S720

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ May 10, 2006 -> 11:23 PM) Ya, I've mentioned it a few times, but we have totally overused him and I fear he will be hurt come the post-season if we continue to do so. He needs a few days off so he can regain his command. Late last season he wore down and started blowing some games (his velocity went south as well) and it was because he wasn't getting enough rest. At this stage he still seems to tire if used back to back to back and since thats happened on more than one ocassion this year its gotten him and he needs a few days without work to get that pop back. I am not sure why you guys said that Jenks has been overused! He only has 14.2 IP, Cotts 14.1, Logan 9.2, Politte 11.2, BMAC 19.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ May 10, 2006 -> 10:34 PM) WTF is the point of a 105 mph fastball if you have no control over it? If Jenks gets his velocity back, he will be a MUCH better closer. It's his bread and butter. His fastballs are just too straight, and at 93MPH, they will be eaten alive by good hitters. QUOTE(fathom @ May 10, 2006 -> 10:39 PM) In my opinion, the cause of the problem is 18 appearances in 33 games. He shouldn't be used in non-save appearances. Fathom, I understand your point. What I am trying to say is right now Jenks is NOT the Jenks we saw last year. For some reasons, his velocity is dangerously decreasing. I am not sure what causes that. Save or no-save appearances should NOT affect his velocity. If he gets his velocity back, 99 or 100MPH, save or non-save situation would not matter. He would blow his fastballs past the hitters. And he would be most dominant if his hook is working for him.

From the last several games, watching Jenks has been kind of scary. It seems like he doesn't have his high-heat velocity like last year. I've seen too many 93, 94, 95 MPH fastballs, and that is not good. Jenks' fastballs are straight with no movement. Hitters will kill him if his curveball or hook does not work. Hopefully, Jenks will get back his 99, 100, 105 MPH fastballs! Only then, I will stop worry about our closer.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 10, 2006 -> 10:15 PM) It is Oz's fault for bringing him in. No way should Cotts have been taken out in that situation. I've seen this situation a lot of times. Not only with our team but with other teams as well. If it works, Ozzie is great and genius! If it does not, he's sh*t! You guys make me laugh!

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 10, 2006 -> 10:05 PM) Oz = dumbass. Should already be bottom 9 right now. Even in my wildest dream that I could NOT believe you are blaming Ozzie for the ineptitude of Jenks! You Ozzie critics make me SICK!!!

QUOTE(JimH @ May 7, 2006 -> 01:20 PM) I just logged on ... so how much whining has there been on the game thread about the lineup? Looks to me like Ozuna in for Podsednik and Widger in for Pierzynski. Hmmm, let's see ... day game after a nite game, Widger catches, check. Ozuna in for Podsednik, well I'm sure some people here will have a problem with that. Mackowiak in for an injured Dye. No wait, some people here will have a problem with everything. Those are the constant whiners. Those are the Ozzie critics. Etc. And we all know who those are!

Where did I ever state that I had superior knowledge to Ozzie? He won a World Series I didn't. Am I not allowed to voice my opinion? I just said I don't like how he is OBSESSED with the lefty lefty matchup. So I guess I have to trust you over Ozzie. Don't make me laugh! In some cases it's good to go with the lefty against the lefty. However, in this scenario with the one run game, I STRONGLY feel that it is the closer's game to lose. Therefore you put the ball in your closers hands and you let him get the three outs. Jenks did have three outs with only ONE man on first base. And he FAILED not Ozzie. As for the personal attack calling me a whiner, that's fine. I don't really care what you have to say about me, but I will not lower myself to your level. If I sounded harsh, I apologize. Let's put this to rest. 2 out of 3 ain't bad!

QUOTE(CWSOX45 @ May 5, 2006 -> 09:06 PM) What do you mean don't blame Ozzie? You put your closer in the 9th. Not your set-up man. I'm sick of this lefty v lefty matchup bulls*** in the 9th. In a one run game in the 9th inning, you give the ball to your f***ing closer. It's his game to win or lose. YOU GIVE THE BALL TO YOUR CLOSER. The end. Do you think you are smarter than Ozzie? Give me a f***ing break! Your baseball knowledge is NOTHING compared to Ozzie. Stop playing f***ING manager. Bobby was called in with ONLY one man on first base. If he can not close the game, it's his f***ING fault. Don't blame anyone else. You are such a WHINER!

