BrandoFan

The thing is, all of the above were made in the early 60s early-mid 70 early-mid 90s That leaves almost 100 years of cinema unaccounted for. Hmm.

I need you toniiight.....

Tex, that is SUCH an oxymoron. Cherry, cherry lady....

Oh no, what have I done! I've spawned a monsta that may never be stopped! It was pudding....gay Houston cowboys eating puddding! Pudding! (btw.... therealpizzacanbefoundinITALYnotinaChicagosuburb)

The movie itself was good enough, but Clarice Starling-Canibal Lector scenes are some of the greatest ever commited to film, any country, any era.

Now we're comparing Wright to Hawkins and Gagne.... And you accuse ME of stretching it? Geebus.... For every Gagne, there are 50 failed starters-relegated-to-BP-duties-because-their-elbow-is-kinda-f***ed-up that are out of baseball in 3 years. Odds are very much AGAINST Danny. Once you accept that Konerko is a big burden and is highly overrated while Odalis Perez is worth taking a gamble on....letting go of Danny would be the easiest thing in the world. Alas, we don't agree on those two counts, so it's all moot.

Again: 1. 810 OPS is an EVERY-DAY MLB average according to ESPN.....and, needless to say, that number is diluted by such "light-hitting" positions such as C, SS, 2B and CF. 2. Paulie's 5 year OPS is 815. Where's the excellence? 3. People were saying he will rebound after the terrible second half of 2002. Well...compared to his futility in 2003, he was an all-star in that stretch. So when you say he will rebound in 2004, I think you should be worried more about him reaching the 800 plateu than the 850 one. 4. His speed. Even for a 1B, he is slow. So begin to lower his value right there because he "costs" you more runs over a full season than even an average 1B. Not by a lot, but still. 5. GIDP's. I am sorry, but ignoring the inning-killers is criminal. His already overrated intristic offensive value takes another, much bigger hit because of them. 6. Defense. Below average-- absolutely putrid range in the last 2 seasons. For every extra out he makes because of his good arm, he gives back 3 because of his tiny range, lack of quickness and inability to bend. Any semi-hard chopper in the hole or a liner down the line and Konerko will not make the play more often than not. So what if he doesn't get an error? It hurts the team and the pitcher. It further lowers his VALUE as a player. 7. 17 Mllion over over 2 years on a team that can barely muster 60 Mill budget. Surely, you must see WHERE exactly this hurts the ball-club........I mean, his 1999-2001 production, while overrated, still made him a bargain because he was better in every facet of the game while making PEANUTS......Sadly, neither is a case any longer. 8. Hip. Too much of a persistent rumor to be ignored. Scary if true. Has to further lower Konerko's value at some point. Let's see: --Depending on how smart they are with their existing contracts, Dodgers will have anywhere from 25 to 40+ Mill of SPENDABLE cash in 2004. Sox are arguably OVER budget. --Dodgers won numerous WS titles. Sox have failed for 86 years. --Dodgers will draw 3 Mill fans (none of that half-price/freebie BS Sox are notorious for pulling) in 2005 even if they are a .500 team in 2004, wchih means whoever will be their new GM, he will have 100+ Mill to spend in 2005 REGARDLESS. Meanwhile the Sox are in deep f***ing trouble because whatever fanbase we have left, it's getting more and more disillusioned and pissed off. Another 2002-2003-esque failure early this season and you might see something like 1.4 Mill (including freebies/half priced!) attendance and a TINY payroll in 2005. Now YOU tell me who is MORE DESPERATE.......And please don't tell me it has nothing to do with Perez/Konerko because it has EVERYTHING to do with them. The only reason why 64 Mill is 64 Mill is because Sox are STUCK with Konerko and Koch and nobody WANTS them, not even the "desperate" Dodgers, lol. Sox are a stupidly-run team, with terrible PR and player reputation. Bottomline is everything, a brighter future routinely gets sacrifized at the feet of small short-term gain...........Last year, an ASG year, a historic year with 1983-1993 connection, Sox were content with a laughable 51 Mill payroll coming into the season and flatout REFUSED to spend a penny more on Everett-Alomar, preferring to mortage the future with youngsters as currency-- even when it was apparent that Sox fans were beginning to come out as the team started to win in June, additional funds were NOT made available. If decades of cheapness and lack of vision didn't convince you of Sox small-mindedness and bottomline-obcessiveness, THAT right there should have. Based on every estimate and Sox management own admission, 58-60 Mill figure represented a DESIRED