BrandoFan

upon seeing the second towering drive of Shammy's fall harmlessly into the the outfilder's glove at the wall... Or was it "The wind is not blowing as much as it used to"? 2 premature hops to the sound of Chip's orgasmic screams in 2 days...LMAO!

Not every "overreation" is created equal, V. Brian is a public figure who needs nerves of steel to deal with criticism (whether warranted or not) from scouts, coaches, management, media and the fans. Considering that I thought comments about him were very reasonable, his supposed reaction struck me as odd.

Preach it, Cerb. Like I mentioned before, it's one thing to have 60 Ks in 50 innings but also 45 BBs....and quite another to have 60 Ks in 50 inn and only 15 walks. In the former case, strikeouts are definately "overrated" since they probably had more to do with one's wildness and minor league hitters getting themselves out on pitches that Major leaguers would let go for ball.... while in the latter scenario K's are probably a reflection of one's dominance and potential. Then, combine it with ERA, avg-against and other vital statistics.....and lo and behold if you don't get the whole story, then certainly a big part of it. It's not by accident that as soon as Corwin Malone and Brian West went "bad" last season, their peripherals really reflected that versus their 2001 campaigns. Stats + scouting reports + seeing pitchers in person = knowing what the f*** we are talking about....Chisoxfn/Cerb never claimed to know the future, nor how piching priblems could be fixed. They just used common sense and argued their points fairly with those who disagreed. What more can you ask? As far as far as "soft" runs go, maybe Navarro and Todd Ritchie and Jim Parque who all pitched terribly and had BB/K ratios out of whack...could have used the "team defense" as an excuse as well. Would it have made any difference, tho? Westie doesn't like what was said? Oh, well, might I suggest getting a thicker skin? Or better yet utilizing that live 95-98mph fastball they were bragging about...and getting his breaking stuff over with consistency? How about changing speeds and not tipping his pitches off? Well you get the idea I am sure.

Não me faça o riso, nacionalista inclinado pequeno! Você tem desculpas mais silly para a falta de Romario da demanda em Italy? Você é tal gracejo! É este Portugese bastantes para você?

Fo shizzle. Billiard.

Thanks, I thought because of all the stupid typos noone would understand what I meant. I edited it just now.

I am sorry but I don't take "don't judge me, you don't know me" attacks lightly. Especially when they are not accompanied by ANY sort of proof, evidence or even simplest of constructive arguementation whatsoever. Of course, but the performance matters too. What kind of a message would you be sending to Cotts, Pacheco, Wing or Yofu if they weren't ranked highter than Ulacia and Malone and Kirkland? If success in the minors most of the time doesn't translate well into success in the Majors...why should LACK of success in the minors, lousy peripherals and mediocre stuff be something to be ecstatic about? Just because players are "learning" or "experimenting"? Mark Prior was doing all of that as well as getting hitters out, it's not too much to ask. Many Soxtalkers go to Birmingham/W-S/Charlotte/Spring Training games, read scouting reports and generally know a little thing or two about history and essence of the game. Do they also need to become coaches/instructors in order to have an informed opinion? I don't think so. Like I said, the analysis was very reasonable if a bit on the perfunctory side. It never claimed to have a full scoop and in-depth breakdown....I am sure mistakes were made and a lot fo people on the List will suprise (and more will isappoint) us in the future. I am happy Chisoxfn, Cerbano, Molto and the rest are not apologetic for their beliefs. When Brian and Jim blow away the AAA/AA competition, then, I am sure, they will be none too happy to put them in the top 5 or 10. Until then, tough luck.

