YASNY

Correct. The ESPN bottom line reported he was out for the season.

I was disappointed in his response due to the fact that he chose to be a smart-ass and failed to respond to the issue I presented to him. I've decided that I'll respond to him with the following: Do you really think so? Have you ever visited soxtalk.com? I suggest you take a peek. Of course, we all know he gets a portion of his material directly from this site.

Well he responded. Here's the complete text of his response:

Thanks for reminding me of these incidents. If and when Moronatti responds to me, I'll be able to use this.

Molesting a 12 year old child is SICK. That child is scarred for life. Selling pot is nothing to be proud of, but there is no comparison.

Always check southwest dot com ... They are always running specials.

In all that is decent, there is no way you can justify speculating on whether or not someone has used, or is using steroids without having something solid to base that on. Unless, of course, we are talking about a certain Cub.

I kind of got that impression too, Steff.

So if Frank has a monster year, there is NO WAY we can keep both Frank and Maggs. That sucks.

All you have to do is read his Cub columns.

Well, Bartman could have been wearing a Sox hat!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I just recently read that was a guaranteed $11.5M

We'll see. There was nothing objectionable in my email to him other than a difference of opinion.

After reading today's column from Jay Mariotti, I was compelled to email him. His column about Frank Thomas was entirely uncalled for. here is the text of my email: Mr Mariotti, I must say that found it ironic that you choose Frank Thomas as the subject of your column rather than, say, Sammy Sosa. This column hit your paper on the day after Frank Thomas breezed into the White Sox training camp, a day early, with a smile on his face and with him assuring all who cared to listen that everything was fine and he wanted to play baseball. Conversely, in Mesa, Mr. Sosa made his appearance at the Cub's camp. He wasn't a day early, but like Thomas, he came in all smiles and looking forward to the season. Yet, you took the opportunity to remind everyone in the Chicagoland area of everything associated with Frank Thomas that has had a negative stigma or connotation. Columns like the one in today's paper are exactly the reason that you are generally despised by White Sox fans. You could have, of course, written a very similar column about Mr. Sosa, but instead you chose to take your potshots at Mr. Thomas. I'm sure you are wondering what I could possibiliy be refering to that would portray Mr. Sosa in the same type of light as you portrayed Mr. Thomas. If you be so kind as to take off your Cubbie blue shaded glasses, let's examine what possibilities for comparison exist. From your column, I qoute "When he wasn't squabbling with respected mates such as Robin Ventura and Paul Konerko ...". Yet, couldn't the same thing be said about Mr. Sosa and former Cub, Mark Grace? Frank Thomas had a spat or two with former manager Jerry Manuel, yet Sammy Sosa completely undermined the authority, with backing from the Cubs hierarchy, of first year manager Don Baylor before spring training was a week old. Mr. Thomas could have attempted to do the same with Ozzie Guillen this year, but he chose to remain above that and think of the team. Mr. Sosa has the inarguable infamy of the corked bat incident and the spector of possible steriod use hanging over him. Mr. Thomas' on the field integrity has never been questioned in any way shape or form, especially not with the word "cheat" attached. Mr. Thomas has the reputation of not being the best teammate one could hope for, whether deserved or not. Mr. Sosa is known to have annoyed teammates with his blaring Salsa music and his supporting cast accompanying him, usually a week late, for spring training. Each side of town has a superstar on it's baseball team. One is consider a pariah, and the other is blindly worshipped. Columns like the one you wrote today are a big part of the reason for that entirely undeserved discrepancy. Sincerely, YASNY (I didn't sign it YASNY) IF and when I get any response, I'll keep you updated.

Dusty's one-year grace period is over. Now the fun with the Chicago media starts.

Yep, that was good stuff.

Alomar was on the right side of the infield. He didn't get to, and cleanly field all those ground balls on the left side. Valentin did.

Get used to it guys. Of course, when the Cubs do their el foldo, then we can enjoy watching ESPN report on that.

Maybe an "us against the world" attitude is just what this team needs. Get a chip on their collective shoulders and kick some Major League ass.

Maybe all this Frank vs Ozzie crap will finally be flushed away.

Brando, I think you are being a little closed minded on this blown save issue. Set up men are going to be put into more difficult situations than a closer would. Closers are "protected" by the fact that usually come in and pitch a complete 9th inning and get their save. Set up guys come in, usually with runners on base, and if the give up the lead it's called a BS. If they hold the lead, then the closer comes in and gets the save so the setup guy will not get credit for a save opportunity. Therefore, a setup guy's blown save percentage is almost certainly going to be higher than a closer's.

Ah. Thank you.

After reading all of that, I'm kinda numb.

Hey Rex! Can we still accuse Sosa of using steroids. The board wouldn't be the same without being able to do that.

I'll tell you what .... the first Sox game I attend this year, I'll have a copy for you.