QUOTE(CWSOX45 @ May 5, 2006 -> 08:57 PM) I hate when Ozzie does this bulls***... You guys are hilarious! It's so obvious that Jenks did not have anything tonight. His straight fastballs are easy to hit at 93MPH. Stop blaming Ozzie!

Well, I guess the floodgate has been opened... http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-060424soxearly,1,3804869.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines Sox's bridge to Japan open World Series title extends what Iguchi, Takatsu started By Mark Gonzales Tribune staff reporter April 24, 2006 SEATTLE -- Shingo Takatsu made inroads for the White Sox in Japan, and Tadahito Iguchi helped the franchise gain worldwide notice in the World Series. If the Sox's sudden popularity in Japan is any indication, more Japanese players might follow the footsteps of Takatsu and Iguchi to Chicago. "I think whereas before the Japanese people, as players, may not have heard of the White Sox or be as familiar with the White Sox, now there's an awareness that we're an open-minded organization in a great city and a good club to play for," general manager Ken Williams said before Monday night's game against the Mariners. "I don't care if the guy we need is from the rain forest on a back field. If he can help us, then we're going to try to find him." Nearly two dozen cameras followed Iguchi on Monday with fellow Japanese players Ichiro Suzuki and Kenji Johjima of the Mariners. The significance wasn't lost on Iguchi, who followed Suzuki to play major-league baseball and was followed the next year by Johjima, his teammate for eight seasons with the Fukuoka Daiei Hawks of the Japanese Pacific League. "The White Sox became more known when we won the World Series, and now they're playing more games on television," Iguchi said through interpreter Ryan McGuire. Iguchi flied out to Suzuki in right field and struck out in his first two at-bats in Monday night's game, televised back to Japan. "It depends on Japanese players like me playing for the Sox, getting more recognition and more games on television," Iguchi said. Iguchi, who entered Monday's game with a .344 batting average, is well aware that his progress is monitored closely as the second infielder to make the jump from Japan to the major leagues, following the New York Mets' Kaz Matsui. "At the same time Johjima came here, and how well a Japanese catcher is going to fare in the major leagues is something people are talking about in Japan," Iguchi said. Interest in the Sox rose dramatically last season when Iguchi batted .278 and was called the team's most valuable player by manager Ozzie Guillen. It reached a zenith in the off-season when Iguchi attended a wedding in Japan that was attended by several former Fukuoka teammates. "It's something they're interested in," Iguchi said. "It's a world they know nothing of, and I got a lot of questions." Iguchi said nearly all of his 40 ex-teammates and coaches asked about his first season with the Sox. The Sox's popularity in Japan started to climb when Takatsu, who returned to the Yakult Swallows this year, earned 19 saves in 2004 and was runner-up for the American League Rookie of the Year Award. They also made inroads in the spring of 2005 when they hired longtime international talent evaluator Ray Pointevint, the son-in-law of Japanese royalty, as a consultant. And after Iguchi's sterling first season, the Sox's popularity reached another level this spring when Japanese pitching pioneer Hideo Nomo was signed to a Triple-A contract. Those developments should enhance their chances of signing more free agents from Japan. Among the potential free agents who could help the Sox in the future are pitcher Koji Uehara and second baseman Tsuyoshi Nishioka. [email protected]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 10, 2006 -> 11:53 AM) No s***. With a pending suit against People's Energy for overbilling customers, you would think they would try and keep the overbilling to a minimum. Apparently that is not the case. Well, my bill the other month was $456.00. Last month was $389.00. I have a two-story Georgian house with new windows installation. How do I know for sure that it was an actual read or estimated? Should I follow your path and report them to BBB?

