Wong & Owens

Then I'm pretty confident your favorite non-Sox player isn't Danny Haren.

Her Manager? Was she a boxer?

Jim Thome. No roids, no nutrition "gurus," no 24/7 personal trainer. Eats steak and f***ing eggs for breakfast everyday, grabs a bat, hits .300 with 35 Homers and 100 ribbies then goes out for a few beers afterwards. That's a baseball player.

Do Mail-Order brides count as "dating services?" I'm, er, um, just making sure all options are listed....

Maggs has a little more power, for sure, but here's how they stack up from 1998-2003: Abreu OPS -- .927 Mags OPS -- .892 Abreu OBP -- .410 Mags OBP -- .365 Abreu Avg Hr's -- 22 Mags Avg Hr's -- 29 Abreu Avg RBI's -- 90 Mags Avg RBI's -- 109 Abreu Avg SB's -- 27 Mags Avg SB's -- 13(and hasn't hit double digits since 2001) Can't take the homers away from Maggs, but as far as RBI's go, I think Maggs has played on a much higher-scoring team since 1998 than has Abreu. If you assume that, then Abreu beats Maggs in every other category but Hr's. Abreu is also better defensively, I think by a long-shot.

The only reason I might disagree with that is because for the last 2-3 years he's always appeared on every baseball wonk's "Most Underrated" list. So does Garret, and Mags for that matter. I don't think, IMO, that's there's any doubt he's better than Maggs. Not yet. He's making $10.6 million this season, but I don't know how many years his current contact has left on it.

http://www.ninjaburger.com/

They jumped ship Joe Crede = Kevin Orie

The penalty for a Terry Jacks reference is death by wedgie. In any country, under any circumstances.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What I think he needs is to take some time and develop an offspeed pitch that he can control consistently. A 94 mph fastball is still perfectly fine, but only if hitters think they actually might need to worry about a different pitch coming. The main problem with Koch is that hitters can sit on his straight fastball, because they know he can't throw 3 breaking balls over for strikes. Can he be sent to AAA to work on this? Bring Wunsch back up, make Takatsu your closer, and let Wunsch/Jackson and Marte work the 7th and 8th, when necessary.

See, here is where I'd bring up the fact again that we're talking about two males. In the straight world, if the females didn't require it, there wouldn't be any long-term relationships(yes, with exceptions, and I have a hunch you'll claim you are one of them). When you're talking about two guys in a sexual/romantic situation, neither may have any interest in being in a committed relationship. Yep, we have no qualms about stuff like that. When a friend did catch a little case of chlamydia, we chided the guy for being stupid, laughed about it once he was OK, then moved on and hoped he learned his lesson. Really? With exception to the rare cases when the condom is defective, how does this happen? OK, I see I worded that poorly. First off, I am not claiming that every sexual encounter comes from a one-night stand. In fact, if I were to attempt to acquire 75 notches on my bedpost, I'd prefer as few of those as possible. What I mean by discretion is, you can take some time to find out a little bit about a person, before you take their clothes off. It's certainly not an exact science, but more often than not if you use your head you'll be OK. I wasn't necessarily referring to just looks. Why is it a question of credit? Why can't it simply be the way it is, without any negative(or positive) connotations? No, they wouldn't, but that's not reality. Reality says the 45 year old guy who has never been married(or married and divorced), who trolls around nightclubs trying to pick up every girl within shouting distance is considered much less desirable than the guy who is married with a couple kids who spends his nights at home watching Law and Order. We can, but we don't. Well, again, we'll definitely have to agree to disagree here. There you go not being influenced by society again I would argue that the feeling you're referring to is more infatuation than love. Not saying love doesn't exist, but that "uncontrollable" "embodying" emotion is not the same feeling after you've been with someone 10 years. All those jokes about married people not having sex? If they weren't rooted in truth, noone would laugh at them. Noone is saying you have to not care about the person. Hell, I once had a friend who I'd fool around with from time to time over a few years, when the timing was right, etc. I care about her, but we weren't a good match for the long haul. We're still friends. When one type of anything is all you're getting, of course it gets old after awhile. If you had only been in one 5-year relationship after another for the last 15 years, that would get old too, and you'd be begging for a one-nighter with Desiree over at Hooters.

Oh yah, you're right, good catch!

OK, playa hatin, cheat, somebody has to make a new sig for Steff using this information!!!!

You know he started his career as a third baseman, didn't you? I think he would be fine on most balls, but I'd have to shield my eyes if someone threw a bunt at him.

I know you just messin with me Steffikins. But that sentiment isn't all that far from the truth though, is it? And that's what I'm talking about when I say society and the "better half" is what keeps the dick in check.

I am not saying that at all. Where did you get that? No, I don't think so. But I don't believe, like Chaos does, that the fact that gay men have 12,000 sex mates means that they are all cheating on partners in a relationship. I think there are far fewer gay men even attempting to enter into monogamous long-term relationships in the first place.