CEILING this off-season. That is, until the Sox found themselves in a predicament: Maggs for Nomar fell through and Konerko, Valentin, Koch found NO takers. Oops. So they got stuck with a 64 Mill payroll. This is not generosity on owner's part. With SoxFest pending, KW iwas NOT gonna come out and say "we done f***ed up overestimating the market for our overpaid bums and are currently looking for any and every option to dump salary". Imagine how many fans it will piss off. Imagine how it would severely damage any future negotionation leverage. Of course it's easy to play dumb and secretly hope 64 Mill IS the intended figure. I do it myself. It makes it so much easier to make imaginary 2004 line-ups, doesn't it? But even if that's the case (and I assure you it's not), how does that change the fact that Konerko is grossely overpaid and Sox have so many other needs the 12 Mill saved on PK-OD swap could go a long way toward taking care of? Dodgers do NOT care about PK and they have resources and prospects to get almost ANY player they choose. I do not know what's holding them up (maybe they're waiting for the White Sox and a few other low-budget losers to get even more desperate, who knows), but how you fail to recognize this is astonishing. Baltimore blinked and got themsleves 3 sluggers for under 25 Mill. They didn't give up Greg Millers or Ed Jacksons, either. The Dodgers don't have as big a FA pool to work with, but so what? If you have the money and prospects to offer other teams.....why would you take on crazy Konerko's 17 Mill and give up your second most talented pitcher one year removed from a break-through campaign? Doesn't make sense. San Diego actually got better and healthier this offseason and will trot out there Klesko, Nevin, Giles, Nady, Borroughs, Vazquez, etc.... while the Tribe lost half their offense in Burks and Vizquel. Outside of Gerut their youngsters are unimpressive. They were second to last in offense in AL WITH Burks last year. Like Tigers, they BLOW. Odds are Mauer won't touch Pirzinski in his first year. Anaheim and Baltimore will be much better than in 2003. As should the Sox. That may push the Twins down to as low as 8-10th spots. Out of 14 teams. Below average. Again, Royals will definately be above average, but unless both Sweeney and his neck and Gonzo stay healthy for the entire year, KC might not crack the top 5, what with Boston, NY, Toronto, Texas and possibly Anaheim, Sox and Baltimore challenging them. Without that .305 team BA with RISP, they are not as scary-- and they are by far the best hitting team Perez will face in ALC! That's nonsense: --Pacheco is simply not as talented as Kip, nor is he ML-ready. Fairly expendable. --Ritchie could only dream of Perez's upside. And his downside turned out to be much worse than Perez's could ever be. --Finally, we NEED to dump Konerko and free up money in order to BREATHE...whereas Kip was making nothing and we were actually taking ON salary in Ritchie. Anyway...did I hear you say you'd "do Konerko for Perez in a second"? If that's the case, then WTF? How high can you be on Pacheco that it changes the whole situation? You mentioned something about a marginal prospect.....Well, as far as Dodgers are concerned, for most of his career, 25yo Pacheco has been just that. Marginal. They are certainly unwilling to do the deal straight up.

Yep....best of all time....that. :puke

quick question: is there a market out there for a pair of urine-filled khakis?

Rex, I heard you got into a brawl with Randar about Rauch. Hehe. The dude thinks Aaron Rowand is a bad defensive CF and has no hitting talent. But Rauch definately reached 94-95 (92-93 was his average) on a few of his heater back in 2000. Even when he was in Chicago in 2002, he often topped out at 93-94 on a TV gun-- and it was clear he wasn't 100% by then. But you're also right about his attitude AND the fact that he may never be what he once was.

n**** hoald up, who said anything about not being a Sox fan anymore?! I said I won't spend a PENNY at USCF and will instead use the extra time/money for other things....but I will still be rooting for the Sox. I simply refuse to reward management's gross INCOMPETENCE and PETTINESS. Foulke trade singlehandedly destroyed 2003 season and continues to haunt us to this day (what could we spend Koch's 6.30 Mill on? Maddux?). Enough is enough. Of course I will admit I was wrong (wait, did you confuse me with someone who has trouble admitting his wrong-ness? Please.) if the above happens......just as I would were a Jeremy Reed-for-Roger Cedeno trade unexpectedly work out in Sox favor. I suppose. Also....it DOES matter what Frank does in LA. Even if Perez has a 3.75 ERA with us but Frank puts up 1000 OPS/130 RBI at CR, we STILL lose the trade.