I am only speaking for myself here and my views certainly do not represent Soxnet/Soxtalk.... Having said that, how fair and intellectually honest can you be when you say things like "there is more to game than stats" or "a pitcher A gave up so many soft runs that could have been unearned" or especially the usual "if you think you're so smart, why don't you come and tell us how to do it right, huh"? Sounds suspiciously like an actor who is not happy with a review. Uncalled for...afterall you didn't include any constructive revisions or evidence to the contrary. "Don't judge our performance" doesn't fly with scouts, coaching or management...why should fans be any different? Brian West is having difficulty getting AA hitters out and peripherals are bad relative to top notch prospects and standards acceptable through-out baseball, by most scouts. The burden of proof, so to speak, is on Brian West and anyone else who is not happy with his status- he is the one who should distinguish himself from the pack year in and year out in order to make "cream of the crop" list. Simple as that....Of course you guys are all works in progress, experimenting with mechanics, polishing your pitches and working on psychological aspect of the the game and temporarily the results may suffer, it goes without saying. It's certainly not a death sentence to say someone is not a top prospect just because the results have been mixed at best. History is replete with pitchers coming out of nowhere and having great success in the Majors.... Strikeouts are overrated? That may be true....except it's not really. If the walks total isn't too high, Ks show, if anything else, just how dominant one's stuff is and/or how effectively one is able to deceive the hitters. Most prospects are judged by their "stuff" and "ceiling" and K:BB ratio is great to gauge that if used in combination with other statistics....and you KNOW that. So why tripping? The list, as I understand it, was not designed to be scientific or definitive or even in-depth. Rather, it was a tentative , brief overview of minor league depth, complete with statistics. When the 1-20 List comes out it should be more clear if the author hit or missed with his subjective evaluation approcach. There is absolutely no need to overreact here, Mr. Bullard. He did nothing that was out of line in light of the fact that Top 50 Prospects lists are abound in both print and electronic media, and the fact that most of those are not based on anytihng more than occasional perfunctory scouting reports and--GRASP--minor league statistics. Besides, there QUITE A FEW Soxtalk posters actually research souting reports and WATCH minor league games in person and then pool that information together.

Oh no, not before I dedicate my second Oscar to you you won't.

You don't sound too excited

Ageist! That's ok- in 15 years me and Nat will probably be living in different continents...Let's make one of dem pacts, eh? I'll be ripe for picking...

Anything under 50 is a fair game. As long as you're younger than my mommy, play ball! (I wish...and willing to try, lol)

You miss my point. Women ONLY BECOME BATTERED women, when they allow it to happen more than once. Once is a mulligan. After that leave and leave fast. It wont ever get to the point you refer to. And your point, in turn, misses a little thing we like to call "complicated reality of life". Not every single case naturally (there are amazing women out there who bounce back quite nicely), but often enough for you assumption to be re-evaluated or at least to be tailed slightly closer to the "gray-shaded" specifications of...you guessed it.

All this rapid-fire back-n-forth overshadowed my point, so I'll repost it: Expecting a battered woman (esp with children) to "just get up and leave his sorry ass" comes from the same woefully simplistic (problems of others tend to seem so simple, so black&white, don't they?) rulebook as telling someone with severe clinical depression and other chemical imbalance-related, debilitating illnesses to just "get over it"....nice thought it theory and may indeed work for the strongest of people, but for the normal majority reality is quite different. Sad but very true.

Geezus f***ing Christ, can a single close call go in Sox favor? Just once maybe? Whatever happened to the whole "tie goes to the baserunner"? Jose's hand was on the bag no later than the glove was on his hand...damn.

Yeah, when? 1930s? LMAO. Modern soccer is modern soccer is modern soccer. Rinse and repeat. If you wanted to contest the parameters that I have set for this discussion (ie counting from 1974 on, instead of including ancient times 30's-60's when players ran in slow-mo compared to now) or don't understand English well enough to be able to compose a coherent defense,....fine, let me know....But all this delusional nonsense of your team being Gods of Soccerdom is getting stale by the minute. YOU ARE WRONG, you couldn't f***ing score ONCE in your two final apperances spanning 24 f***ing years (74-98), what a joke. Deal with it. Stop lying and twisting the facts around. Only very recently did Europe get more spots than 12. And yes Yugoslavia, East Germany, Blegium and Portugal could kick Bolivia's or Urugway's ass any day in the 70's and 80's and 90's. Brazil had an EASY road to World Cup, admit the truth for once in your lifetime. Biased little wiesel...Why don't you create your own World Cup of Heavenly Brazil or some such? Then you would be spared the sight of non-Brazilian stars, whom you obviously do not recognize, Platini, Baggio, Van Basten, Zidane, Batistuta and Kruiff are s***, right Oh, and so I don't forget: Juventus/Milan/Lazio/Roma didn't want Romario even after he scored so many goals in 94 Cup...You know why? Beause he was overapid, aging and overrated. He couldn't carry Ronaldo's jock. Without Ronaldo, your team doesn't even make it to semifinal in 98 or 2002.....he bailed your ass so many times it's not even funny.