Maybe cuz I'm not a guy, my answer doesn't 'qualify' in this conversation, but what the hell, I'll put in an answer anyway. I'm 27 and have to agree with Chaos. I've been with Brian (32) for about 4 years now (I know, still relatively short period of time) and both of us are in love with each other and don't want to sleep with anyone else, hence one of the reasons we have for getting married. For reasons I refuse to get into, I do know that this is a fact about the way he feels; it's not lip service on his part, so to speak. It is certainly not a matter of your answer "qualifying", everyone undoubtably has an opinion on topics like this, and yours is as valid as anyone elses. But I think what you meant was that you were coming from the female side of the equation, and thus have a different perspective oin the sex thing in general. And that is very true, men and women have very different perspectives on sex, for a variety of reasons. As for knowing that he has zero interest in sleeping with another woman, I'd say it depends on where he's coming from. What I mean is, does he not want to sleep around because he has no attraction to the nubile hottie walking down the street in a thong? Or does he not want to sleep around because he values your relationship and you in general, and so he wouldn't want to lose that via infidelity? I am basically married(no ceremony or paperwork, but we live together and hopefully always will) and if I see Salma Hayek on the beach towel next to mine, does the thought cross my mind that I might want to exchange my left arm for 15 minutes alone with her and a tub of Cool Whip? Yes, every time. But, do I REALLY want to sleep with her and thus give up my girlfriend and all we have together? No, of course not. But, the temptation is always there, and always will be(for guys at least). I would say(no offense) that if Brian says he doesn't have those same thoughts, I'd bet he's fibbin'.

Would you say it is too much Wong for you to handle? Why would you assume that? That statement sounds pretty homophobic, no? It doesn't have to be. I know a couple straight guys that can count 40-50 gals as sex partners, but they don't have any std's. You know why? Because they use condoms, and a little common sense. If you are desirable enough to others that you can rattle off 50 different horizontal bop partners, then you can certainly afford a little discretion and take a pass on the Homer-Simpson's-Las Vegas-Wife-types. No, that's not correct. The main factors in why straight men don't hump anything on two legs is because 1)society deems it unpleasant, and 2)women generally demand exclusivity in "exchange" for sex. Yes, there are of course exceptions to this theory. The disease and pregnancy factors are secondary, but part of it as well. OK, first question--How old are you?, and second question--How long have you been seeing your significant other? The answers to both are going to weigh heavily in how I respond to this. I think you might be having trouble separating the emotion from the act itself. Good sex is good sex, and if you love the person you're doing it with, then of course it's all that much better. However, I would bet at least half of the guys on this board who are currently in a marriage or similar relationship would say that they have had better sex with someone else rather than their current partner.(Prior to their current relationship, not referring to cheating here) Yah, likewise

Happy Berfday!

Actually, Cheat, there are numerous studies that show that homosexual MEN have wayyy more sex partners and std's as your average straight guy, but they also show that lesbians have much LOWER rates than your average straight folk.

No, it's because you're dealing with two(or more) male sex drives in an environment where there's not as much to gain by committing to a monogamous relationship(i.e. no procreation), nor is there any societal influence pushing them in that direction. As I said before, if straight men weren't nudged by society into marriages, and if women didn't require monogamy as a trade-off for the benefits of being in a long-term dealie, then straight guys would be in the same boat as gay guys when it comes to promiscuity. The STD thing is something I cant figure out. Demographically, gays are usually smarter in general than straight people, so why are so many acting moronically when it comes to sexual health? (I hope I did this Multi-Quote thing right finally) Sure you don't, but you're a guy--have you been in love with every girl you slept with? If you were being honest, wouldn't you say you wish you slept with MORE girls that you weren't necessarily in love with? Me neither, tell that to the idiot in the White House. Who says anyone is cheating on anybody? What if it's simply casual sex between consenting adults? Albeit an IMMENSE amount of casual sex. Again, straight guys would be doing it too, if they could get away with it. Taking the STD's out of the equation, why is it inherently wrong to have copious amounts of boot-knockin'? Yes, that's exactly what they want you to think. I would disagree. I would say it's because 1)women won't allow it, and 2)society(generally speaking) frowns on it. No, I meant it's socially/politically incorrect for a person to be promiscuous. You really think Wilt Chamberlain's claims were "glorified?" I think most people just thought it was skanky.

What are you talking about? Gays didn't choose to have their ability to form lifetime bonds deemed illegal, or a sin. If it's not a realistic option, then why offer it? And who exactly would have taught 30-40 year old gay men that it's OK to have a long-term same sex relationship back when they were 10-11 years old? If straight men werent conditioned from birth to "fit in" by getting married, having kids, et al, I guarantee you those same rates of promiscuity and std's would be found in striaght men as well. I'm not apologizing for anyone, straight or gay, who cant use common sense and protect themselves from std's. As for promiscuity, that doesn't concern me at all. There's no chance of making an unwanted child(if you're in a gay relationship that is), so if you're practicing safe sex, why not f*** anything you could? And again, this goes back to the male sex drive. If it wasn't deemed "incorrect" behavior, and if there were no potential baby ramifications, straight guys would screw everything with a pulse also.

That's some interesting stuff there, CC, but I'd still say that those results are directly linked to the fact the gays haven't had long term relationships as part of their culture. Add to that the male sex drive being found in 2 parties as opposed to one(while plenty of studies show the high promiscuity and std rates of gay men vs straight men, same studies show rates among lesbians to be BELOW that of your average hetero), and you've got yourself an ongoing CaligulaFest.

It might be more interesting, but it's still not close to comparing apples to apples. Heteros(at least the majority) are brought up with marriage positioned as an expectation, the norm, etc. Gay people are brought up where the same "setup" is illegal, and therefore wouldn't be taught to expect the same. My point is, if gays were brought up in a society where it was expected and taught(by lecture and example) that you are supposed to choose one person to form a permanent relationship with, then you can start comparing the "divorce" rates.