Wong & Owens

In yesterday's Tribune, it said that KW and Sullivan's agent were close to working out a deal. If memory, serves, they made it sound like it was virtually a done deal.

That's 120-130 miles straight down I-57. About 3 hours, depending on how fast you drive, and assuming you're leaving during rush-hour.

Do you have any reason to think otherwise? Please share. **IF YOU'VE ONLY BEEN HERE 5 YEARS, THEN I'M IMPRESSED BY YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF AMERICAN CULTURE, SPORTS AND VERNACULAR. Either you're trying to make me feel better about my linguistic handicap (aw, shucks), or you've been hanging out with some retarted-ass foreigners. **NOT AT ALL, I JUST THOUGHT YOU WAS YANKIN' OUR COLLECTIVE CHAIN.

I love the idea. However, I would be obviously concerned that JR would not spend the savings on other players to upgrade the team as a whole. I'm a little concerned in regards to how much he strikes out. The Sox don't need another candidate for--man on third, one out, sox player x up, promptly strikes out looking.

Are you being truthful, Brando? If so, you might have the best command of the English language for a foreigner that I have ever seen. The immigrated/emigrated thing notwithstanding.

What a fibber. And it's "emigrated," comrade.

Come see the violence inherent in the system, Help! Help!, I'm being repressed!

I'll rehash my summer argument with Ncorgbl here: Bartolo is EXACTLY the same pitcher he has been throughout his career. He is NOT, nor has he ever been, a front-of-the-rotation stud like Schilling, Pedro, Clemens, etc. He won 20 games 2 years ago with almost the same numbers(ERA, K's, WHIP) that he did last season. So much else goes into a pitcher getting a 'W' that you can't predict it year-to-year, nor can you really judge how well a pitcher performs based on that stat. Javier Vazquez was something like 13-12 last year, danny Wright had 14-15 wins in 2002. Who would you rather have in your rotation? Bartolo is worth what the Sox are offering. That is his fair market value, IMO. He's always healthy, gives you many quality starts, and eats a ton of innings. The fact that he would be 20% of the Sox's payroll is JR's problem, not Bart's. I highly doubt you'll find many pitchers out there who would perform better and make less.

Well, if Colon comes back, and Konerko does in fact go to L.A. in exchange for Perez, I think it's obvious that KW's master plan is to construct a team made up entirely of Latin Players. Obviously, this was the impetus behind the Miles/Uribe deal. That deal allowed us to send Valentin along with Konerko, while keeping our Latin prescence at SS. If the Sox don't sign Robbie, then it's guaranteed that Fernando Vina will be wearing the black and white next season. Third Base, First Base, and Center Field remain open, look for KW to make a big push to acquire Juan Encarnacion, Vinny Castilla, and Rafael Palmeiro. Also, as it has been noted already, Rowand has been tearing up the Puerto Rico league, and his presence there has little to do with baseball, and everything to do with assimilating the culture, language, and lifestyle of Puerto Ricans. After then changing his name then to Rowandez, he would serve as the backup, should obtaining Encarnacion become impossible, As for the pitching staff, the rotation would be almost set with Colon, Loaiza, and Perez. javier Vazquez was an option, but the Expos wanted Ordonez. Re-signing Jaime Navarro remains a possibility, and there is talk of sending Jon Garland back to the Cubs for Juan Cruz. In the bullpen, Damaso Marte remains, Edwin Almonte is a lock for a slot, and it has been reported that KW is looking at signing Jesse Orosco, Jose Lima and Eddie Guardado.

That's completely different. You're really not going to the doctor for his "opinion" at all. You're going to essentially get tested for a condition that can be proven to exist, that which is not subject to any opinion at all. You get a biopsy on a tumor, and it turns up malignant, no opinion from anyone that says it's non-cancerous should be given any merit.

18 points down and dropping 18 points down you knowwwww you're going broke, Brando 18 seconds left to go.

"Say, you were to run into JP's secret diary, where he expains with detail and verve what exactly inspired and motivated him and what exactly was encrypted in his "paint spills"........Would that make a slightest difference to you? Cuz I tell you, I smell a wise-ass phillistine. " No, and that's my point. Some people can view it as talented, or deep, or pretty, important, etc., and nothing I can say to them would change their opinion, nor is there anything I could do to prove them wrong. Were I the curator of the Art Institute of Chicago(do Institutes have curators? Or is that only museums?), and thought JP's work was crap, but a 10-yr old kid told me it was beautifully thought out, and striking, nothing in my supposed background would give me the sufficient proof to tell him he was wrong.

Show me someone in the music "biz" that isn't pompous, and I'll show you a figment of your imagination. I understand where PA is coming from, assuming his background is legit, but he's not arguing based on musical structure, and that is the only basis in which an "informed" person is more qualified to speak than a non-informed person(i.e, an informed person can look at a piece of sheet music, and know whether it requires much skill or not to play, a non-iformed person could not). The argument, in short, seems to be whether or not Korn is good or not, am I right? If so, then "good" is such a vague and subjective term, that no person is more "qualified" than another to determine a band's value measured in such terms. I don't think working as A) a musician, B) someone involved in other ways of getting music made, or C) a critic qualifies anyone moreso than a garbageman, astronaut or vet to determine whether any piece of art is good or not. For example, Jackson Pollock. Revered in some circles, very popular in others, certainly generally accepted as a "good" artist by those that deem themselves "qualified" to make such assessments, but in my opinion, he's a joke. Stood over a canvas with a brush and essentially spilled paint. What talent was on display? What profound statement was being made? In my opinion, it's s***, and no art teacher, historian, collector, et al is going to tell me otherwise because they have more art knowledge/experience/whatever. And they have no way to prove my "uninformed" opinion is wrong.

