YASNY

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ May 18, 2006 -> 09:45 AM) I see no value in keeping him here. But I guess I'm just beating a dead horse. You know how Ozzie is. Things could change in 15 minutes.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ May 18, 2006 -> 09:39 AM) Wow. I'm perplexed. The guy looked like a deer in headlights in a cavernous empty stadium against a very bad team. Can't wait to see him pitch at Yankee stadium with 45K people screaming at him. Here's the Link

QUOTE(Steff @ May 18, 2006 -> 09:40 AM) Ligue is an idiot asshole As he said, Ligue was a Cub fan.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ May 18, 2006 -> 09:36 AM) Well.... i'd rather have the governement digging for hoffa than spending more time spying on me. What do you have to hide?

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ May 18, 2006 -> 09:36 AM) When is the Count off the DL so we can send down Boone? Is that today or tomorrow? There's a Sun-Times article today that says Ozzie's not sending Logan down.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ May 18, 2006 -> 08:36 AM) That's a valid argument, but to me Ramirez is the best hitter they have and he's been a good player for a while now. I was tempted to give Crede the edge, but I've also gotta respect the type of hitter Ramirez can be. I believe hit hit a granny off of us at the Cell last year. I assumed you took his past performance into consideration, but then Lee's not in the lineup now so he's having to carry the load. Ramirez with Lee in the lineup might be even, but without Lee it's not even close. I'm not trying to be difficult here. Just a discussion.

Comparing the year Crede's having with the year Ramirez is having, throw in some defense and I'd give a huge advantage to Crede.

Since this new video came out, with the plane supposedly visable before it hit the Pentagon, I snooped around the net looking at photos just to see what I could see. First, here's the recently released still that "shows" the plane: You'll note that what has been identified as the plane is at or near ground level. It also has to be noted that a plane coming from the sky to a non-skyscraper building would by definition have to be in decent. Now, a picture taken shortly after impact. Note that firefighters are on the scene and the roofline is still intact. Also note, to the right of the firetruck, below the water stream, there is something white in the shadows on the grass. I'm pointing this out for the sake of perspective in later photos. Next, a close up shot of the water stream pouring into the building. Note that the this definitively shows the upper floor(s) still spanning the entry hole. Another shot, showing the roofline still in tact. The previously mention white thing on the ground partially blocked by the observer in the suit. Now, a shot after the collapse of the roofline. You can see that there is still fire and plenty of smoke, so this shot was taken somewhat later than the others. The purpose of pointing this all out is to prove that the previous shots occured very shortly, in the first few minutes, after impact. Finally, this: Look at the image on the right. More of a panarama of the Pentagon grounds. Notice anything? Maybe I should ask "Notice anything missing?" The large amount of black smoke and the intact roofline in the right hand picture tells you it was right after impact. Now look at the top photo of this post again, showing the "plane" at or near ground level. If that plane hit the ground, as they claimed, with the wings almost in a 12-6 position, again as claimed, you'd be seeing two noticable items. Wreckage of the wing in the 6 o'clock position would be there as well as damage to lawn of the grounds. Even elimating the 12-6 position of the wings, if the plane hit the building in a "normal" flying position, you'd still have lawn damage. He'll you'd have a big gash in the lawn. There is no way that "thing" in that top picture is a 767 jumbo jet.

QUOTE(3RDBASE @ May 18, 2006 -> 03:08 AM) I fooking love SOXTALK!!!!! That's good to know.

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:19 PM) So if you were starving and desperate and came to my house and asked me to let you work to buy some food for your family, you wouldd be ok if I told you to get your ass back where you came from? The answer lies somewhere between these examples. But the discussion rarely does.

A message in the form of a heater to the ribs, is one thing. But aiming at someone's head is not defensible. You can kill somebody that way, whether that was your intent or not. I still remember Tony Conigliaro very well and cannot imagine wanting to throw at someone's head after seeing that.

QUOTE(knightni @ May 18, 2006 -> 01:51 AM) He seems quicker than Mack. He plays solid LF. I bet he'd be as good as Mack if they tried him out. Ozuna is adequate, at best, in LF and that might be a stretch. No way do you put him in CF.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ May 17, 2006 -> 11:11 PM) It's not just his ERA, honestly I just through that out there because it's high and was something that he really couldn't dispute. Garland has always been a pretty good pitcher except at the end of last season he began to falter and was not as effective as he was in the past. His poor pitching luckily did not carry over to the postseason but he was incredibly hittable in April of this season. My problem with Garland has nothing to do with stats, it has to do with him making bad pitches and getting hit like he never was in the past. In all likelyhood he will settle down and begin to pitch better but that doesn't mean that his poor pitching to start this season should be ignored. It doesn't mean he should get ripped by so called fans, either.

