Middle Buffalo

1) 1983 - The Double Leyland A young Middle Buffalo postions himself smartly along the 3rd base line before game-time hoping to get Ron Kittle's autograph. Keeping his true intentions to himself, young MB passes the time by getting 3rd base coach Jim Leyland's autograph. As Kittle passes behind Leyland to assume his left-field position for warm-ups, young MB yells to Kittle for an autograph. Kittle makes eye-contact. Young MB asks Leyland to pass the program to Kittle for the autograph. Leyland signs it a second time and passes it back. Kittle is gone. The double Leyland. 2) Doug Jones meets Middle Buffalo's younger brother This is Middle Buffalo at his finest. Center field bleachers again, above the Cleveland Indians bullpen. Young MB and younger brother are standing above the Indians bullpen trying to get someone, anyone, to toss them a ball. MB's brother will not be denied. He keeps yelling for Doug Jones to toss him a ball. Seizing the opportunity, Middle Buffalo tells his brother that the reason Jones isn't throwing him a ball is because he's pronouncing Jones' name wrong. My brother, still not to be denied, spend the rest of the game yelling, as I told him to, "Hey HONES, throw me a ball!" Hones (pronounced with a spanish "J" sound) - classic.

Always loved Jimmy. I remember when he was on that studio show demonstrating to Sox players how to put down a bunt by using a broom (because it was the only thing availabel in the studio). I wish he would have punched LaRussa. LaRussa could use a little humility.

QUOTE(zach61 @ Jun 21, 2005 -> 01:53 PM) usage For both transitive and intransitive senses 1b the past and past participle hung, as well as hanged, is standard. Hanged is most appropriate for official executions but hung is also used . Hung is more appropriate for less formal hangings . So do I tell the ladies that I'm well hanged or well hung? Maybe I'll just show 'em.

In the early 90's, I remember alot of talk about the Yankees possibly moving from the Bronx to a better location. Their problems are similar to the Sox in terms of location (I think Yanks are worse, but not sure). When the Sox consistently (for a few years, not half a season) start putting winning teams out on the field, they'll draw. Look at how the Yankees attendance spiked after 96 when they won the Series. I don't expect the Sox to have a $200 million payroll anytime soon, though. http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/yankatte.shtml

In grammar school we wore horrible polyester yellow shirts and brown pants. Just awful.

I've never heard Crede talk, but I'll assume he's every bit the announcer that Ventura was. Welcome back, Hawk. Aaaaarrrgh. Swab the deck, DJ.

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 01:51 PM) Agreed, I want Duque in the best form he can be at the end of the season and possibly the playoffs. I think I'd have the most faith in him in the playoffs, with his track record there. That's why we got him. He was a stud with NYY in the post-season. PS Let's quit trying to figure out ways to get rid of BMac. Every trade "rumor" or wish I see on this site seems to include him. For some reason, I don't think he's going to be another Ruffin/Ruffcorn type.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 06:36 AM) I just got back from beautiful McAllen, TX last week. Man, it gives Miami a run for its humidity money. Phoenix temps should be 105-112 today and every day for the next 100 days. Good thing I work outside.

That game was awesome. FG was SO bad early, even Homers Hawk and DJ were dogging him. Talking about how it takes FG getting hit around sometimes before he gets going and how Ozzie has had to go out and b**** FG out on the mound several times. Good stuff to hear from the Sox announcers. I was watching the game and thinking, "Could AJ please go out to the mound and slap this guy and wake him up!" I mean, just terrible, lazy body language from FG. But to his credit, he woke up and pitched 8 solid innings. In retrospect, too bad he didin't get the win.

QUOTE(AirScott @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 07:53 AM) well 3 years and about 50 points difference in average. if there was any way this could happen, it would be great. but Helton doesn't want to go anywhere, he wants to win in Colorado. and the money argument sucks, if we spend an extra $10M and win more, why not do it? too bad Helton's not going anywhere. Any "extra" money the Sox have should ALWAYS go toward improving the pitching staff.

QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 11:04 AM) It's Russian, so it's a bit strong. Nothing is stronger than K-19 Russian Submarine vodka, though. If you think Skol is rough, find a bottle of this and you'll gag for minutes. But I've been told that I was seen drinking from a bottle of Stoli at a house party that I co-threw...half the bottle...while blacked out. It wasn't surprising when I woke up in some girl's room at 530 that morning. It was surprising that she peed standing up, though.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 06:54 AM) Bartolo Colon is from the Dominican Republic, Guillen is from Venezuela. Totally different countries. Right, they're both Mexican.Hence, the pact.

I quit drinking Absolut when I turned 21.

Did everyone hate Mags this much when he was with the team? I don't live in the area anymore, so I really don't know what the local opinion is. I just remember him being really popular before I moved away from Chicago.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 08:51 AM) it probably costs ESPN more to insert another show. They should just create another show for Stuart Scott. He's not busy enough.

I think the "Turn Back the Clock" promotion was among the best. Those 1917? uniforms looked great, and it led to all the teams doing similar promotions. Unfortunately, in football, the Detroit Lions still trot out those awful uniforms on Thanksgiving.

Since the attendance comparison is really always made in relation to the Cubs, here's the history of attendance at Wrigley. Their attendance can ultimately be linked to winning in 1984, Harry, becoming a tourist destination, and the rejuvination of the area. Before 1984, Wrigley attendance was not so great. I get sick of hearing about how loyal their fans are. I remember late 70's/early 80's when portions of the upper deck were roped off because they didn't want to pay ushers to work sections with just a handful of people. Too bad all the columnists don't take the time to do a little research. They'd rather write about a stupid effing goat and attend the day games. Chicago Cubs attendance at Wrigley Field 2004 3,170,154 2003 2,962,630 2002 2,693,096 2001 2,779,465 2000 2,789,511 1999 2,813,854 1998 2,623,194 1997 2,190,308 1996 2,219,110 1995 1,918,265 1994 1,845,208 1993 2,653,763 1992 2,126,720 1991 2,314,250 1990 2,243,791 1989 2,491,942 1988 2,089,034 1987 2,035,130 1986 1,859,102 1985 2,161,534 1984 2,107,655 1983 1,479,717 1982 1,249,278 1981 565,637 1980 1,206,776 1979 1,648,587 1978 1,525,311 1977 1,439,834 1976 1,026,217 1975 1,034,819 1974 1,015,378 1973 1,351,705 1972 1,299,163 1971 1,653,007 1970 1,642,705 1969 1,674,993 1968 1,043,409 1967 977,226 1966 635,891 1965 641,361 1964 751,647 1963 979,551 1962 609,802 1961 673,057 1960 809,770 1959 858,255 1958 979,904 1957 670,629 1956 720,118 1955 875,800 1954 748,183 1953 763,658 1952 1,024,826 1951 894,415 1950 1,165,944 1949 1,143,139 1948 1,237,792 1947 1,364,039 1946 1,342,970 1945 1,036,386 1944 640,110 1943 508,247 1942 590,972 1941 545,159 1940 534,878 1939 726,663 1938 951,640 1937 895,020 1936 699,370 1935 692,604 1934 707,525 1933 594,112 1932 974,688 1931 1,086,422 1930 1,463,624 1929 1,485,166 1928 1,143,740 1927 1,159,168 1926 885,063 1925 622,610 1924 716,922 1923 703,705 1922 542,283 1921 410,107 1920 480,783 1919 424,430 1918 337,256 1917 360,218 1916 453,685 Attendance figures courtesy of Total Baseball

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 10, 2005 -> 12:35 PM) I think it's funny that a lot of the Red Sox hitters have seen their power numbers go down this year (in the season of steroid testing). I was told by a MLB scout early last year that the Red Sox had a roster full of steroid abusers. This was said well before steroids became a big issue in baseball. Hold on. Curt Schilling testified before Congress that he's only played with 3 or 4 steroid abusers in his career. I can't believe that Mr. Schilling would lie.

Juan Agosto was the first guy I thought of. I do agree with the DWells and Navarro hatred, though. Hated Jerry Hairston. Least clutch PH in history. Don't much care about Johnny Damon's "pin." OK, so I DO care.