What the hell would Roberto Hernandez be good for? God I hope this is strictly a rumor. As for the Cubs signing Hawkins, who cares? And wait till they try to make him a closer. How quickly it has been forgotten that the Twins tried Hawkins as a starter, AND a closer, and he failed miserably at both. He doesn't have the makeup to be a closer, he's strictly a set-up guy.

Super. Please do not post the lyrics to "I Want Some Milk," it's just such a stupid song.

I enjoy the Phil Spector. ....... except when he is murdering people. Or Ramones records....

Did it have the button on the side that activated the light? Then yes, at least $1000.

Now listen hear, Mr. Music Man, I'll have you know that the Anthrax cover of "Bring the Noise" is a fine example of what rap/rock can be when done correctly. The Zach de la Rocha Mocha Grande Latte's mix of Outkast's "Bombs Over Baghdad" is also mighty rocking, yo. And yes, I hear you, Kid Rock sucks Michael Jackson's prosthetic nose tip

Baseball is now much like a political race. Yankees are the Democrats, Red Sox are the Republicans, and all the other AL teams are Ross Perot. One of them almost always wins elections, and defintely outspend everyone else, but sometimes a Jesse ventura comes along(Marlins) and sneaks away with a win. With no salary cap, baseball will be a joke within 20 years--I guarantee it.

I too, have taken the radio-less route, listening only to R&B stations, because that music I like some of, but not enough to buy usually. Are you saying you only heard of Led Zeppelin 5 years ago? How old are you? Are you from this country originally?

Wouldn't that argument just go around and around in a circle? Wouldn't any mention of a great hard rock band from the 80's and 90's be met with, "but Zeppelin did it first, so-and-so wouldn't even be here if it weren't for LZ." I agree with him though. I'd take Master of Puppets, 1984, Gish, Ten, and many others over most anything LZ did. Maybe that's solely a product of having LZ bashed into my head since birth on any rock/classic rock radio station, or maybe it's that their whole mystic shtick gets old for me. I think LZ was great, and they unarguably led the way for thousands of bands since, but their are plenty of bands from the 80's and 90's that I would much rather listen to--and that's regardless of the inevitable truth that most of them were influenced by LZ.

Hasn't Led Zeppelin been nailed numerous times for stealing old Blues songs, and not crediting the proper writers? I thought I heard somewhere that they have paid millions over the years to blues artists for vanilla ice-ing their s***, and not paying them any royalties. If this is true, then they suck, but if it's wild speculation, then they're one of the greatest bands ever.

The more I think about it, the less I like baseball anymore. What you get all off-season long is the same 4-6 teams driving up prices and snatching all the best players, leaving the other teams hoping to catch lightning in a bottle like Anaheim did in 2002. Why does the attendance suck at US Cellular in the early months every year? Because how can you get too excited over the team, when you see NY signing Gordon, Sheffield, Giambi, Matsui, et al, Boston gets Schilling, Manny, Pedro, Damon, etc. For sure, these plans don't work out necessarily, but it's certainly a lot easier to get pumped up right now for April if you're a Red Sox or Yankee fan, than if you are a White Sox or Toronto or Minnesota fan. We, along with the fans of 28 or so other teams, have to hope that retread free agent signings mesh with no-name rookies and "career years" to get your team its one shot, before the odds catch up with you, and you fall back to earth. Your only hope is that the team plays well enough in the first half that the GM can swing some temporary deals to rent better players from under-performing teams looking to dump salary in order to reload. and then your team gets torn apart after one season because the owner won't outbid the 4-6 big money teams to keep your players, and you're right back where you started. Don't be fooled by the Marlins or Angels of the last 2 seasons, they are anomalies. The Yankees, 97 Marlins, and DBacks are more indicative of how things work anymore. The brewers trade Sexson to shave payroll down from $30 million? Give me a f***ing break, and give me a salary cap. I'm about 2 seasons away from not watching another pro baseball game again.

Heading out to NE Indiana. Cue "Dueling Banjos."

This may be the only thing sox4life and I agree on! Hooray! I agree that the Beatles, while certainly one of the great bands of all time, are overrated. While arguing the merits of a band is always subjective, here are some of my reasons: 1) A lot of their stuff doesn't hold up well. for me, listening to most any Beatles tune pre-1965?(or whatever the year was, I'm talking the stuff found on the "Red" greatest hits album) really comes across as bland and bubble gum-y, especially in lyrical terms. 2) Their influence was a product of luck more than anything. Especially, again, in their early days, there were plenty of bands that were playing the same type stuff that they were, but the Beatles were the ones who got popular doing it. The fact that teenage girls would show up in the thousands crying at every airport really shouldn't affect their status as artists. 3) What is most popular doesn't necessarily make it the best. McDonald's is probably the highest-grossing, most popular restaurant ever, anyone think it's the best? Just my opinion, and I also think that, as a musician, Bob Dylan sucked Donkey Balls and would have been better off writing songs, and letting others sing them, a la All Along the Watchtower.