QUOTE(WCSox @ Feb 9, 2006 -> 08:42 PM) Yes, after Saddam killed 5,000 Kurds with sarin and mustard gas three years earlier, they were hostile towards him. The nerve of those insurgents! And guess who urged the Kurds to overturn Saddam, and then when Saddam used those deadly sarin and mustard gas bombs on the Kurds, who turned their back and allowed Saddam to do it? Another thing, if Saddam had those same sarin and mustard gas bombs as well as others, why did not he use them when he was cornered? If your enemy are coming to kill you, and if you possess those WMDs, isn't it naturally for you to protect yourself. NOBODY on this board tolerates Saddam. After the first Gulf War, Iraq's power has already dwindled to nothing. It's just the misleading justification the Bush administration has used to go to war. And this war has cost us tremendously.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 9, 2006 -> 08:50 AM) What's your point? I've never once said that I was protecting 'the president's reason to go to war', you've SPECULATED that was what I was doing. You could be making s*** UP that defends the UN. What's the difference? I am not making things up to protect the UN. I don't give a s*** about the UN. All I'm saying is the US knew damn well that Iraq did not possess the amount of WMDs as Bush and Cheney stated for their reason to go to war. The world knows that North Korea and Iran have WMDs and even nuclear capability. Why don't we go and attack them? As Colin Powell stated, "You better make sure that you really want to attack Iraq. Once you break it, you own it!" And that's exactly what the situation in Iraq is. Other countries would gradually and eventually leave Iraq. Our poor soldiers will once again be there to protect WHAT??? Kapkomet, do you know about a letter that was sent to President Clinton back in 1996 in regard to attacking Iraq even back then? Do you know whose signatures on that letter?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 9, 2006 -> 07:43 AM) And any UN report supporting anything has to be weighed by the fact that they were desparately trying to hide the oil for food fiasco. I don't believe any of it. I think no matter what documents you quote, refer to, say is the gosphel, is somehow politically manipulated. What motives did Saddam have to destroy that stuff? None. Absolutely none. I think some of it did get destroyed when Clinton lobbed a few missles Iraq's way. I think some of it did get destroyed by our no-fly zone missions and subsequent attacks. I think some of it naturally degraded into a harmless state. I think some of it did get buried in the desert sand and we haven't found it. And last, I do think some of it got moved to Syria. No one KNOWS what happened to it but Saddam and his two dead sons, and they ain't talking anymore. To reempahsize, ANYONE could have made s*** up to protect the UN and make it look like things were "working"... And you are making s*** UP to protect the president's reason to go to war!

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 8, 2006 -> 08:18 PM) Yes, but HOW!?! He MOVED THEM. He didn't destroy that s***, he MOVED it to Syria. And let me be clear, the whole thing on the intelligence was bulls***. But, I don't doubt for one single minute that he moved that stuff out of the country. Kapkomet, stop your BULLs*** speculation. You or ANYONE else don't even know whether Saddam had actually moved them to Syria. It's all speculation. So STOP pretending as if you actually know it. Answer me this question: When you are being attacked, when your own sons had been killed by your enemy, if you actually have those WMDs, would you have released them to kill your enemy? You want to know why we attacked Iraq USING WMDs as alibi? Because we knew damn well that Iraq's WMDs were already destroyed by all the bombings we had on that country. Let's see if we will use WMDs justification on Iran or North Korea to attack them. The world knows they have them. I don't see us attacking them!

Alright, this is final offer: Abreu + Gio for Contreras + Dye Take it or leave it!

Steff, I'm sorry to hear such terrible news. No words can describe how you and your family are feeling right now, but one thing I feel for sure - Joey is very happy now being surrounded by beautiful angels. My deepest sympathies to you and your family Steff. RIP Joey...

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 04:29 PM) How much money did the Bush campaign raise in that election? It's not the matter of how much money he had raised in that campaign. It's the fact that everytime this administration gets caught on something negative, it seems like Bush always doesn't know anyone involved. If it's something positive for his administration, he WILL be the first person who will come out and acknowledge it.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 11:54 AM) I remember everyone I had a meeting with that also happened to donate over $100,000 to me and was on my Presedential Transition Team. Better chance that I'd remember that person if they were a friend to my advisor Karl Rove. BigSqwert, the Bush supporters are completely right. There is no way Bush can remember, since Bush is so STUPID to remember anything that he ever did wrong! That's the fact. Abramoff is only a friend of Karl Rove who donated $100,000.00 to Bush's campaign. There is no way he can remember. He got no brain! Sometimes, supporting can be so blind!