Soxy....that flick snuck up-- I had no expectation going in and it was, to quote James Lipton, scrumtrulescent. People who b**** about having no money to make a good movie should watch Memento, which could have been shot in one week.

Watch it Zero....lest you get some in the yarbles, you bloody jelly eunuch, you.

Without question. But then again, seeing Pacino chewing some major f***in' scenery is one of life's better pleasures.

Believe it or not, I have NEVER seen those Boris Karloff flix in their entirety. I know it's canon....but still. I think hippie child Rose McGowan looks uncannily like Whale's favorite actress Elza something-semething, tho. When you say "James Whale" you know what comes to mind? That unforgettable portrayal by one of my faves Sir Ian Mckellan in Gods and Monster.

No, but his 2002 was. That makes him different from Konerko who was NEVER worth 17 over 2 he'll be getting in 2004-2005. 840 OPS is around AVERAGE for a 1B, but his defensive range has REALLY taken a hit in the last 2 seasons (dead last in adjusted ZR, quite a few plays scored as doubles down the line were simply the case of Konerko being unable to bend), he is a HORRIBLE baserunner (takes 3 singles to get him home from 1st), leads the world in GIDPs. Then factor in his questionable hip/back AND even more questionable mental make-up (ask Rick Ankiel how things are going-- once you lose it, it's not easy to get it back).....and PK's intristic value gets reduced even further. Another crucial distinction is this: 115 Mil dollared Dodgers can "swallow" underperforming Perez. 60 Mill dollared Sox CANNOT afford another Konerko Meltdown. In 2002 and 2003 ENTIRE SEASONS were derailed because a few Mill were mispent or mis-distributed. Unlike the Dodgers situation, Sox have remarkably little room for error, and I simply do NOT like the odds of Konerko. Point to all the career consistency you want, I have weighted his history and I still do NOT like the odds of Koney having a 900 OPS-type career year in '04. ? Do YOU? OF COURSE KW is gonna say he is not desperate to dump payroll. Duh. Can you imagine the kind of negotiation HOLE it would put him in if he implied otherwise? Dodgers have a lousy GM, true, but the fact remains: he has SO many more options than the Sox it's not even funny. Billy Beane would KILL to have upward of 30 Mill of spendable cash. Kill. And given some ingenuity, they may free up more than that. Meanwhile the Sox are OVER every budget estimate, by a healthy margin (by Sox standards anyway; remember this was the team that refused to spend a single extra penny for Robbie Alomar while embroiled in a pennant race in an All-Star Game year, a historical year ending with a '3'). We have criminal amount of question marks STILL and are basically banking on Koch and Burhle to rebound....or we're dead. Don't ever compare the two teams in terms of financial flexibility and options. You're much, MUCH smarter than that, WS. It's TWO months away from Opening Day. Are you kidding me? Who the hell knows what kind of a 10-way blockbuster they are cooking up. Orioles had NO offense 1 day and then.... POOF they got Tejada, Palmeiro AND Lopez for under 25 Mill total, WITHOUT giving up any prospects. Again, there will be (losing) teams who will seriously think about giving the Dodgers their under-paid stars for almost nothing provided they get Miller-Gutierez-type hook-up. Dodgers won't deal their best prospects for overpaid Ordonez, but they might for, say, a fairly underpaid Huff or Giles or Edmonds or....literally a few DOZEN similar options. That makes you the world's smallest minority. As previously discussed, even if Konerko rebounds to 800 OPS level, he can't begin to justify his 8.5 Mill a year contract because of reasons I mentioned above. And given how BAD his meltdown was in 2003, I am NOT even sure he will do that. Remember, he finished the season on something like a 3-for-45 slump just when we needed him the most. Perez is in a somewhat different situation. His struggles happened when he was 23-24yo. Learning curve. He was much more of a Garland (but with better stuff and polish) than he was a Konerko. Anyway, that's my personal opinion, going not only on stats but on a pure hunch. What are you talking about? They lost Brown. Counting on Wilson Alvarez coming anywhere close to 2.45 ERA is setting yourself up