I can smell all that frustration sweat all the way from the States...Quit hating on America, you racist coward. "Puta Americana"? Yawn.

I forgot another one: 7. Stop bragging that Brazil quilaified for every World Cup since 1974. You only competition for 3 magical berths in the the preliminary round is Argentina and maybe Columbia- even Mexico is another division.. What a joke! Momo. Meanwhile, Germany had to compete with East Germany, France, England, Italy, Holland, USSR, Romania, Beligium, Wales, Switzerland, Yugoslavia, Chezhoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Spain, Greece, Austria, Turkey and Portugal and only best 8 or 10 got to move on to the final stage. You can't compare the competition level...ah, but you wouldn't know anything about that, would you? You couldn't do s*** betwee 1971 and 2001, scoring no golas in the finals and yet have the gall to proclain yourself head and shoulder above the rest. What a joke!

Brazil went to all Cups, this is the only to in the world to do it. Brazil since 1974: 74: Semifinals, 78: semifinals, 82: quarterfinals, 86 : quarterfinals, 90: 1/8 , 94: campions, in the penalty kicks, but why Italy dont score a goal agst ours, and where was Argentina and Germany??? Eliminated!!!, 98: lost in the finals, because Romario dont went to the Cup and Ronaldo suffer some problems in the finals, if it was not fo this we were 6 times champions; and Germany was eliminted in 1/8 and Argentina it was quarteefinals, 2002 we won all the matches and finished that Germany team, English team...and Argentina was eliminated in his group!!! And Argentina was the champion in 78, because they played in home!!! And soccer is not 30 years, you are so stupid!!! Who dominate the world ??? It´s Argentina??? In 2006 will be the sixth!!! And if we have a World Cup here in Brazil, it would be no funny because we will be the champion with some players from the sub-21 team. Who you call a talent player??? Some guys that cant make a pass and what he just knows to do is make some fouls like we have a lot in the Italian league. Dou you think that Gattuso is a great player??? That guy is a s*** that make fouls all the time!!! Or brazilian players that create a lot of score opportunities and score goals??? We have a lot of players taht just do is foul others and those guys dont play soccer for a long time here. We look to players that can cover the other player and, fisrt of all, that can create score opportunity and score goal. European coaches see the other way, first guys that defend, after you defend score a goal with luck, because the talent they dont have too much. Make you team of the world, please!!! I will laugh a lot with this!!! I reiteratre: 1. 30 years cutoff as far as modern, fast soccer is concerned is more than fair. Don't b**** about it. 2. I never said Brazil national team wasn't one of the best if not the best out there. You were the one doing all of the tangential work, all of the extrapolatin' and conclusion-jumping. I concentrated on club leagues and select individual players instead. 3. Now you have a time machine that you KNOW for certain Brazil will win in 2006...Man you are more infantile than I previously thought. 4. You were the one who said, without any hesitation whatsoever, that if Garincha played today, he would detroy defenses...shows how much you know, put down the green&yellow pompons. I doubt that even most ardent fans of Jim Brown or even Chamberlaine in basketball would suggest that those guys would be able to hang with today's mean, huge, juiced-up and fast atheletes. IMPOSSIBLE! 5. Stop being an evasive crybaby: when one team is dominating, it wins with a wide margin. Your national team, as flashy and enyoyable as their brand of soccer has always been (see I can admit the truth), has NOT scored a SINGLE f***ing goal in the two Fanals apperances it made between 1974 and 1998, a span of 24 f***ing years, you imbecil! If that's "dominant", then Baffalo Bills has been the most "super-dooper-dominant" team in the last 15 years. Furthermore, in 1994 you barely squeeked by USA (1:0) and barely got by Nethermands in semis (3:2) in one of the best matches I have ever seen. Don't pretent like you've swept through the competition. 6. Finally...what part of "Italian league was the richest and toughest by far in the 90's" don't you get? I am not Italian, so I have no reason to exaggerate...Stop your nationalistic paranoia and recognize that other nations have great champtions as well, be a man for a change. Canadians are the best hockey players in the world, but they are not the only ones and can certainly be beaten as Brazil has been beaten many times in the last 30 years. Game.Set.Match.