QUOTE(3E8 @ May 18, 2006 -> 01:05 AM) I can never figure out why people throw out magic numbers which Anderson's batting average must be higher than at the end of the season to call him a success. It really is ridiculous. The difference between 10 or 20 batting average points over the course of a season is just a handful of hits. Getting an extra bloop single each month or lining the ball right at someone a few more times than normal will skew results for better or worse. Batting average is just not the metric we should be using to measure anyone's worthiness in their rookie season. All we can hope for is for Anderson is to keep up the stellar defense and work on improving his contact rate at the plate. Because if BA doesn't get his average up, we'll keep seeing threads like this one: http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=49995

Hmmmm. I'd feel much better with Joe at 3rd tonight with Jon pitching.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ May 17, 2006 -> 05:26 PM) That would've been awesome to read. Maybe this is the Cubs curse, not the Billy Goat or whatever else they can think of. We can just add to the list.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ May 17, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) I did a research paper on both the Black Sox and the widespread gambling in baseball in spring of 2004 (my senior year of high school). Wish I still had it on my computer, because I'd post it. Has a ton of references and such, very good stuff. Anyways, the 1919 Black Sox WERE NOT the first team to throw games, or throw them in a world series, not even close. In fact, many believe (with some proof) that the 1906 and 1918 Cubs not only threw the World Series, but made it even more obvious than the 1919 White Sox did, but nobody was looking for it yet (here's to you Mountain Landis). So yes, when people say our Sox in 1919 were the first to throw a World Series, that is WAY WAY wrong. It's just sad that Shoeless Joe is banned for life for doing something that AT LEAST half a dozen other men in the hall of fame also did. And that's assuming Shoeless Joe actually threw the games and took the money, which we aren't for sure about.....I mean Shoeless Joe was a great player, but he was illiterate and not really the type that could defend himself as well as a player now would be able to. I wish you had your research paper too. I love to read it.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt @ May 17, 2006 -> 04:59 PM) ...the logic behind taking out BMac after less than 5 innings pitched in a low scoring game to get Logan or ANYBODY in that bullpen for that matter? I'm not one of these guys who disses Ozzie and questions him that much, but I don't see how this was a good decision at all. Now, I'm no baseball expert, but I don't get it. Bill Melton said in the post game show soemthing about keeping his pitch count to about 80, and call me ignorant but I don't get the idea behind that. You're looking at the single game and not the big picture. It was stated before the game that they were going to be careful of BMac's pitch count. If you want a manager that will just leave his pitchers out there just because they are pitching effectively and disregard the long term consequences, look to the north side.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ May 17, 2006 -> 04:39 PM) It's blatantly obvious that the media set a narrative regarding this and nothing is blatantly obvious except that the defense team is fighting this case in the public arena and that the DA's office isn't. It may not be blatantly obvious, but if it looks like a duck...........

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 17, 2006 -> 11:00 AM) I wasn't aware of the widespread gambling that was going on. I never really bothered to learn anything about that era. It's almost ironic, but there was talk that Cubs threw the 1918 WS to the Red Sox. Unless my memory of this stuff is all skewed.

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:51 AM) No I was just thinking the only politician who sends me stuff without a soliciation is Kinky. Vote for that man!

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:45 AM) Dear James, You know what our mission is -- to drive to victory on November 7 by using our online strength to give key Democratic candidates grassroots help they couldn't even imagine getting in the past. This week, we're focusing on a handful of races across the nation that are absolutely critical to the environment. We're out to take back the Congress and defeat Republican candidates who have sold out the environment whenever it really counts. Support pro-environment Democratic candidates now. Yesterday, we helped raise tens of thousands of dollars for three critical House challengers: Ron Klein in Florida, Francine Busby in California, and Darcy Burner in Washington state. Today, we've added a new candidate to the list -- Linda Stender who is running in New Jersey's 7th Congressional district. Linda is not only a strong environmental candidate, she has also fought to protect the right to privacy and she has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's failed policies in Iraq. Linda has led fights in her county to pass the Open Space, Recreation, and Historic Preservation Trust Fund, create the area's largest tree replacement program, and develop a new program to improve the appearance of county property. Protecting our environment and making America energy independent are two of her key priorities when she gets elected. I told you earlier that two of the GOP incumbents we're out to defeat, Clay Shaw and Dave Reichert, had identical 28% voting records on the League of Conservation Voters' scorecard. Linda's opponent, Mike Ferguson, is even worse. In the last session of Congress, he voted pro-environment only 17% of the time. All 3 of these Republican incumbents have voted to open up the Arctic Refuge to drilling, gut funding of environmental protections for clean water and environmental conservation, and sell off our public lands to the big mining companies. We can't continue to let this happen. Support pro-environment Democratic candidates now. We have these anti-environment Republicans on the run. Let's keep it that way. Help build an unstoppable momentum for our environmental slate of candidates. Donate to one or more of our candidates right now. Let's give them the strong support they need to win. Sincerely, John Kerry P.S. In addition to providing direct support to our candidates, don't forget to also include a donation to Keeping America's Promise in support of our broader efforts to help shape the outcome of these vitally important elections. Just curious. Does he ever send you an email without asking for money?

After thinking about this, I was mistaken. Please disregard.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ May 17, 2006 -> 10:15 AM) I pulled up Brian's name in my fantasy league to get his # of AB's when I noticed something interesting. Brian has 15 runs, 4 hr, and 10RBI in 97 ab's hitting out of the 9 hole. Garret Anderson, who makes millions and plays mediocre D, has 15 runs, 4hr, and 24 RBI in 137 ab's out of the cleanup spot. GA has a better average but I'd say that the difference in their averages is negated by the quality of D Brian plays in CF. Give the kid some time. He doesn't even have 100ab's yet. He's looking much better at the plate and is an exceptional outfielder. There really aren't any offensively dominant CF'ers in all of baseball, it's a defensive position. He's not hurting our team near as much as some of these threads would lead one to believe. Agreed. But the fact remains, Brian is going to have to pick it up some.