YASNY

A few random thoughts that occured while reading the last few pages of this thread. If Jon Garland is so easy to replace with a FA pitcher after 2006, why don't we just sign Jon Garland? Roger Clemens - Pedro Martinez. He was using Martinez as an example that you don't mess up a guy by putting him in the pen. No one claimed you mess up a guy by putting him in the rotation, so throwing Clemens name out there is pointless. JimH and Qiuckman have their s*** together. I sat through the Ron Schuler years waiting for all the super prospects come up and save the Sox. The thing that saved the Sox was Kenny Williams replacing Ron Schuler.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 10:21 AM) I dont know if Garland ever felt that Chicago was his true home, if you think about it. He had to hate it when Manuel was the coach, the guy had no plan for Garland and no faith in him. Then he almost gets traded for Erstad, gets killed by the press for not caring, and doesnt complain about anything. I think he enjoyed his time here, but I wont be surprised when he goes elsewhere, either through a trade or free agency. I never thought he would stick around past his free agency years anyways. I would like to see him put together a "contract-year" type of season, however. I think keeping Garland next year would be very beneficial for the Sox in 2006, but you cant let that kind of talent walk. I dont think his value will be any higher for the Sox to unload him though. It won't.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 07:01 AM) Basically official now. **EdIt: Sorry, I meant Vazquez. Can someone edit? I love this deal, and yet another bold move for KW. So what does this mean for BMAC? Edited. But why the need for another thread?

This came out of the Trib. I wonder if he's part of the deal?

Best post I've read all day Steff. Great to hear (see?).

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 14, 2005 -> 12:42 AM) I sent them an email and they said call. I call and was on hold for over 2 hours... Ok, I was wrong. Sue me.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:33 PM) Pretty please? I don't have a clue, but a phone call or email to grandstand will get you an accurate answer to your question.

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:45 PM) The previous team to repeat was the Yankees. They pretty much kept the core of there rotation together. Didn't the Angels basically keep their rotation? Keeping it together doesn't insure a repeat.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:34 PM) Not that I'm saying anything about the case - this kid was molested and the dude ought to be in prison - regardless about how old the kid was. The kid was harmed by what happened to him and the priest ought to be punished, severely. But let's have a little perspective. In a lot of states the age of consent is 16. If someone dates a person that's 15 years and 364 days - does that make them anymore of a pedophile then if they date someone one day over that invisible line? Oh s***. Here we go ..... Be back later folks. I've had enough excitement for one day.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:27 PM) Arm strength for Anderson? I thought his arm is supposed to be much, much, much better than Rowand's arm was this season. I thought he was talking about Owens?

QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:22 PM) And why do we want to take a chance with a guy like this? The Loaiza for Contreras deal was not a 'big' risk. But trading a sure thing in Garland for a question mark is scary. Even if it is the last year of his deal. Just ride the wave to another title and go from there. Even though I always had the opinion the Graland was "on the verge" and the fact that he appeared to come into his own this year, I don't consider garland a sure thing. His second half gives me slight pause.

QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:15 PM) Right, how do you feel about a veteran of some sort sharing the job with Owens, whom Guillen has raved about? If I'm not mistaken, Owens has major question marks defensively.

QUOTE(hitlesswonder @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:13 PM) Of the group, only Young I think has the ability to play above average defense in CF. If Young has a great season at AAA this year, then maybe you can trade BA. But if you trade Anderson now, the Sox need a new CF for 2006. Has Carl Everett signed with Seattle yet?

QUOTE(hi8is @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:08 PM) "Knowing how Byrnes hasnt "Budged" so they better put together a nice package...I can see Arizona asking for Brian Anderson a top prospect and hopefully Neal Cotts along with Garland" that is from the mlb.com arizona fan fourm i almost just about fell out of my chair laughing my ass off HHAHAHAHAHA f***ing hysterical. Arizona has Cub fans too, I see.

QUOTE(Mercy! @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) Cause that would be, like, really offensive? Yeah. Too bad, the "other side" doesn't have a vulgarity regulator. Well, of course they do. They just choose not to employ it cause they don't have to here. And, ya know, considering that females other than other posters and maybe, say, Rosa Parks, are usually referred to around here only as body parts (and that's when guys are being nice!) ..... Well, Penis-in-Chief just seems like poetic justice to me. Move over Cheney, the real Dick is in the (White) House. If Hillary wins in 08, I'm gonna have fun around here.

QUOTE(drowninginflame @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:31 AM) theres no dinosaurs up there I think, only starbucks I don't think Starbuck's is mentioned in the bible, either.

I tried to merge this, but since it's jumping forums, I don't have the authority to do so.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:47 AM) *cough*50*cough* I know I look it, but I'm not quite there yet.

QUOTE(SouthSide2004 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:13 AM) I just found this on Foxsports.com from an article Ken Rosenthal posted 40 minutes ago: The White Sox are making a "strong, under the radar" bid to trade for Diamondbacks right-hander Javier Vazquez, according to a source with knowledge of the negotiations. The package of players that the Diamondbacks would receive is not known, though it could include a major-league starting pitcher — perhaps right-hander Jon Garland or Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez — and an outfield prospect such as Chris Young. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5163848 I don't like hearing all this "package" talk when Garland should be more valuable than Vazquez. I also don't like Chirs Young's name jumping into this. Not sure what trading El Duque and prospects would accomplish, but it would definately result in McCarthy in the pen or a trade of another starter. I'll agree with your assesment of that little blurb. Garland plus? No way.

Garland for Vasquez. Those guys are just the centerpieces for this possible trade. We don't know any more than that. There could be money, prospects or other ML players involved. Let's see what the trade actually is before we judge it.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:47 AM) This just ruined my day. From the NY Daily News: CHICAGO WAY: Javier Vazquez, who has piqued the Mets' interest, may be on the verge of getting shipped to the Windy City. A baseball insider suggested the White Sox are the most likely destination for the Diamondbacks pitcher, possibly leading to a trade involving Jon Garland (a free agent after the 2006 season) or Jose Contreras. Ten pages about this in trade winds.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:30 AM) Both of you knock it off. White guys over 30. :headshake Touche'

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:32 AM) Well, if the President can be forgiven for making that error...I guess we can let you off the hook too. I think the key question in all of this is this one; is Isreal's nuclear arsenal enough of a deterrant to prevent a nuclear armed Iran from attacking it? Israel has enough nukes to turn every other country in the Middle East into a smoking hole in the ground. The real question is...is Iran's leadership willing to sacrifice everything they have...all the power, all the wealth of running a nation...to take a shot at Israel? If you are Isreal, do you take that gamble?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 08:56 AM) Ha Ha, YAS doesn't know the difference between murder and pedophilia. It has been shown over and over again that sex related criminals are much more difficult to rehabilitate than murders. Many researchers point to the sex drive as being "hard wired" into humans. People who engage in pedophilia are especially difficult to rehabilitate. nice try Yas. Keep pushing those buttons. Liberals. :headshake