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 7, 2006 -> 10:36 AM) Because a protester getting the access to confront Bush is a lot rarer. Most of his "town meetings" are staged. So its rare that he would even get the chance to get talked down to. Have you peoples seen a clip where Bush was confronted by a soldier in military outfit with a question regarding Iraq, and he just gave his goofy smile and turned his back on this soldier? Didn't even answer it! ALL of our politicians will experience odd moments like this, and that's the exact REASON why Bush will always have his so-called "Town Meeting" STAGED! The chicken &*^%!

QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 10:32 AM) The key here to me is this statement. ''That's not going to happen,'' Williams said, confirming that the Orioles did call this week. "'We were told there wasn't a fit.'' That to me sounds like Baltimore was the one to say no to the Sox. Or it might mean, "Lower your demands, then we got a deal!"

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:01 AM) http://www.suntimes.com/output/deluca/cst-spt-deluca05.html DAMN! One can dream ~~~ Tejada-Konerko-Thome-Dye ...

About few weeks ago, Kenny has already mentioned on an article in the Sun-Times that he disliked the defeatist attitude, and that he will do whatever to not only improve the team to win it all again, but also to get rid of the second team in the city reputation. If he holds truth to his words, he will pull the trigger. Just close your eyes and envision the drawing attraction: Tejada-Konerko-Thome-Dye!!! Wow!

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 10:22 AM) Then you haven't followed the pitching market very well the last two offseasons. Rowand44, I do follow the offseason market for starting pitchers the last two years, and that's why I'm kind of confused with the Garland's signing! Throw the first year out since Garland is going to receive that amount in his arbitration year anyway. That means he's going to get $11 mil for each of 2007 and 2008. I am just not sure Garland warrants that much! Put it this way. If you have a choice of offering the same amount $29 for 3 years to Contreras or Garland, and you will have to trade one away, who would you give it to? With me, I will offer the contract to Contreras. I just feel that whatever pitcher receives $11 mil/year contract, he ought to be the #1 starting pitcher. I don't see Garland as that, but in my eyes, Contreras definitely is the #1 starting pitcher on our rotation. That's why Ozzie started him on all of the 1st game of the playoff series and the World Series. If you read the Dodgers message board, their fans do not want to trade their highly rated prospects for Garland. However, once Garland was signed to the contract extension, they were willing to let go some of their prospects for Contreras. They even said Contreras would head their starting pitching rotation. My point is most of us did not like the contracts of Burnett, Millwood, etc. They are making $11/year as well but with longer years. At the end of 2008, if you think Garland will be resigned with the White Sox for $11 mil/year again, what is the difference between Garland's contract and other overrated contracts of Millwood or Burnett? I don't think Garland will get another big contract from the White Sox after 2008, and that's the reason why I prefer giving this $11 mil/year for 2 years to Contreras.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 29, 2005 -> 07:59 AM) Look at Contreras's 2004 and first half of 2005 and tell me what a year and a half is worth again. Vazquez has the arm, he proved that while in MTL and starting in NY. He is much younger than Contreras was at the time, and now Javier is coming into an ideal situation with a great pitching coach and a latin clubhouse. He is ripe for a turnaround and has the ability to do so. Folks, I really don't know now. Since Dick Allen mentioned about Garland is supposed to receive $7 or $8 mil in arbitration for next year anyway, this means Garland's 2-year extension worths $11 per year for 2007 and 2008. I personally think that is too much for Garland. Between Contreras and Garland, I prefer Contreras. First, Contreras has better stuff than Garland. Contreras IS the #1 starting pitcher as he has shown in the playoff and the World Series. Garland only flourishes in his 4th or 5th position. Between Contreras and Garland, who do you think should be allocated as #1 or #2 on our rotation? WITHOUT A DOUBT, Contreras! By the end of 2008, Garland might walk away anyway. I certainly don't see us keeping Garland past 2008 if his monetary demand is equal or higher than it is now. Don't know what Kenny is thinking! But this offseason is getting more interested...