1. 420 might have been excessive, but it sure as hell wasn't "soft" 365. they had quite a few stadiums with 430-480 to straight away center and Sammy hits about 7-10 of those a year, to say nothing, of course, of hits to other parts of the field that might have been much closer to what they are now, but even the difference of 10-15 feet can often mean a lot over 162 games... Think of how many RBI's would have to be subtracted if you take away some of those "cheapies". 10? 20? More? I think the 138 average is grossely inflated I am VERY confident in saying that. 110 is more like it (if in the unlikely event the run production during different decades could ever be universalized as R-GDP in 80's dollars is in economics for example...I know, it's a stretch on my part, lol). 2. There is a reason why I included the speculation thing up there...But since so many call Sammy's run "unprecedented" without making ANY qualifications, I felt justified in my healthy scepticism. It's not like I am saying Sosa is "mere mortal", but "more of a mortal". 3. Sammy indeed hit over 310 with RISP...but Fox hit .360. 4. I temporarily excluded the steroid arguement as well as dead ball, pitching, higher mound, etc....but let's not pretend like they didn't play a big part in keeping players like Foxx from reaching 200-RBI plateu. I am not suggesting everything should be weighted equally--it never is or will be--but some consideration should be given if not by MLB officals then certainly by a few curiosity-endowed fans. No harm done, healthy arguement. 5. I still said Sammy deserves to be in the Hall as much as it pains me since I more or less know in mu gut that he is all juiced up and corked out. I don't know where you got the idea where I "disrespected" what Sammy has done, I am just putting a slightly different prospective on the whole greatness thing, that's all. 6. I never argued that Sammy would have been a flat-out better player if he hadn't "bulked up". What I did say is that Ricky Henderson at his best could match Sammy's value while playing a completely different type of ball. I said speed+defense can go a long way, provided OBP and RISP numbers are still respectable and they were in Ricky or Ty Cobb's case.

Well...um....if she wasn't such a dirty, dumb little whore back in high-school, maybe she would have learned the skills necessary to provide for herself, her kids AND her man...whom btw she should always worship because there is only one man of the family. Damn straight, she is lucky she only gets smacked on weekends for all the whining she does about "other wimen" and "food on the table"...

Ooh, listen to this tough guy! What are you gonna do, unleash your William H. Macy repressed loser verbal fury on him? Better yet hire a cheap hitman from the projects? You don't have a sister do you? Bwa!

1. I was talking about individual players and the level of toughness of individual team leagues. That distinction is apparently lost on you, overhshadowed by blind nationalistic pride. 2. If you insist on spouting nonsense about your national team and the hiarchy of dominance in modern soccer (last 30 years is fair enough), then fine: Between 1974 and 2001, Brazil has scored ZERO goals in it's two Finals apperance. Hardly what I call dominant, hahaha. No, dominant would be winning 4 Cups in that span as Germany and Argentina came close to winning...and yet I never said they were the best; in fact I always said Brazil was the best, but added that the margin between them and competition was remarkably narrow in recent years. And 30 years is recent enough for you not to be foolishly challending the conclusion. 3. The richest league in the world, Italian, had twice as much talent, including best Brazilian players, in it throughtout much of the 90's, and THAT my friend is a fact. Spanish league pales in comparison and Brazilian league can't touch neither Spanish nor English Priemire in overall level of skill. When the best you can come up with is "my friends say you are crazy' and some meaningless offseason exhibition matches, you have no business carrying on with the discussion. Join the little table, amigo arrogante. No, it's not. The more apt comparison would be to Canadien hockey players versus the rest of the world.

Hate to rain on the smarm parade...but a tiny brain and a pair of baby balls is nothing to be proud about.

One arguement of yours that I agree with is that whenever such comparison is done, it inevitbly involves a great deal of speculation, subjectivity and unknowable factorts. HOWEVER, knowing how many homers Sosa hits to opposite fieds...well the stadium factor (420 feet to RF gap was not uncommon in those days) alone would probably take away a dozen of Sammy's homers (and with them a bunch of RBI's), turning them into mere flyouts as Mr. Schmidt pointed out long time ago.... I am not even gonna go into the juice/liveball/watered down pitching/etc aspects... As for his 138 rbi thing, check out Jimmie Foxx's 1931-1938 numbers and then adjust for amount of atbats (they played less games then, right?)...suddenly Sammy's 5-year run looks more mortal, doesn't it?