threads that turned into this chatter pretty quickly. So to clean up a bit, just dump everything in here. PS Daniel Hudson is teh suck

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 03:26 PM) I was stating that you have to not only look at their projectability but also how many years of service they have under a team's control to judge value. Of course not every prospect pans out, but not every MLB player pans out too and Edwin had just as much as risk as anyone if he would ever be more than a 5th starter for a full season. Even if Jackson proves to be able to pitch in the 3.5 ERA area he still has to greatly outproduce Hudson not only next year but for future years with the Sox because Hudson is under contract for the next 6 years. Even if Jackson is stellar next year, Hudson would still give the Sox a 3/4 starter for 5 plus years of being cheaper than Jackson in his 1.25 seasons here. So not only is it about talent, but its in terms of how long you have that talent and what you are paying them. So if Jackson pitches like an ace next year(even if we don't resign him), and Hudson pitches with a 4.5ERA in the NL West, the trade was still a dumb one? Really? Cas I fail to see that. Because fact is, if Hudson has an ERA of 4.25 over the course of the next 5 or 6 years, Jackson doesn't have to do squad to justify the trade as long as he's better. Know why? Because you can get 4.25ERA's pretty easily off the scrapheap.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 04:41 PM) As great as Jackson could be next year, he has to outperform 6 years of Hudson (and whatever Holmberg turns into) to make that trade even. Almost all of the money being saved from expiring contracts will be going to arbitration and raises, we have some $85 million tied up with obvious keepers like Danks. Even after that we're down Konerko, Jenks, Putz, Vizquel, Jones and AJ. We'll need a catcher, a 1B, possibly a 3B depending on Morel, a closer, a setup man, and possibly some bench pieces. All that for less than $15 million. Now tell me that Kenny did not shoot himself in his foot with the moves leading to this situation. He now has to trade from an area of strength to recover from his weaknesses, and with the Peavy injury, that strength is already in question. Danks is not an obvious keeper whatsoever. In fact, he's an obvious trade chip because he's going to want the moon when it's his time, and he's not worth more than a few stars. It's pretty obvious KW, is going to go next year with Viciedo and Morel at 1B/3B unless someone like Adrian Beltre comes cheap. I believe Putz will be resigned. I'm pretty sure Thornton is our setup man or did I miss out on that? Our bench is definitely not a problem.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 04:19 PM) First off, never use wins as a way to judge a pitcher's performance, wins are almost always out of the hands of the pitcher as an offense can score 10 runs to save a pitcher or none to kill a great performance, look at other stats to determine a pitcher's worth. Second, you don't trade a young, talented pitcher who struggled in one key area, walks, but showed in the past that those struggles would go away. Jackson was a decent pickup, but he was not worth Hudson, period. Kenny is shooting himself in the foot with this trade, and you'll see this when we have a Dewayne Wise/Mark Kotsay starting in our lineup somewhere because we ran out of funds, or we can't resign key players (and not just Konerko, who I think will get more money regardless elsewhere, but guys like Putz that we need in the bullpen). Again, I fail to see where Edwin Jackson is the cause of this. For someone getting paid his salary, he's pretty justafiably paid compared to other pitchers in the league. Also, if we had Hudson over Jackson, the best we could do is maybe afford two Juan Uribe's which still doesn't make this team a contender. Rios, Buehrle and PK are and would be much better cases for the whole "funds" argument. Not Edwin. So I'm not buying that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 07:46 AM) There are 3 easy answers to that. If you don't think they'll get to 73, you think it's because one of them will get hurt or exhausted because of excessive minutes, you think that there will be a serious chemistry clash (to the point that Riles steps in to bail the team out in the 2nd half), or you think that they're going to get crushed by any team that has a legitimate big man because they have no one who can slow down a Howard or a Gasol on the inside. I think they're 73 barring freak injuries, but there are legit points on the other side. I think they will as well, but it has to be in the first two years together. Wade is brittle. Also, that's when they'll have the most motivation because people hate them so much now. So with that said, as you stated, a good big man will cause them fits and they're going to be exhausted if they go for 73. I disagree with Howard though because offensively, he's still pretty much a joke after working with several big men. A guy like Boozer who can easily backdown Bosh will cause them problems. Gasol will too. Heck, the whole Celtics frontline will upset them. Throw Blake Griffin in there too who will eat Bosh alive.

QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 11:18 AM) Pure skill with Clausen? The only thing he can do well is throw a deep ball. His arm strength has never been above average, and he has no mobility. Yeah, best pure skill for a QB. Running is more of a modern thing. He had decent mobility, has great arm strength good accuracy, etc. That's not everything though. QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 11:22 AM) Thats the thing though, even if his pure skill would put him at #1(debatable), Kiper is paid to evaluate everything, not just skill. It was almost unanimous that Clausens attitude was a huge downfall for him and is the reason he fell so far. Kiper should of been able to see that and correctly assess his value in the draft Exactly. He had little respect from his teammates and even from regular people(guy who punched him out at a bar). He struck everyone as a dbag, and he hasn't shown anyone otherwise. He even blamed an INT on a receiver, who even if he didn't hear the audible, or he ran the incorrect route, you don't do on national tv to make yourself look better which is clearly what he tried to do. A QB is supposed to have intangibles and on great teams, is a leader. Clausen has nooooooooooooooooo leadership skills whatsoever. QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 11:29 AM) Hub had a great point on Boers and Bernsie yesterday: ProFootbal Weekly had Clausen has a mid-2nd round pick. Kiper had him in the top 10 (i think). Sounds about accurate. I thought he was more of a 20th pick and on.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 07:59 AM) He's clearly the best CB on the team, who is better? That's not saying much. The Bears have been pretty poo in the secondary for awhile now. Tillman and Vasher in 06 were both b starters, but nothing spectacular. Tillman is a good ballhawk, that's about it. Which is why a lot of people think he should be playing S. BTW, just my opinion, DJ Moore is a better CB than anyone on that Bears squad skillwise, but he lacks size. Tillman is a servicable guy and at his peak, would've made a good #2, but Bears fans need to stop drinking the kool-aid and thinking he's great because he had a good game against Randy Moss 4 years ago.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 13, 2010 -> 01:42 PM) Wasn't just projecting him, but you have to value him at 6 years because that is how long he is under team control. Jackson, when being brought up, was also being valued under the 6 years, you can't just look at what a player gives you for one year, but what impact does taht have on the organization after that too. Not sure if I understand your argument. Are you saying, you're valuing him because he's under control for 6 years, and not based on projections? I don't think you are, but if that's the case, Jackson was in the same position when he came up. It would be like saying it was a stupid idea to trade him. And Jackson showed promise his first year with the Dodgers. Hudson has too. Now what if Hudson falls flat on his face next year? What if Edwin pitches like he has in the AL? Are we still going to argue that the trade is bad? I think some people are too afraid of this becoming a Todd Ritchie situation all over again, and the others just don't like Jackson period.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 11, 2010 -> 07:01 PM) Chris Young, Clayton Richard, Dan Hudson, Ryan Sweeney, Gio Gonzalez, Brandon Allen, Chris Carter, Brandon McCarthy, Chris Getz, Aaron Cunningham...I'm sure there are a few others who are solid prospects still too (like Daniel Cortes). Not all of these guys are good or great players, but all of them should be serviceable players in the majors at some point in time. I also don't think they traded Hudson at his peak value, but that's neither here nor there. Young is a good starter. Richard is an NL only type pitcher. His peak is a good #4. Hudson is a good pitcher and at his peak(over the course of a final season) is a #3. Sweeney, we saw was a bust. Gio is at best a #4 pitcher(it saddens me to say that since I was a huge fan of his). I can't evaluate Allen yet. Same with Carter. McCarthy hasn't shown he's useful since 2006. Getz is nothing more than servicable. Cunningham hasn't shown anything worthwhile either. Sure, these guys are useful as bench players and back end starters, but let's not pretend like they are on their way to being great players while being dirt cheap. BTW, I do agree with you that they didn't trade Hudson at his peak value. Typically though, that doesn't end up happening. BTW, I can't believe Hahn thought Mackowiak could play CF. WOWWWWWWW

In terms of pure skill, you can make an argument Clausen was #1. Overall though, Bradford was #1 with a bullet.

And Moss is still much faster and is better at WR than Tillman is at CB. Also Moss's WR skills haven't diminished as much as people would like to think.