He's thinking of Jerry Koosman, I think. Got his miracle mets mixed up.

Gold Gloves are soooo much about reputation. No CWS has a chance this year. I'm pretty sure Raffy Palmeiro won one a few years back when he mostly DH'd.

I like to judge my performance by whether or not I outlasted any single by the Romones. Why mess around?

QUOTE(ptatc @ Jun 2, 2005 -> 09:25 PM) Sure it's possible to gain weight. But once you start getting in the 20's it's gets difficult to put on significant muscle weight. He will gain some I'm sure but it's by no means a given that he will. The Sox should hire Greg Anderson. He helped Barry gain significant muscle well past his 30th birthday.

The players' silence and unwillingness to step up and get steroids out of the game puts every player under a cloud of suspicion. They brought this on themselves. Chavez is right, but I hardly believe that he didn't suspect/know that Giambi was cheating. Consider your own work-place. Don't you know stuff about people just because workplace gossip has a way of getting around to everyone. You know who cheats on their spouses, who does drugs, etc. Think MLB clubhouses aren't the same? Chavez' head in the sand act is the same that Schilling pulled before Congress.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 28, 2005 -> 09:50 AM) Conversely it shows that he, and I'm just playing Devil's advocate here, has a spine of Jell-O. They push polled in states insinuating that McCain had an illegitimate black child. For more info... From the web: http://www.stcynic.com/blog/archives/2004/...in_and_bush.php After McCain's surprising defeat of Bush in the New Hampshire primary in 2000, the Bush campaign targeted South Carolina, the next big primary, and began calling voters, particularly elderly voters, to ostensibly take a poll. But rather than asking how they felt about an issue, they asked this question: "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew that he had fathered a bi-racial child?". Now, they didn't actually say that he DID father a bi-racial child. But at campaign stops, you could see McCain and his wife Cindy with their dark-skinned daughter, Bridget. They adopted Bridget from an orphanage in Bangladesh. This is how you play dirty politics, folks. You plant seeds that push buttons, all with plausible deniability. But it's vile as hell. It didn't stop there. They also put out "anonymous" pamphlets all over South Carolina telling people that McCain's wife had a history of drug addiction (she apparently was addicted to prescription pain killers at one point). Again, plausible deniability while spreading vicious rumors to kill one's political opponents. For a full report on the smear campaign, go here. Even worse is Bush's association with Ted Sampley, the absolutely loathsome former green beret and POW/MIA pimp who has claimed that John McCain is a traitor and even a communist spy that the Soviets had turned into a "Manchurian candidate". He's the same guy behind the attacks on John Kerry now, by the way. After what the Bush campaign did to McCain in 2000, you'd think that McCain would be pretty pissed off, wouldn't you? He said in 2000 that there was obviously no limit to how low Bush would go to win election after what they did to him, at one point even yelling at Bush when Bush grabbed his hand and telling him to "get your hands off me". But this is politics and McCain is now lending his image and endorsement to Bush in 2004. Why? Because it's his party and if he doesn't go along, he doesn't get party money and support when running for reelection to the senate. Again it is the political party "You will follow the party line, eh comrade?" dictating all the rules -- because if McCain calls shenanigans and actually voices his opinion of being pissed off about those slimeball tactics, he gets on the outs with the party & then will have a very difficult time in getting a Presidential nod. The whole monolithic concept of political parties seems to keep any deviation from the party line to compromise in check. There is no way for candidates to get approval for working together and actually getting things done that don't f*** over the American people because whatever they do -- they're bound to piss off the "Party faithful" which can be a problem come election time. Great stuff - and exactly what I was talking about. My problem with McCain leading up to the '04 election is that he swallowed his pride (which I'm sure is immense) because he was keeping an eye on the '08 election. He really should have kept a low profile. Of course, GWB needed a true American hero to trot out to counter Kerry. For what it's worth, I think Kerry way overplayed the war hero thing. Remember, also, that there was talk of McCain running with Kerry as his VP candidate. Wishful thinking? Probably.