for a huge dissapointment. Edwin Jackson is a f***ing rookie. They may actually end up in a worse situation pitching wise than the Sox if they don't get the breaks. No need to make them out to be the Oakland A's of NLW this season. Home-away splits always baffled me. There is no objective justification for them. Dodgers Stadium does NOT have 415-foot gaps nor is it 485 to CF or 375 down the lines. It's foul territory is not what it is in Oakland and wind patterns not as bad as in old Candlestick. Ditto the mound height. Perhaps mentally, the reputation alone makes a difference like a self-fullfilling prophesy, but otherwise? I think splits are somewhat flukey-- kinda like Todd Helton doing poorly away from Coors one year and then proving everyone wrong the next. What changed? ALC offenses? Tigers are absolutely dreadful. Indians are worse than last year and they were really bad. Twins are also worse-- and they were below-average in 2003. Royals were a hair above average in 2003, but remember how much of that had to do with their .305 team BA with RISP which they won't duplicate. I also think either Sweeney or Gonzo will struggle with nagging injuries, so expect the Royals to be above average offensively but nowhere near the powerhouse to be feared.......And when you switch leagues, advantage almost invariably goes to the pitcher, so not only will Perez be pitching in a nototriously bad-hitting division, but also against hitters who've never seen him.......Once you adjust for the minimal park effect (actual stat) difference beween CR and USCF, Perez still should improve on his 2003 stats. Maybe not a 3.00 ERA, but I wouldn't be suprised if he put up something along the lines what Bartolo did in 2003-- only in less innings. Common, pitcher-less Rockies gave up on the kid! I mean....once you accept the premise that Konerko's contract SUCKS ASS, that Sox are more or less desperate and that Perez has a big upside......dealing Pacheco (as opposed to Reed, Cotts, Honel, Sweeney, Rauch, Munoz, Borchard, Wing and Anderson) is NOT that outlandish a proposition. Sox NEED to win the division in 2004 SO BAD, it's not even funny. . I think he will be what Gary Glover was for us in BP in 2002. BUT....given how average he's been in 2001-2002 and how bloody AWFUL he was in 2003.....you of all people should realize that, objectively speaking, as far as the REST of MLB are concerned, he is just a SCRUB-- another Sox bust. Sorry, but if you were to mention Pacheco and Wright on non-Sox message boards as serious trade bait, you'd get LAUGHED at. Potential-shmotential, both 25yo Pacheco and 26yo Wright are busts until proven OTHERWISE. What good are strong AAA teams if your ML squad keeps on losing and losing and losing....fan base continues to deteriorate, detriorate, deteriorate.......I am sorry, but at this point, unless it's Jeremy Reed we're talking about, NOBODY is untouchable......Most of these prospects will be busts anyway. If LA does Konerko-for-Perez straight up, I'll be happy. But I think it will take a prospect or two for us to make the deal. And at this point, knowing how much we need STARTING pitching, I am willing to sacrifize an A-minus prospect who won't even crack 2004 roster. It's a gamble, one contingent on Perez being good.....but it needs to be done IMHO. Sox must win in 2004....or the 2005 roster might consist of Pacheco types EXCLUSIVELY. Don't ever apologize for your posts. I may vehemently disagree with you (often), but your thoughts and ideas automatically add credibility and depth to this site, whitesox61382.

Did I say pizza? I meant pudding.

Riveting Ellen Burtyn (later robbed by Horsey McMarriagebreaker)? Check Jen Connely's ever excellent bush? Check Unwatchable last 20 minutes? Check One of the greatest trailers I ever seen was for LOTR: Two Towers set to Clint Mansell's score. Just wow.

So did Melvin Douglas. I saw Ninotchka and Being There back to back. In reverse order. BTW....seeing the Spinal Tap....where's the Producers and Young Frankie?

Hey....if his newly-acquired cutter is any good, he might just beat out Rauch for the 5th spot and post a 4.50 ERA. I'll take it.

Peter Sellers =

PS I still love Chicago. Frank was wrong-- it's MY kind of town.

First of all, they were gay urban cowboys. And secondly, there was pizza.

Paul Hogan is the Patron Saint of Aussie Commonwealth.